Curry last second shots in playoffs

[dhsilv2]

I think if you switch Harden and Steph in 2014, Warriors should atleast won 6-7 rings at this point without recruiting KD, Harden arguably the GOAT while the Steph-led Rockets might make the Semis or even Conference Finals from time to time but won't sniff NBA Finals because Harden-led GSW won the West for 9 straight years.

Ive been getting so much hate for saying that lol

snowflakes wanna believe anyone can be great. that's not true. size and athleticism matters. there's a reason why the best player on a championship team isn't the shortest player. kawhi, KD, Kobe, dwade, dirk, even Paul Pierce can get THEIR shot off when their teams need them to. they're not running around screens or hoping to catch their defender sleeping. that's not reliable the deeper you get into the playoffs because good teams don't make as many mistakes.

The best player on literally the most recent championship team was the shortest player on his team and is also the subject of this thread.
So, there goes that theory I guess

I missed that part, and btw he listed Wade...who's a whole inch taller than Curry.

[bovice]

Ive been getting so much hate for saying that lol

snowflakes wanna believe anyone can be great. that's not true. size and athleticism matters. there's a reason why the best player on a championship team isn't the shortest player. kawhi, KD, Kobe, dwade, dirk, even Paul Pierce can get THEIR shot off when their teams need them to. they're not running around screens or hoping to catch their defender sleeping. that's not reliable the deeper you get into the playoffs because good teams don't make as many mistakes.

The best player on literally the most recent championship team was the shortest player on his team and is also the subject of this thread.
So, there goes that theory I guess

I missed that part, and btw he listed Wade...who's a whole inch taller than Curry.

dwade was physically dominant too. he can create by himself

[dhsilv2]

The best player on literally the most recent championship team was the shortest player on his team and is also the subject of this thread.
So, there goes that theory I guess

I missed that part, and btw he listed Wade...who's a whole inch taller than Curry.

dwade was physically dominant too. he can create by himself

He still nerfs the height issue. if you want to address Curry's issues, address them. Not try using comps while calling a guy too short with someone a whole inch taller.

[bovice]

I missed that part, and btw he listed Wade...who's a whole inch taller than Curry.

dwade was physically dominant too. he can create by himself

He still nerfs the height issue. if you want to address Curry's issues, address them. Not try using comps while calling a guy too short with someone a whole inch taller.

you're pointing out the very few exceptions to the rule. go and find teams who have won championships with their best player being their shortest player in the last 30 years. pistons with IT, warriors with Steph, and maybe you could say billups in '04. those are 3 outliers and you could probably find a good way to explain why they won those years. they either benefitted from injuries and/or had the majority of matchup advantages in the finals.

and again, dwade is a physically imposing player. physicality is important in the playoffs. it's why a player like bogdonavic who may be a better scorer but is finesse regresses in the playoffs but Terrence Mann's impact is elevated.

edit: I feel like you're choosing not to understand the gist of what I'm saying because you're so caught up in wanting to be right. I don't want that to come off as condescending, I just want a discussion in good faith

[dhsilv2]

dwade was physically dominant too. he can create by himself

He still nerfs the height issue. if you want to address Curry's issues, address them. Not try using comps while calling a guy too short with someone a whole inch taller.

you're pointing out the very few exceptions to the rule. go and find teams who have won championships with their best player being their shortest player in the last 30 years. pistons with IT, warriors with Steph, and maybe you could say billups in '04. those are 3 outliers and you could probably find a good way to explain why they won those years. they either benefitted from injuries and/or had the majority of matchup advantages in the finals.

and again, dwade is a physically imposing player. physicality is important in the playoffs. it's why a player like bogdonavic who may be a better scorer but is finesse regresses in the playoffs but Terrence Mann's impact is elevated.

edit: I feel like you're choosing not to understand the gist of what I'm saying because you're so caught up in wanting to be right. I don't want that to come off as condescending, I just want a discussion in good faith

The best players in NBA history have generally been taller. That's pretty well established. That said Curry isn't that small. He's 6'3 and is today a fairly well built and strong guy. The thing about Curry is his value is unique among MVP level stars. His value is more about his shot creation for others than it is his ability to shot create. Sure, he's an all time great shot MAKER, but not creator for himself. He's just a very different style of player. It would be like saying no team had won with a superstar who shot under 60% since Wilt when Shaq was winning titles. Shaq's just a different animal. Same with Curry.

