RealGM

Peak only, which duo would you rather have?

For some reason Wade/Robinson just seems like the better duo to me. I think Wade would lift up Robinson's offense better than Curry would do with KG and Wade/Robinson also bring a level of athleticism and defense that I think would drive teams crazy on the other end.

Unless this is some weird scenario where there's another superstar/closer on the team (in which case I'd be Curry/KG), I'd go with Wade/Admiral--mostly because of Wade's superior ability to close. Except in extreme situations, that ability trumps everything else when there's a relatively small talent gap.

I would go Wade and Admiral. I think Wade has an underrated argument for being the best scorer here in the PS, and then I also feel as if the Admiral was a better 2nd option on offense than KG was (he was more efficient in this role I believe). Robinson wasn't as good of a passer as KG or mid-range shooter, but he was still good at both aspects nonetheless.

Depending on the era, the duo is playing in I think Admiral (specifically in the 90s and 2000s) and KG (today's game) would be the best defensive player here. Robinson was a better rim-protector and his superior raw speed and ability to get up up, allowed him to patrol the paint better. I also think he was probably the better man defender. According to Backpicks, "Robinson was also a lockdown individual defender, rarely exploited in isolation (per the scouting report). From 1990-96, he played 101 games against All-Star centers5 and held them 1.1 points below their per 36 scoring average and a whopping 5 percentage points below their true shooting efficiency." However, KG is the better pick and roll defender, and moves laterally better than Robinson, which is why I think he would be better defensively if they both played in today's game. KG also could just guard quicker players and every position, something that Robinson has not shown.

Overall, I guess what I am trying to say is that KG and Robinson are similar in many ways, but I think peak for peak, I just simply have more confidence in peak Wade. Suppose, I consider 2010 Wade his peak (honestly 2006, and 2009 are right there), and all I can say is man he was special.

2010 Wade had a 13.5 BPM (#4 all-time for any playoff run). He also had a 12.6 Expected Value from that playoffs, which was #1. Yes it was one series but for comparison's sake, Wade's 12.6 EV was better than Lebron's 8.5 EV (elbow injury and Delonte situation might have played a part) and Kobe's 3.4 EV against the same Boston Celtics team. Wade also had a 24.9 Game Score against the Celtics to Lebron's 22, and Kobe's 18.7. Wade averaged 33.2 pts per game on 65 TS% for crying out loud (LBJ 26.8 pts 55.6 TS% and Kobe 28.6 pts 52.8 TS%)

Wade was simply unreal no matter how you slice it. The thing that is special about Wade is that his first step is so incredible that there is no way to really game plan for it. You can't plan for someone simply being quicker and able to blow by you every time especially when they are automatic from the midrange. Wade is sort of MJ-lite in that respect, and therefore if this is a peak discussion I will take Wade and Robinson.

D-W/Rob quite easily. Bigger, two- way players and has the best closer and playoff performer in Wade.

I'd be more confident in Wade and Robinson though both duos offer a lot. Put shortly I think Wade and Robinson will require less from the other 3 players

For peak i’d take my chances on Wade/Drob and feel pretty good about it. I take KG over Drob for peaks, but if they’re both in a 2nd option role on offense then i see no real difference in their impact. Wade’s offense is pretty rock solid in the playoffs in a way you can’t quite say about Curry imo.

No-more-rings wrote:Wade’s offense is pretty rock solid in the playoffs in a way you can’t quite say about Curry imo.

How so? Genuinely asking, because the numbers don't show that at all.

I feel like Steph/KG are being a little shortchanged here. I get that Wade is a superior isolation scorer and can play a playoff role (resilient iso scorer) better than the other three, but man— I can’t ignore the ceiling that a Steph/Garnett team has assuming they have the right system and supporting cast.

fanofthegreats wrote:I feel like Steph/KG are being a little shortchanged here. I get that Wade is a superior isolation scorer and can play a playoff role (resilient iso scorer) better than the other three, but man— I can’t ignore the ceiling that a Steph/Garnett team has assuming they have the right system and supporting cast.

