RealGM

Who's better at his peak?

Easy. Peak Rose was an MVP. Of course you may say the selection was arguable. Peak Irving was never a top 5 player in the league in any years.

I think Rose, he was almost Wade level at driving and finishing at the rack. His athleticism was all time great for a point guard and that can't just be swept aside. Kyrie may be more portable alongside other stars but that's not the end all be all for ranking players. The Bulls probably would've won that year if they just had a reliable 2nd offensive option next to Rose.

dygaction wrote:Easy. Peak Rose was an MVP. Of course you may say the selection was arguable. Peak Irving was never a top 5 player in the league in any years.

Being MVP, even when comparing peaks, isnt something that just translates year to year. Ignoring snubs and narratives which alone make it a bit wonky, an MVP year one season may be not even a top 5 season another year.

Also, I think that Kyries peak is probably this year or sometime in the next year or two. He is having a career year now after havign one last year pre-injury. So we dont know how he finished out but...

29/6/5 on 50/40/90 is certainly not an "east" second place to anyone let alone Rose's 2010-11 season.

for the last 5 seasons Kyrie has basically been 25/6/4 on close to 50/40/90. Rose doesnt have a season that approaches that offensively. How much better does his D need to be to close that gap for a non-title, non-finals team?

Prokorov wrote:

dygaction wrote:Easy. Peak Rose was an MVP. Of course you may say the selection was arguable. Peak Irving was never a top 5 player in the league in any years.

Being MVP, even when comparing peaks, isnt something that just translates year to year. Ignoring snubs and narratives which alone make it a bit wonky, an MVP year one season may be not even a top 5 season another year.

Also, I think that Kyries peak is probably this year or sometime in the next year or two. He is having a career year now after havign one last year pre-injury. So we dont know how he finished out but...

29/6/5 on 50/40/90 is certainly not an "east" second place to anyone let alone Rose's 2010-11 season.

for the last 5 seasons Kyrie has basically been 25/6/4 on close to 50/40/90. Rose doesnt have a season that approaches that offensively. How much better does his D need to be to close that gap for a non-title, non-finals team?

First of all, it is 27.7/5.7/4.7, not 29/6/5. Rose was the best player on a league best 62 win team. Kyrie is now the 2nd or 3rd best player of his team with a worse record. They are facing different levels of defense.

dygaction wrote:

Prokorov wrote:

dygaction wrote:Easy. Peak Rose was an MVP. Of course you may say the selection was arguable. Peak Irving was never a top 5 player in the league in any years.

Being MVP, even when comparing peaks, isnt something that just translates year to year. Ignoring snubs and narratives which alone make it a bit wonky, an MVP year one season may be not even a top 5 season another year.

Also, I think that Kyries peak is probably this year or sometime in the next year or two. He is having a career year now after havign one last year pre-injury. So we dont know how he finished out but...

29/6/5 on 50/40/90 is certainly not an "east" second place to anyone let alone Rose's 2010-11 season.

for the last 5 seasons Kyrie has basically been 25/6/4 on close to 50/40/90. Rose doesnt have a season that approaches that offensively. How much better does his D need to be to close that gap for a non-title, non-finals team?

First of all, it is 27.7/5.7/4.7, not 29/6/5. Rose was the best player on a league best 62 win team. Kyrie is now the 2nd or 3rd best player of his team with a worse record. They are facing different levels of defense.

are we really splitting hairs about 0.3 rebounds and 0.3 assists?sorry. 27/5/4 on 50/40/89.9 is that better?

You are using narrative based items to determine peak. that isnt really how it works. 62 wins one year is different from 62 wins another year. i mean this nets team has missed time to covid, had an enormous in season trade, a rookie coach, a condensed season and a pandemic. not to mention the nets arent worried about regular season wins.

Offensively, Kyrie at his peak is clearly better then rose at his peak.... in pretty much every aspect. his finishing may not be as spectacualr, but kyrie is sitll elite at the rim. and as a shooter, it isnt remotely close from any level. so again, how much does rose's defense close that gap. for impact on winning... they got smashed in the ECF by lebron in roses mvp year. in Boston Kyrie went 1 less round then rose getting smashed by giannis. not a huge difference. he basically ran into the conferences best player 1 round earlier then rose.

its hard to compare because Kyries peak is next to better teammates. from a production/ability/stas/analuitics standpoint it certainly issnt "rose easy"

Kyrie, because he is better at almost everything on offense and ewhile a small edge might go to Rose on defense.

I think 2018-2019 Kyrie was as good or better than 2011 Derrick Rose. The 2011 Bulls are what Kyrie's team should've been that year, but none of those players were as good as Luol Deng (18 ppg and good defense, all-star a year or two), Joakim Noah, Boozer, Taj Gibson, Kyle Korver...this was a very solid team. Rose was great, but peak Kyrie would make the offense even better because he was a better shooter and at least as good a passer and spaced the floor better. That all makes up for Derrick Rose's superior driving/GOAT athleticism.

I think this Kyrie is also about as good as Rose, just more portable. Kyrie is a top 10ish, top 15ish guy. Rose was never actually better than top 10 in the league, no matter what people think.

LukaTheGOAT wrote:Kyrie, because he is better at almost everything on offense and ewhile a small edge might go to Rose on defense.

Well no that's not accurate. Rose was a better slasher, better at drawing free throws and a better playmaker. Kyrie shoots better which matters a good deal but your statement is inaccurate.