That said if you're including IT and Bilups with Curry. That's 7 titles since 1989 or 20.6% of them. That seems like a pretty reasonable number, basically 1 in 5.

[bovice]

He still nerfs the height issue. if you want to address Curry's issues, address them. Not try using comps while calling a guy too short with someone a whole inch taller.

you're pointing out the very few exceptions to the rule. go and find teams who have won championships with their best player being their shortest player in the last 30 years. pistons with IT, warriors with Steph, and maybe you could say billups in '04. those are 3 outliers and you could probably find a good way to explain why they won those years. they either benefitted from injuries and/or had the majority of matchup advantages in the finals.

and again, dwade is a physically imposing player. physicality is important in the playoffs. it's why a player like bogdonavic who may be a better scorer but is finesse regresses in the playoffs but Terrence Mann's impact is elevated.

edit: I feel like you're choosing not to understand the gist of what I'm saying because you're so caught up in wanting to be right. I don't want that to come off as condescending, I just want a discussion in good faith

The best players in NBA history have generally been taller. That's pretty well established. That said Curry isn't that small. He's 6'3 and is today a fairly well built and strong guy. The thing about Curry is his value is unique among MVP level stars. His value is more about his shot creation for others than it is his ability to shot create. Sure, he's an all time great shot MAKER, but not creator for himself. He's just a very different style of player. It would be like saying no team had won with a superstar who shot under 60% since Wilt when Shaq was winning titles. Shaq's just a different animal. Same with Curry.

That said if you're including IT and Bilups with Curry. That's 7 titles since 1989 or 20.6% of them. That seems like a pretty reasonable number, basically 1 in 5.

he's a scrawny, finesse 6'3 player who recently put on some weight in recent years and has become a better finisher inside as a result. no one would say he's above average in strength at his height. you would say that about someone like donovan mitchell.

there comes a time in the playoffs where the system breaks down and you need to put the team on your back. relying on movement to get open shots gets wins in the regular season, but it's not reliable in the post season. look at the jazz 2 years ago when they were the #1 seed or atlanta when they had millsap and korver, they fizzled out in the postseason. sure, the warriors are that on steroids, but you're seeing in these playoffs when it's neck and neck in the 4th quarter, you need to be able to isolate a defender and score on him. steph can't do that and they're down 3-1. dwade, paul pierce, kobe, jordan, KD, kawhi, lebron could all do it.

you can believe steph and the gsw system is so great that it overcomes that weakness, i cant convince you otherwise. but i don't believe that. i look at his playoff resume and i see a lot of wins but how many of those wins were against actual contenders? like kobe played a legit rockets team with artest, yao, scola, battier in the 2nd round, a 2nd seeded melo, billups, kenyon martin nuggets team, then played DPOY, MVP-candidate led magic who were good enough to beat lebron in the finals. that's a legendary run. Kawhi beating MVP Giannis + a philly team with embiid and butler just to get to the finals is a legendary run in and of itself. what run of curry's was that great? so did he win because of dominance or did he win because of circumstance. they had KD for 2 years and were the best team, but who did they beat without KD? OKC in '16 but they weren't champions that year. only series i can think of is boston last year. so forgive me if i'm not convinced of curry's transcendent greatness.

and...billups being the best player in '04 is debatable. you could say ben wallace was the most important player on that team. you could say sheed was. i wouldn't disagree if you said billups was the best, but if we're being honest that really was a total team effort that has yet to be repeated since then. an anomaly of a ring. the 2 years the warriors won with KD, a lot of people would say KD was the best player and his FMVP makes that case stronger. that 20% number is probably closer to 10%. but yes, you can win a ring if your best player is your shortest, but you're gonna need a lot more advantages to go your way to make that happen, it's why we don't see it often.