It's sort of strange though that Steph/KG are leading 13-10 but nearly every reply is pro Wade/Admiral. I think Curry's lack of fully healthy playoff runs do work against him, especially since 2016 is his clear rs peak but probably not a top 3 playoffs for him.

The-Power wrote:

No-more-rings wrote:Wade’s offense is pretty rock solid in the playoffs in a way you can’t quite say about Curry imo.

How so? Genuinely asking, because the numbers don't show that at all.

Well I'd rather look into what they did over their best 3-5 years to indicate what you can expect from them on average, peak is usually one year but i factor in other years to help remove flukes and such. If we used 2016 and 2009, neither would come out looking very good in the playoffs.

Their playoff numbers look comparable.

Wade 2006-2011: 27.2ppg/5.3 apg/3.8 TOV 26.1 PER 58 ts% 6.6 OBPM

Curry 2015-2019: 27.2ppg/5.9 apg/3.5 TOV 23.7 PER 61.6 ts% 6.8 OBPM

Those are just some box scores without any context really and they look quite comparable, so when you say the numbers don't show that at all you're right though it's close enough where it could just boil down to preference. When it comes to supporting casts, there's really no doubt Curry played with better players on average sometimes significantly better. How much that effects his numbers, i don't know but it does help to explain away the big difference in team success. Wade had a solid but far from great supporting cast in 06, and a good one in 2011 but the redundancy next to Lebron arguably hurt his numbers some at least from a raw standpoint.

It really just comes down to I think Wade has a more impressive track record against strong defenses than Curry.

2015- He had a subpar series against Memphis and that's even with Conley being pretty banged up and even missing a game

2016- We all know how the finals went that year, some excuse it away due to injury though there's good reason to think while that played a factor the way that the Cavs played him too played a big role. And those Cavs weren't even that great defensively, 10th in the regular season, 7th in the playoffs

2018: He underperformed against the Rockets. He really only had 3/7 games in the series where he performed up to par or greater, and one of them was in Chris Paul's absence. The Rockets did a great job defensively in the series, but someone of Curry's caliber backed by that kind of supporting cast I'd expect more from him period.

2019: He had a good series against the Raptors, though i wouldn't mark it down as anything extraordinary. He had like 3 mediocre games in there and 3 good-great ones.

We can compare that to Wade and again i think his track record against strong defenses/and or high pressure moments is just clearly more impressive.

2006: I mean just look at every series in that run, he destroyed the 4th, 5th and 11th ranked defenses. His worst series was against the 7th ranked DRTG Bulls, and in that he still managed 24.7 ppg/7.2 apg on 54 ts% and 3.6 tov, and just look at the last 2 games the Heat won both by double digits with Wade performing pretty well. The Bulls weren't really a serious threat anyway.

2010: Wade had a great series against the Celtics, who were arguably one of the best defensive playoff teams in history that year. Lebron and Kobe couldn't hold a candle.

2011: Wade dominated the Celtics again this year proving 2010 wasn't a fluke. He had a great performance against Dallas that got wasted due to Lebron's shrinkage, and just poor depth overall.

This isn't to say Wade's perfect in the playoffs, you can point to a series like the 2011 Bulls sure but that seems way more like a fluke than the norm for Wade, and in 07 he was nowhere near healthy.

None of that is to say Curry didn't have some great performances against great teams himself, but if you ask who I'd trust more in a vacuum with both healthy I'd usually pick Wade.

The phrase "and it's not close" is often used with wild abandon to no real purpose around here. But in this case it is useful and applicable. Some people seem to think this is a close comparison. It isn't. There is one pair here capable of ruining defenses and forcing coaches to rewrite the book on how to play the game. That so many here cannot even begin to grasp that shows how backward the thinking here is.

I appreciate the response, although I'd object to some of the conclusions and the selection of series that appear quite a bit unfair and/or inconsistent.

No-more-rings wrote:Well I'd rather look into what they did over their best 3-5 years to indicate what you can expect from them on average, peak is usually one year but i factor in other years to help remove flukes and such. If we used 2016 and 2009, neither would come out looking very good in the playoffs.

I agree, that's how I was looking at it as well.

No-more-rings wrote:It really just comes down to I think Wade has a more impressive track record against strong defenses than Curry.