Rose by a mile

Sadly we never saw Rose's peak or prime. To be an MVP at 22 is astonishing. If we ever got to see him healthy at age 26-30, it would been an all-time great prime.
If we're debating Rose best season vs Irving's best, then its still Rose as he was the best player on the best team in the league, surpassing expectations and beating the supposed best team Heat 3-0 in the regular season.

The Explorer wrote:Sadly we never saw Rose's peak or prime. To be an MVP at 22 is astonishing. If we ever got to see him healthy at age 26-30, it would been an all-time great prime.
If we're debating Rose best season vs Irving's best, then its still Rose as he was the best player on the best team in the league, surpassing expectations and beating the supposed best team Heat 3-0 in the regular season.

How were the Bulls the best team in the league? They would have won a championship otherwise, would they have not?

The Heat were supposed to be the best team in the East. I believe the Lakers were favored to win the title in 2011.

HeartBreakKid wrote:

The Explorer wrote:Sadly we never saw Rose's peak or prime. To be an MVP at 22 is astonishing. If we ever got to see him healthy at age 26-30, it would been an all-time great prime.
If we're debating Rose best season vs Irving's best, then its still Rose as he was the best player on the best team in the league, surpassing expectations and beating the supposed best team Heat 3-0 in the regular season.

How were the Bulls the best team in the league? They would have won a championship otherwise, would they have not?

The Heat were supposed to be the best team in the East. I believe the Lakers were favored to win the title in 2011.

Well, sometimes the best team does not win the championship, due to a myriad of reasons (injuries, matchups, luck...).

But it certainly doesn't seem like the case with the Bulls, who were a +6.5 SRS team on the RS (not the best SRS in the league either), and played exactly like that on the playoffs (with Rose's offense ultimately being completely nullified).

No-more-rings wrote:

LukaTheGOAT wrote:Kyrie, because he is better at almost everything on offense and ewhile a small edge might go to Rose on defense.

Well no that's not accurate. Rose was a better slasher, better at drawing free throws and a better playmaker. Kyrie shoots better which matters a good deal but your statement is inaccurate.

Nope. I said almost everything. There is a lot more to offense than what you mentioned. Also I don't believe Rose necessarily gets to the hoop better, as Kyrie gets there more through craft than athleticism. And I don't buy that Rose is a better playmaker. Kyrie Irving has a 1.3 PlayVal this year (had a 1.6 PlayVal last year) and is creating about 11 shots per 100 possessions (created about 12.6 shots per 100 possessions last time). Derrick Rose's peak PlayVal was 1.4 and he peaked at creating about 11.6 shots per 100 possessions. They are pretty close and you go either way.

The answer is Kyrie too and the fact he can better play off ball because of his shooting is key here.

dygaction wrote:Easy. Peak Rose was an MVP. Of course you may say the selection was arguable. Peak Irving was never a top 5 player in the league in any years.

You could argue Rose wasn't top 5 in 2011 himself.

I'd say their peaks are pretty much a push. They are both overrated.

Soulcatcher33 wrote:

dygaction wrote:Easy. Peak Rose was an MVP. Of course you may say the selection was arguable. Peak Irving was never a top 5 player in the league in any years.

You could argue Rose wasn't top 5 in 2011 himself.

I'd say their peaks are pretty much a push. They are both overrated.

You may argue 2011 Rose was not top 5, but the case would not be very strong. He was the leader of a league best 62 win team. Advanced stats also support - He was #5 in winshare, tied #1 in OBPM, #3 in BPM, tied #2 in VORP.
On the other hand, you cannot argue Kyrie was a top 5 player in any season. He was a borderline top 10 in a few seasons.

LukaTheGOAT wrote:

No-more-rings wrote:

LukaTheGOAT wrote:Kyrie, because he is better at almost everything on offense and ewhile a small edge might go to Rose on defense.

Well no that's not accurate. Rose was a better slasher, better at drawing free throws and a better playmaker. Kyrie shoots better which matters a good deal but your statement is inaccurate.

Nope. I said almost everything. There is a lot more to offense than what you mentioned. Also I don't believe Rose necessarily gets to the hoop better, as Kyrie gets there more through craft than athleticism. And I don't buy that Rose is a better playmaker. Kyrie Irving has a 1.3 PlayVal this year (had a 1.6 PlayVal last year) and is creating about 11 shots per 100 possessions (created about 12.6 shots per 100 possessions last time). Derrick Rose's peak PlayVal was 1.4 and he peaked at creating about 11.6 shots per 100 possessions. They are pretty close and you go either way.

The answer is Kyrie too and the fact he can better play off ball because of his shooting is key here.

I'll just say i think you ought to rewatch some Rose games from that year. His playmaking was clearly better, i don't know what to make of those stats you used, but you need to account for the fact that Rose had played with mediocre offensive teammates in a defensive system. Kyrie plays with KD and Harden.

It's kind of the same for his driving game, his team didn't have the kind of Spacing that Kyrie's usually have to help free up space to drive. I'm pretty certain Rose's speed and athleticism made his drives harder to stop. You can take Kyrie and that's alright, but this "he does almost everything better on offense" just isn't true.

Rose had a mvp season and was healthier.

Kyrie because he's a consistent threat from all three levels. Shooting is a premium in the playoffs, & the flat Earther is a markedly better shooter while being comparable at patting the rock & getting to the rim.