[dhsilv2]

you're pointing out the very few exceptions to the rule. go and find teams who have won championships with their best player being their shortest player in the last 30 years. pistons with IT, warriors with Steph, and maybe you could say billups in '04. those are 3 outliers and you could probably find a good way to explain why they won those years. they either benefitted from injuries and/or had the majority of matchup advantages in the finals.

and again, dwade is a physically imposing player. physicality is important in the playoffs. it's why a player like bogdonavic who may be a better scorer but is finesse regresses in the playoffs but Terrence Mann's impact is elevated.

edit: I feel like you're choosing not to understand the gist of what I'm saying because you're so caught up in wanting to be right. I don't want that to come off as condescending, I just want a discussion in good faith

The best players in NBA history have generally been taller. That's pretty well established. That said Curry isn't that small. He's 6'3 and is today a fairly well built and strong guy. The thing about Curry is his value is unique among MVP level stars. His value is more about his shot creation for others than it is his ability to shot create. Sure, he's an all time great shot MAKER, but not creator for himself. He's just a very different style of player. It would be like saying no team had won with a superstar who shot under 60% since Wilt when Shaq was winning titles. Shaq's just a different animal. Same with Curry.

That said if you're including IT and Bilups with Curry. That's 7 titles since 1989 or 20.6% of them. That seems like a pretty reasonable number, basically 1 in 5.

he's a scrawny, finesse 6'3 player who recently put on some weight in recent years and has become a better finisher inside as a result. no one would say he's above average in strength at his height. you would say that about someone like donovan mitchell.

there comes a time in the playoffs where the system breaks down and you need to put the team on your back. relying on movement to get open shots gets wins in the regular season, but it's not reliable in the post season. look at the jazz 2 years ago when they were the #1 seed or atlanta when they had millsap and korver, they fizzled out in the postseason. sure, the warriors are that on steroids, but you're seeing in these playoffs when it's neck and neck in the 4th quarter, you need to be able to isolate a defender and score on him. steph can't do that and they're down 3-1. dwade, paul pierce, kobe, jordan, KD, kawhi, lebron could all do it.

you can believe steph and the gsw system is so great that it overcomes that weakness, i cant convince you otherwise. but i don't believe that. i look at his playoff resume and i see a lot of wins but how many of those wins were against actual contenders? like kobe played a legit rockets team with artest, yao, scola, battier in the 2nd round, a 2nd seeded melo, billups, kenyon martin nuggets team, then played DPOY, MVP-candidate led magic who were good enough to beat lebron in the finals. that's a legendary run. Kawhi beating MVP Giannis + a philly team with embiid and butler just to get to the finals is a legendary run in and of itself. what run of curry's was that great? so did he win because of dominance or did he win because of circumstance. they had KD for 2 years and were the best team, but who did they beat without KD? OKC in '16 but they weren't champions that year. only series i can think of is boston last year. so forgive me if i'm not convinced of curry's transcendent greatness.

and...billups being the best player in '04 is debatable. you could say ben wallace was the most important player on that team. you could say sheed was. i wouldn't disagree if you said billups was the best, but if we're being honest that really was a total team effort that has yet to be repeated since then. an anomaly of a ring. the 2 years the warriors won with KD, a lot of people would say KD was the best player and his FMVP makes that case stronger. that 20% number is probably closer to 10%. but yes, you can win a ring if your best player is your shortest, but you're gonna need a lot more advantages to go your way to make that happen, it's why we don't see it often.

Curry early in his career was a finesse player completely. Scrawny....maybe before 2014, by then he'd become a reasonably and historically decent sized 6'3 guard...which is already pretty good sized for a smallest guy on the court. Today in terms of strength, I'm really not sure mitchell is any stronger than Curry. He's more explosive as a driver and leaper. But on defense I see Curry knock guys back as much as anyone that height does. Just tonight I saw him stop lebron, obviously Lebron realized a foul was a risk there too...but still lebron hit curry with real force and curry didn't budge.