2015- He had a subpar series against Memphis and that's even with Conley being pretty banged up and even missing a game

First of all, I don't believe that Curry is a player you stop with an individual match-up and certainly not with a non-wing-sized non-elite defender.

It is true that the series was underwhelming in terms of overall numbers. But if you want to assess how resilient someone's offense is when it really matters, as you seem to do, then it probably matters more how a player closes out the series. After being down, Curry had these three games that all led to wins and thereby a not-really-close series after all:

33 PTS on 64% TS, 5 AST to 4 TOV, +19 ; 101-84 W
18 PTS on 56% TS, 5 AST to 4 TOV, +16 ; 98-78 W
32 PTS on 62% TS, 10 AST to 4 TOV, +11 ; 108-95 W

So he had a great game in what was essentially a must-win game, followed it up by a subpar game to go up 3-2, and had a great close-out game to the series in which he was directly involved in around half of his team's points. So while not without flaws, he closed out the series a lot better than he started it – i.e. he has shown that he could figure out this defense over the course of a series and perform when the stakes were at the highest.

No-more-rings wrote:2016- We all know how the finals went that year, some excuse it away due to injury though there's good reason to think while that played a factor the way that the Cavs played him too played a big role. And those Cavs weren't even that great defensively, 10th in the regular season, 7th in the playoffs

Certainly a comparatively poor series, no doubt. He was visibly hobbled but still should have performed better. Not sure why you bring this series up, though, as you wanted to focus on strong defenses (otherwise, why not also look at the 2016 Thunder for instance?). This feels more like listing bad series, which is fine, but you would have to do the same for Wade in that case.

No-more-rings wrote:2018: He underperformed against the Rockets. He really only had 3/7 games in the series where he performed up to par or greater, and one of them was in Chris Paul's absence. The Rockets did a great job defensively in the series, but someone of Curry's caliber backed by that kind of supporting cast I'd expect more from him period.

He slightly underperformed based on the overall numbers but still put up 25/6 with only few turnovers on 58% TS. Hardly a clear negative outlier. More importantly, I find it very difficult to hold this series against him when once again, he absolutely showed up when the series was on the line.

Down 3-2, Curry had a game in which he put up 29/6 with only 2 TOV, 63% TS, +33 (115-86 W)
Tied 3-3, Curry had a game in which he put up 29/10 with 5 TOV, 61% TS, +13 (101-92 W)

Players who struggle against good defenses typically cannot perform at their best when the series is on the line. Yes, Chris Paul was missing but I find it very far-fetched to suggest that Paul was the key difference between Curry struggling and going off. The history of Curry vs. Paul indicates that Paul cannot really bother Curry in any special way.

No-more-rings wrote:2019: He had a good series against the Raptors, though i wouldn't mark it down as anything extraordinary. He had like 3 mediocre games in there and 3 good-great ones.

I find that a very harsh assessment and one that doesn't seem consistent with your previous tendencies. 30/6 on 60% TS with your best teammate going down 12 minutes into the series, meaning that your entire offenses needed to be re-adjusted on the fly, is really excellent in an NBA Finals series against a great defense. That not every game was equally good is certainly true but not something we shouldn't expect from anybody that isn't peak LeBron perhaps.

No-more-rings wrote:We can compare that to Wade and again i think his track record against strong defenses/and or high pressure moments is just clearly more impressive.

2006: I mean just look at every series in that run, he destroyed the 4th, 5th and 11th ranked defenses. His worst series was against the 7th ranked DRTG Bulls, and in that he still managed 24.7 ppg/7.2 apg on 54 ts% and 3.6 tov, and just look at the last 2 games the Heat won both by double digits with Wade performing pretty well. The Bulls weren't really a serious threat anyway.

That seems very inconsistent. You suggest to ‘just look at the last two games’ when you haven't said the same about Curry versus the Rockets. And you say that ‘the Bulls weren't a serious threat anyway’ when this might also be said about the Grizzlies in 2015 (both series ended 4-2).

Also, you describe Wade's series against the Nets and Mavericks as ‘he destroyed’ them, yet Curry's finals against the Raptors were an ‘underperformance’. Again, I don't see that as consistent with what we see in the numbers. You also mentioned versus the Raptors that Curry had some mediocre/poor games in that series; yet you don't mention that Wade really struggled in 2 out of the 5 games versus the Nets, including a disastrous close-out game 5 that the Heat won by 1 point thanks to his teammates. And while the Finals were really good, I'm not sure they were noticeably better on offense than what Curry did against the Raptors at the individual level (Wade scored a bit more, but had a 1:1 AST/TO ratio and lower efficiency).

No-more-rings wrote:2010: Wade had a great series against the Celtics, who were arguably one of the best defensive playoff teams in history that year. Lebron and Kobe couldn't hold a candle.

That was a great individual series, no doubt. Still, it bears mentioning that it was a backdoor sweep, i.e. the Heat never were much of a danger to the Celtics. And, more importantly, the Heat offense was absolutely terrible. 97.6 ORTG, 99 ORTG with Wade on the court (down from a 112 on-court ORTG during the RS). To use this series to show that Wade can get his against a great defense – that's fine. But it's absolutely not a great example of his offensive resiliency at the team level.

No-more-rings wrote:2011: Wade dominated the Celtics again this year proving 2010 wasn't a fluke. He had a great performance against Dallas that got wasted due to Lebron's shrinkage, and just poor depth overall.

This isn't to say Wade's perfect in the playoffs, you can point to a series like the 2011 Bulls sure but that seems way more like a fluke than the norm for Wade, and in 07 he was nowhere near healthy.

I'm glad you note the 2011 and 2007 Bulls series, but the way you do it I'd say comes across as pretty biased. You analyzed all the series in more detail but for those two series, you essentially just say: well, they exist, but we shouldn't look at them too much. Why not? I'm fairly certain that a series like the 2011 one would have not been glossed over like that if it was Curry who performed like that. It would probably even have been central to your argument.

For all the talk about how this has been a fluke for Wade: Curry NEVER had a series as bad as Wade had versus the 2011 Bulls. Not even close. The Bulls were the #1 defense, i.e. exactly the team you were interested in looking at. Yet it's addressed in only one half sentence. Curry also never had a series in which he struggled as much as Wade versus the 2007 Bulls and Curry himself has been pretty banged up – to the point that he certainly wouldn't have played if it weren't the playoffs – in some series. But again, that wasn't even remotely used in the same way you use it for Wade here.

So that's two series in Wade's prime that were worse than anything we've seen from Curry – and Wade only played 11 series during this time, while Curry played in quite a few more in that span.

Also, you've left out some series against good defenses for Curry (not sure why, since you were happy to look at good series for Wade – i.e. it clearly wasn't just about focusing on the poor series).

2015 Rockets ranked 8th in DRTG during the RS. Curry's numbers: 31/6, 3 TOV, 68% TS
2017 Jazz ranked 3rd in DRTG during the RS. Curry's numbers: 25/6, 2 TOV, 68% TS
2017 Spurs ranked 1st in DRTG during the RS: Curry's numbers: 32/5, 4 TOV, 73% TS
– yes, Kawhi's loss was a big deal but he wasn't the difference between best defense in the league and not even a good one (see the on/off numbers for that season)

If you want to include the 2016 Cavs as a series for Curry, you might as well also include the 2016 Thunder who had virtually the same playoff DRTG as the Cavs and were close in the RS as well. But Curry performed excellent there to close it out, so maybe that's why it was omitted.

So yeah, while I appreciate the response, it appears as though you not only interpreted but selected series in a way that is clearly biased towards Wade. A number of series against good defenses you just left out for Curry (coincidentally, he played excellent in those), two terrible series for Wade you essentially skip over (while this isn't done for Curry, on the contrary) and some interpretations appear to be inconsistent to me in ways that favor Wade (e.g. describing series as ‘he destroyed those defenses’ for Wade when a comparable series for Curry is described as ‘underperforming’; focusing on factors (individual losses, individual games) to knock down Curry's performance in ways that isn't done for Wade; describing Curry's injury trouble versus the Cavs as ‘playing a role BUT...’ while describing Wade's injury trouble versus the Bulls as ‘he was nowhere near healthy’ etc.).