Now to the system and the moving off ball, you're still not getting why Curry is the GOAT offensive player to so many. All that stuff he's doing is creating better shots for EVERYONE on the court. And we have so much data on that it's insane. He makes everyone else look way better. This is one of the reasons people so horribly and incorrectly think KD was better than him on those warriors title teams.

Now, we agree on one thing, I'm not sure we're right. We might be idiots. But I do agree that with less than 1 minute left and down, I don't love having Curry over most of the best players to win titles historically. But we perhaps disagree that those are the most important moments in the game. Curry is just more often than not, already up because again he can make everyone on his team better the whole game by just doing his movement stuff and you know being insane on ball too. When he gets hot, he generally just shoots the other team off the floor and he's on the bench in the last 5 minutes, they've already won.

FYI, I honestly think Ben was their best player and I think Hamilton was the most important PLAYOFF player before the finals. But a lot of teams have questions. You could have argued Parker was the most important spur in 2014, many in the media did that for example. I mean by the silly logic you laid out with height...MJ and Harper were basically the same height. So MJ was essentially the smallest starter. Now that completely misses your point, but if we're being exacting, that's a reality we have to discuss. Obviously, that's a STUPID discussion so lets not go there, but I just had to point it out to showcase where it takes us.

[bovice]

Curry early in his career was a finesse player completely. Scrawny....maybe before 2014, by then he'd become a reasonably and historically decent sized 6'3 guard...which is already pretty good sized for a smallest guy on the court. Today in terms of strength, I'm really not sure mitchell is any stronger than Curry. He's more explosive as a driver and leaper. But on defense I see Curry knock guys back as much as anyone that height does. Just tonight I saw him stop lebron, obviously Lebron realized a foul was a risk there too...but still lebron hit curry with real force and curry didn't budge.

Now to the system and the moving off ball, you're still not getting why Curry is the GOAT offensive player to so many. All that stuff he's doing is creating better shots for EVERYONE on the court. And we have so much data on that it's insane. He makes everyone else look way better. This is one of the reasons people so horribly and incorrectly think KD was better than him on those warriors title teams.

Now, we agree on one thing, I'm not sure we're right. We might be idiots. But I do agree that with less than 1 minute left and down, I don't love having Curry over most of the best players to win titles historically. But we perhaps disagree that those are the most important moments in the game. Curry is just more often than not, already up because again he can make everyone on his team better the whole game by just doing his movement stuff and you know being insane on ball too. When he gets hot, he generally just shoots the other team off the floor and he's on the bench in the last 5 minutes, they've already won.

FYI, I honestly think Ben was their best player and I think Hamilton was the most important PLAYOFF player before the finals. But a lot of teams have questions. You could have argued Parker was the most important spur in 2014, many in the media did that for example. I mean by the silly logic you laid out with height...MJ and Harper were basically the same height. So MJ was essentially the smallest starter. Now that completely misses your point, but if we're being exacting, that's a reality we have to discuss. Obviously, that's a STUPID discussion so lets not go there, but I just had to point it out to showcase where it takes us.

dunno why we're so focused on curry's strength. curry is not a physically imposing player. the shortest players on a team usually are not. even a swole, gymrat pg like bledsoe is not physically imposing. and harper is 6'4 and jordan is like 6'6. spurs made parker the focal point of the offense in the late 00's/early 10s and they didnt have playoff success. it wasn't until they added kawhi and duncan sort of had a resurgence did they win again.

KD w/ the warriors was like tyreek hill on the dolphins. tyreek is better than tua but the offense relies on tua more. nobody thinks tua is the best player on their offense but the team would look a lot worse w/ tua. the warriors are built around steph. no matter who they get at SF on their team, the team will look worse if steph is out a few games than if that SF is out a few games.

like, curry is an all-time great. he's the most influential player in the NBA since kobe/iverson. i'm not denying that the man's not great. he's incredibly entertaining to watch, but he's not the ideal #1 option on a championship team. if u had 1 year to win a championship, you'd have a better chance building around a kawhi or kobe or harden. that's all im saying.

people love to give credit for creating the warriors system but cant open up to the possibility that klay and draymond are just as important to that system. KD w/o russ in OKC or harden w/o cp3 on the rockets is still making the playoffs and maybe winning a series. I can't see steph winning a playoff series w/o draymond. steph seems to win when everything is lined up perfectly for him and we seem to ignore that he's been incredibly fortunate compared to his peers. again, a very weak playoff resume. and when he doesn't have all the cards stacked in his favor, what happens? steph/wiggins/dray couldnt make it past the play-in in '20. we give steph too much credit for winning.

[dhsilv2]

Curry early in his career was a finesse player completely. Scrawny....maybe before 2014, by then he'd become a reasonably and historically decent sized 6'3 guard...which is already pretty good sized for a smallest guy on the court. Today in terms of strength, I'm really not sure mitchell is any stronger than Curry. He's more explosive as a driver and leaper. But on defense I see Curry knock guys back as much as anyone that height does. Just tonight I saw him stop lebron, obviously Lebron realized a foul was a risk there too...but still lebron hit curry with real force and curry didn't budge.

Now to the system and the moving off ball, you're still not getting why Curry is the GOAT offensive player to so many. All that stuff he's doing is creating better shots for EVERYONE on the court. And we have so much data on that it's insane. He makes everyone else look way better. This is one of the reasons people so horribly and incorrectly think KD was better than him on those warriors title teams.

Now, we agree on one thing, I'm not sure we're right. We might be idiots. But I do agree that with less than 1 minute left and down, I don't love having Curry over most of the best players to win titles historically. But we perhaps disagree that those are the most important moments in the game. Curry is just more often than not, already up because again he can make everyone on his team better the whole game by just doing his movement stuff and you know being insane on ball too. When he gets hot, he generally just shoots the other team off the floor and he's on the bench in the last 5 minutes, they've already won.

FYI, I honestly think Ben was their best player and I think Hamilton was the most important PLAYOFF player before the finals. But a lot of teams have questions. You could have argued Parker was the most important spur in 2014, many in the media did that for example. I mean by the silly logic you laid out with height...MJ and Harper were basically the same height. So MJ was essentially the smallest starter. Now that completely misses your point, but if we're being exacting, that's a reality we have to discuss. Obviously, that's a STUPID discussion so lets not go there, but I just had to point it out to showcase where it takes us.

dunno why we're so focused on curry's strength. curry is not a physically imposing player. the shortest players on a team usually are not. even a swole, gymrat pg like bledsoe is not physically imposing. and harper is 6'4 and jordan is like 6'6. spurs made parker the focal point of the offense in the late 00's/early 10s and they didnt have playoff success. it wasn't until they added kawhi and duncan sort of had a resurgence did they win again.

KD w/ the warriors was like tyreek hill on the dolphins. tyreek is better than tua but the offense relies on tua more. nobody thinks tua is the best player on their offense but the team would look a lot worse w/ tua. the warriors are built around steph. no matter who they get at SF on their team, the team will look worse if steph is out a few games than if that SF is out a few games.

like, curry is an all-time great. he's the most influential player in the NBA since kobe/iverson. i'm not denying that the man's not great. he's incredibly entertaining to watch, but he's not the ideal #1 option on a championship team. if u had 1 year to win a championship, you'd have a better chance building around a kawhi or kobe or harden. that's all im saying.

people love to give credit for creating the warriors system but cant open up to the possibility that klay and draymond are just as important to that system. KD w/o russ in OKC or harden w/o cp3 on the rockets is still making the playoffs and maybe winning a series. I can't see steph winning a playoff series w/o draymond. steph seems to win when everything is lined up perfectly for him and we seem to ignore that he's been incredibly fortunate compared to his peers. again, a very weak playoff resume. and when he doesn't have all the cards stacked in his favor, what happens? steph/wiggins/dray couldnt make it past the play-in in '20. we give steph too much credit for winning.