And to be clear: I'm absolutely fine with someone preferring Wade in the playoffs, even on offense (though I'd disagree with that). Also, I'm not claiming that my assessment here is complete – given how I feel about your interpretation and selection, my post might be a bit tilted towards providing a counter-perspective instead of making a comprehensive and consistent analysis. But I feel very strongly about the in my view false narrative that Curry is particular prone to playoff struggles and certainly that Wade has some obvious resiliency advantage on offense in the way you present it.

The-Power wrote:
It is true that the series was underwhelming in terms of overall numbers. But if you want to assess how resilient someone's offense is when it really matters, as you seem to do, then it probably matters more how a player closes out the series. After being down, Curry had these three games that all led to wins and thereby a not-really-close series after all:

33 PTS on 64% TS, 5 AST to 4 TOV, +19 ; 101-84 W
18 PTS on 56% TS, 5 AST to 4 TOV, +16 ; 98-78 W
32 PTS on 62% TS, 10 AST to 4 TOV, +11 ; 108-95 W

So he had a great game in what was essentially a must-win game, followed it up by a subpar game to go up 3-2, and had a great close-out game to the series in which he was directly involved in around half of his team's points. So while not without flaws, he closed out the series a lot better than he started it – i.e. he has shown that he could figure out this defense over the course of a series and perform when the stakes were at the highest.

Well again, i didn't call it a bad series but if we compare it to a lot of his other series it was definitely subpar, and while finishing out a series strong helps the cause we can't just look at only that. It's also very important to reiterate Conley's health, he broke his face in the prior series and clearly wasn't himself against the Warriors. Also, which i almost forgot Tony Allen's injury. He was barely available in those last 3 games you mention, only playing about 20 mins combined over the 3. There's very good reason to believe that with Curry's 2 main defenders Conley and Allen being more available and ready to go would've made it tougher on Curry and who knows maybe even pull off the upset. Warriors would still probably win, but i don't see any reason to ignore all of this.

The-Power wrote:Certainly a comparatively poor series, no doubt. He was visibly hobbled but still should have performed better. Not sure why you bring this series up, though, as you wanted to focus on strong defenses (otherwise, why not also look at the 2016 Thunder for instance?). This feels more like listing bad series, which is fine, but you would have to do the same for Wade in that case.

The Cavs weren't a great defense per say, but they did play fantastic defense in the series particularly in the last 3 games. So i think it bears mentioning.

The-Power wrote:He slightly underperformed based on the overall numbers but still put up 25/6 with only few turnovers on 58% TS. Hardly a clear negative outlier. More importantly, I find it very difficult to hold this series against him when once again, he absolutely showed up when the series was on the line.

Down 3-2, Curry had a game in which he put up 29/6 with only 2 TOV, 63% TS, +33 (115-86 W)
Tied 3-3, Curry had a game in which he put up 29/10 with 5 TOV, 61% TS, +13 (101-92 W)

Players who struggle against good defenses typically cannot perform at their best when the series is on the line. Yes, Chris Paul was missing but I find it very far-fetched to suggest that Paul was the key difference between Curry struggling and going off. The history of Curry vs. Paul indicates that Paul cannot really bother Curry in any special way.

I don't know how you can say any of that when Paul was his primary defender and the Warriors offense was completely shut down in games 4 and 5. I don't think Curry magically figured them out, if anything the Rockets were looking to be on their way of figuring the Warriors out until their 2nd best player goes down. You can't continue to ignore these things because a pattern is sort of happening here. Curry's team falls down 2-1 and 3-2 and then important players for the other team goes down with injury. The opposite happened in 2016, and instead of Curry "figuring them out" he fell apart. Doesn't seem so coincidental to me.

The-Power wrote:I find that a very harsh assessment and one that doesn't seem consistent with your previous tendencies. 30/6 on 60% TS with your best teammate going down 12 minutes into the series, meaning that your entire offenses needed to be re-adjusted on the fly, is really excellent in an NBA Finals series against a great defense. That not every game was equally good is certainly true but not something we shouldn't expect from anybody that isn't peak LeBron perhaps.