Facts and data drive reality. Harper and Jordan were listed at 6'6. It's a fact MJ was 6'5. I don't know Haper as well but the gap in height was quarters of inches at most. They were the same height. Curry's impact is again data driven. Now I don't watch the NFL, it's a terrible league. I like college football far more or at least I did before the playoff. So I can't relate to your comment.

Curry IS the sytem and again we have data that supports it.

You've said you want to have a real discussion but you're not having that. I get it, I'm putting you on the spot and it's cool if you need time to respond but making poor arguments to the point nobody would ever even respond isn't useful. Lets do better.

[bovice]

Curry early in his career was a finesse player completely. Scrawny....maybe before 2014, by then he'd become a reasonably and historically decent sized 6'3 guard...which is already pretty good sized for a smallest guy on the court. Today in terms of strength, I'm really not sure mitchell is any stronger than Curry. He's more explosive as a driver and leaper. But on defense I see Curry knock guys back as much as anyone that height does. Just tonight I saw him stop lebron, obviously Lebron realized a foul was a risk there too...but still lebron hit curry with real force and curry didn't budge.

Now to the system and the moving off ball, you're still not getting why Curry is the GOAT offensive player to so many. All that stuff he's doing is creating better shots for EVERYONE on the court. And we have so much data on that it's insane. He makes everyone else look way better. This is one of the reasons people so horribly and incorrectly think KD was better than him on those warriors title teams.

Now, we agree on one thing, I'm not sure we're right. We might be idiots. But I do agree that with less than 1 minute left and down, I don't love having Curry over most of the best players to win titles historically. But we perhaps disagree that those are the most important moments in the game. Curry is just more often than not, already up because again he can make everyone on his team better the whole game by just doing his movement stuff and you know being insane on ball too. When he gets hot, he generally just shoots the other team off the floor and he's on the bench in the last 5 minutes, they've already won.

FYI, I honestly think Ben was their best player and I think Hamilton was the most important PLAYOFF player before the finals. But a lot of teams have questions. You could have argued Parker was the most important spur in 2014, many in the media did that for example. I mean by the silly logic you laid out with height...MJ and Harper were basically the same height. So MJ was essentially the smallest starter. Now that completely misses your point, but if we're being exacting, that's a reality we have to discuss. Obviously, that's a STUPID discussion so lets not go there, but I just had to point it out to showcase where it takes us.

dunno why we're so focused on curry's strength. curry is not a physically imposing player. the shortest players on a team usually are not. even a swole, gymrat pg like bledsoe is not physically imposing. and harper is 6'4 and jordan is like 6'6. spurs made parker the focal point of the offense in the late 00's/early 10s and they didnt have playoff success. it wasn't until they added kawhi and duncan sort of had a resurgence did they win again.

KD w/ the warriors was like tyreek hill on the dolphins. tyreek is better than tua but the offense relies on tua more. nobody thinks tua is the best player on their offense but the team would look a lot worse w/ tua. the warriors are built around steph. no matter who they get at SF on their team, the team will look worse if steph is out a few games than if that SF is out a few games.

like, curry is an all-time great. he's the most influential player in the NBA since kobe/iverson. i'm not denying that the man's not great. he's incredibly entertaining to watch, but he's not the ideal #1 option on a championship team. if u had 1 year to win a championship, you'd have a better chance building around a kawhi or kobe or harden. that's all im saying.

people love to give credit for creating the warriors system but cant open up to the possibility that klay and draymond are just as important to that system. KD w/o russ in OKC or harden w/o cp3 on the rockets is still making the playoffs and maybe winning a series. I can't see steph winning a playoff series w/o draymond. steph seems to win when everything is lined up perfectly for him and we seem to ignore that he's been incredibly fortunate compared to his peers. again, a very weak playoff resume. and when he doesn't have all the cards stacked in his favor, what happens? steph/wiggins/dray couldnt make it past the play-in in '20. we give steph too much credit for winning.

Facts and data drive reality. Harper and Jordan were listed at 6'6. It's a fact MJ was 6'5. I don't know Haper as well but the gap in height was quarters of inches at most. They were the same height. Curry's impact is again data driven. Now I don't watch the NFL, it's a terrible league. I like college football far more or at least I did before the playoff. So I can't relate to your comment.

Curry IS the sytem and again we have data that supports it.

You've said you want to have a real discussion but you're not having that. I get it, I'm putting you on the spot and it's cool if you need time to respond but making poor arguments to the point nobody would ever even respond isn't useful. Lets do better.

going by bball reference they're both 6'6. going by Google Jordan is 6'6 and Harper is 6'4. either way, Jordan is a physically imposing player who can create his own shot against the best defenders and he isn't short. you're so focused

my point with the football reference is that if a team is built around a certain player and that team adds a better player, the team will look worse if the player in which the team is built around is out than the better player.

for example, replace Joe Johnson with Kobe on the 7 seconds or less suns. if Nash is out, the team will lose more games than if Kobe was out. but everybody knows Kobe is better than Nash. the same could be said about Steph and KD.

we've almost always seen Steph have the perfect circumstance around him and rarely have we seen him face adversity. Steph has klay guarding the opposing team's best perimeter player and Draymond being the QB on defense, being the vocal leader, and coaching new additions (gp, Wiggins, looney). the one year he didn't have klay he barely was the 8th seed and couldn't get past the play-in.

like you can't look at Steph's playoff resume and be impressed. it's weak.

you said curry is the system and the data proves. what does that mean?

[dhsilv2]

dunno why we're so focused on curry's strength. curry is not a physically imposing player. the shortest players on a team usually are not. even a swole, gymrat pg like bledsoe is not physically imposing. and harper is 6'4 and jordan is like 6'6. spurs made parker the focal point of the offense in the late 00's/early 10s and they didnt have playoff success. it wasn't until they added kawhi and duncan sort of had a resurgence did they win again.

KD w/ the warriors was like tyreek hill on the dolphins. tyreek is better than tua but the offense relies on tua more. nobody thinks tua is the best player on their offense but the team would look a lot worse w/ tua. the warriors are built around steph. no matter who they get at SF on their team, the team will look worse if steph is out a few games than if that SF is out a few games.

like, curry is an all-time great. he's the most influential player in the NBA since kobe/iverson. i'm not denying that the man's not great. he's incredibly entertaining to watch, but he's not the ideal #1 option on a championship team. if u had 1 year to win a championship, you'd have a better chance building around a kawhi or kobe or harden. that's all im saying.

people love to give credit for creating the warriors system but cant open up to the possibility that klay and draymond are just as important to that system. KD w/o russ in OKC or harden w/o cp3 on the rockets is still making the playoffs and maybe winning a series. I can't see steph winning a playoff series w/o draymond. steph seems to win when everything is lined up perfectly for him and we seem to ignore that he's been incredibly fortunate compared to his peers. again, a very weak playoff resume. and when he doesn't have all the cards stacked in his favor, what happens? steph/wiggins/dray couldnt make it past the play-in in '20. we give steph too much credit for winning.

Facts and data drive reality. Harper and Jordan were listed at 6'6. It's a fact MJ was 6'5. I don't know Haper as well but the gap in height was quarters of inches at most. They were the same height. Curry's impact is again data driven. Now I don't watch the NFL, it's a terrible league. I like college football far more or at least I did before the playoff. So I can't relate to your comment.

Curry IS the sytem and again we have data that supports it.

You've said you want to have a real discussion but you're not having that. I get it, I'm putting you on the spot and it's cool if you need time to respond but making poor arguments to the point nobody would ever even respond isn't useful. Lets do better.

going by bball reference they're both 6'6. going by Google Jordan is 6'6 and Harper is 6'4. either way, Jordan is a physically imposing player who can create his own shot against the best defenders and he isn't short. you're so focused

my point with the football reference is that if a team is built around a certain player and that team adds a better player, the team will look worse if the player in which the team is built around is out than the better player.

for example, replace Joe Johnson with Kobe on the 7 seconds or less suns. if Nash is out, the team will lose more games than if Kobe was out. but everybody knows Kobe is better than Nash. the same could be said about Steph and KD.

we've almost always seen Steph have the perfect circumstance around him and rarely have we seen him face adversity. Steph has klay guarding the opposing team's best perimeter player and Draymond being the QB on defense, being the vocal leader, and coaching new additions (gp, Wiggins, looney). the one year he didn't have klay he barely was the 8th seed and couldn't get past the play-in.

like you can't look at Steph's playoff resume and be impressed. it's weak.

you said curry is the system and the data proves. what does that mean?