All i said was it wasn't some extraordinary series and i stand by that.

The-Power wrote:That seems very inconsistent. You suggest to ‘just look at the last two games’ when you haven't said the same about Curry versus the Rockets. And you say that ‘the Bulls weren't a serious threat anyway’ when this might also be said about the Grizzlies in 2015 (both series ended 4-2).

It's not inconsistent really. Neither were great series by these guys, i acknowledge that. Curry did however catch a break with Conley and Allen's injuries and partial absences. That's undeniable. Saying the Grizzlies weren't a threat is false, they took OKC to 7 the year prior. They were absolutely a threat to top West teams. Saying otherwise would be absurd.

The-Power wrote:Also, you describe Wade's series against the Nets and Mavericks as ‘he destroyed’ them, yet Curry's finals against the Raptors were an ‘underperformance’. Again, I don't see that as consistent with what we see in the numbers.

Read again i never called the Raptors an underperformance.

The-Power wrote:You also mentioned versus the Raptors that Curry had some mediocre/poor games in that series; yet you don't mention that Wade really struggled in 2 out of the 5 games versus the Nets, including a disastrous close-out game 5 that the Heat won by 1 point thanks to his teammates.

How would Curry do against the arguable goat point guard defender in his prime? These sort of things matter, and I'm not going to take it to the point where we just disregard winning and losing.

The-Power wrote:And while the Finals were really good,I'm not sure they were noticeably better on offense than what Curry did against the Raptors at the individual level (Wade scored a bit more, but had a 1:1 AST/TO ratio and lower efficiency).

I'll just say i shouldn't really have to go into the context of why those 2 performances can't really be compared.

The-Power wrote:That was a great individual series, no doubt. Still, it bears mentioning that it was a backdoor sweep, i.e. the Heat never were much of a danger to the Celtics. And, more importantly, the Heat offense was absolutely terrible. 97.6 ORTG, 99 ORTG with Wade on the court (down from a 112 on-court ORTG during the RS). To use this series to show that Wade can get his against a great defense – that's fine. But it's absolutely not a great example of his offensive resiliency at the team level.

Well let's give Curry old Jermaine Oneal, Haslem and Mario Chalmers and see how his offense performs at the "team level" against those Celtics. Remember this is the same team that shut down the Cavs, Magic and to a lesser degree the Lakers offense.

The-Power wrote:I'm glad you note the 2011 and 2007 Bulls series, but the way you do it I'd say comes across as pretty biased. You analyzed all the series in more detail but for those two series, you essentially just say: well, they exist, but we shouldn't look at them too much. Why not? I'm fairly certain that a series like the 2011 one would have not been glossed over like that if it was Curry who performed like that. It would probably even have been central to your argument.

For all the talk about how this has been a fluke for Wade: Curry NEVER had a series as bad as Wade had versus the 2011 Bulls.

Well i am biased, but i know you are for Curry and it reflects in some of your responses as well such as claiming Cp3 missing 2 games doesn't matter. I think we can put those things aside or at least try to. Nobody's argument is going to be perfect, and i don't think my bias has manifested into some outrageous claims.

The-Power wrote:Not even close. The Bulls were the #1 defense, i.e. exactly the team you were interested in looking at. Yet it's addressed in only one half sentence. Curry also never had a series in which he struggled as much as Wade versus the 2007 Bulls and Curry himself has been pretty banged up – to the point that he certainly wouldn't have played if it weren't the playoffs – in some series. But again, that wasn't even remotely used in the same way you use it for Wade here.

Curry never played as bad as Wade did against the Bulls you're right, but he certainly never seen a defense like theirs and even if he did he certainly wouldn't have had such poor spacing and role players to work with either. That was a slug fest defensive series, and the Heat didn't have the kind of spacing or offensive strategies to really pull of a great offensive performance. While I'm not excusing it, that series is clearly way more of an outlier than a normal series from Wade.

The-Power wrote:So that's two series in Wade's prime that were worse than anything we've seen from Curry – and Wade only played 11 series during this time, while Curry played in quite a few more in that span.

Well that's one that's worse, though it doesn't look as bad in context and the other where he was crap but probably shouldn't have even been on the court for how injured he was.

The-Power wrote:Also, you've left out some series against good defenses for Curry (not sure why, since you were happy to look at good series for Wade – i.e. it clearly wasn't just about focusing on the poor series).

2015 Rockets ranked 8th in DRTG during the RS. Curry's numbers: 31/6, 3 TOV, 68% TS
2017 Jazz ranked 3rd in DRTG during the RS. Curry's numbers: 25/6, 2 TOV, 68% TS
2017 Spurs ranked 1st in DRTG during the RS: Curry's numbers: 32/5, 4 TOV, 73% TS
– yes, Kawhi's loss was a big deal but he wasn't the difference between best defense in the league and not even a good one (see the on/off numbers for that season)

I acknowledged he had some fine performances of his own, i never denied that. If you want to compare those defenses to that of the Celtics, Pistons and Nets though go ahead i guess. And for what i say about KD should apply to Curry somewhat as well, the amount of talent they had over their competition in 2017 was just unfair, so while i won't disregard that 2017 run completely it's hard for me to really weigh it at face value.

The-Power wrote:So yeah, while I appreciate the response, it appears as though you not only interpreted but selected series in a way that is clearly biased towards Wade. A number of series against good defenses you just left out for Curry (coincidentally, he played excellent in those), two terrible series for Wade you essentially skip over (while this isn't done for Curry, on the contrary) and some interpretations appear to be inconsistent to me in ways that favor Wade (e.g. describing series as ‘he destroyed those defenses’ for Wade when a comparable series for Curry is described as ‘underperforming’; focusing on factors (individual losses, individual games) to knock down Curry's performance in ways that isn't done for Wade; describing Curry's injury trouble versus the Cavs as ‘playing a role BUT...’ while describing Wade's injury trouble versus the Bulls as ‘he was nowhere near healthy’ etc.).

And to be clear: I'm absolutely fine with someone preferring Wade in the playoffs, even on offense (though I'd disagree with that). Also, I'm not claiming that my assessment here is complete – given how I feel about your interpretation and selection, my post might be a bit tilted towards providing a counter-perspective instead of making a comprehensive and consistent analysis. But I feel very strongly about the in my view false narrative that Curry is particular prone to playoff struggles and certainly that Wade has some obvious resiliency advantage on offense in the way you present it.

I understand your concerns with my analysis and I'll admit it's not perfect but still stand by what i said, which is essentially if you remove all context and look at them both in a vacuum with good health, who would i rather have for a run where I'm going to run into high level opponents with good-great defenses I'm going to take Wade more times than not though if the matchup seems to favor Curry on paper i might take him in some instances.

In today’s league give me Garnett and curry. In any other league I want robinson and wade. Good comparison though

WarriorGM wrote:The phrase "and it's not close" is often used with wild abandon to no real purpose around here. But in this case it is useful and applicable. Some people seem to think this is a close comparison. It isn't. There is one pair here capable of ruining defenses and forcing coaches to rewrite the book on how to play the game. That so many here cannot even begin to grasp that shows how backward the thinking here is.

I think you're missing the point. Robinson and Wade are bigger and stronger. That means they are better. /s

I love that the argument against Curry is that he can't close games or create his own shot when he's literally 2nd to Shaq all time in 4th quarter scoring in the Finals.

Stephen Curry's least efficient year in ISO on record he averaged 1.05 PPP. To put that into perspective in LeBron James best he averaged 0.98 PPP.

I combined their advanced stats from their best single seasons. It's neck and neck.

Curry/Garnett
PER 60.9
OWS 24.2
DWS 12.1
WS 36.2
WS/48 .590
OBPM 17.1
DBPM 4.0
BPM 22.1
VORP 19.5
VORP/48 0.158

Wade/Robinson
PER 61.1
OWS 23.6
DWS 11.1
WS 34.7
WS/49 .528
OBPM 16.3
DBPM 6.2
BPM 22.5
VORP 21.0
VORP/48 0.160

Side note:
Curry made it the the Finals and Garnett made it to the WCF and they averaged 65.5 wins.
Wade and Robinson were both first round exits and they averaged 48 wins.