I think we've covered that you're placing high value on the traditional iso shop creator role when talking about guys like Wade and Jordan. I'm just point out height isn't the driver here that you're making it out to be. Curry isn't CP3 or AI.

I'm not sure I see why Kobe couldn't step in to the nash role. Harden did it better than Nash. CP3 actually had the top RPM the year he was healthy and paired with Harden in that system. If Kobe is a better offensive player at his peak than Nash, which is EXTREMELY questionable and very much up for debate, he should be completely capable of running that system. The problem with that system is that having two stars doesn't really work that well because it demands one guy be far more ball dominate. Now Kerr...he's running a triangle with elements of Pop's motion offense to create better space in the mid range. The triangle is built on having two elite scorers. This is an ideal offense to maximize KD with shooters, one of those shooters can be Curry. The whole point of a system like that is that your shooters can maximize the value of the other players on the floor without touching the ball. But like any system it does need someone to create shots at the end of the clock. KD again was the PERFECT guy to fit into it, he just had a massive tendency to play outside the offensive sets too early in the clock. What ultimately made that system work was that Curry is a unicorn in terms of his off ball ability. Due to his incredible strength for his size he sets chaotic screens and can freeze defenders with them. His high motor allows him to keep going on these moves.

OK that's a block of text. 2016 warriors 9.3 11.9 2017 10.7 12.9 2018 13.9 14.4. These are their percentage of shots taken 10-16 and 16 to 3P. As you see the warriors went from a team near the bottom of the league in mid range attempts to near the top and they were about the most efficient in that area among the top teams if not the most. Essentially, the warriors shifted to feature KD over Curry on the offense, but despite that Curry continued to be the most impactful player - see below.



There are countless images like this out there, but this shows the absurd impact Curry has on the floor. Curry isn't an elite passer nor is he with the ball creating all these better looks. Instead him just being on the floor and moving off ball makes everyone better. This is exceptionally rare and it isn't just the system. Again the warriors modified their system to optimize getting KD mid range shots using the triangle (the same concepts that got MJ the ball to lead the league in scoring from the mid range) with shooters in motion to create even better spacing than MJ got. With and without those changes it was still Curry who made everyone on the floor better. This is why Curry is the greatest offensive player of all time. Not his scoring, not his ability to create a shot in the "clutch", but his ability over the 40 minutes he plays to make every single play easier for the other 4 guys on the floor.

As for Curry's playoff stats, I'm not sure what about a 23 PER, .191, or 7.0 BPM aren't impressive to you. Especially when the above points out how most of what Curry does on the court isn't even captured by the box score. Those stats are still ahead of someone like Kobe that you brought up earlier. They aren't MJ or Lebron numbers by any means, but those guys are different animals when it comes to box score metrics.

[bovice]

Facts and data drive reality. Harper and Jordan were listed at 6'6. It's a fact MJ was 6'5. I don't know Haper as well but the gap in height was quarters of inches at most. They were the same height. Curry's impact is again data driven. Now I don't watch the NFL, it's a terrible league. I like college football far more or at least I did before the playoff. So I can't relate to your comment.

Curry IS the sytem and again we have data that supports it.

You've said you want to have a real discussion but you're not having that. I get it, I'm putting you on the spot and it's cool if you need time to respond but making poor arguments to the point nobody would ever even respond isn't useful. Lets do better.

going by bball reference they're both 6'6. going by Google Jordan is 6'6 and Harper is 6'4. either way, Jordan is a physically imposing player who can create his own shot against the best defenders and he isn't short. you're so focused

my point with the football reference is that if a team is built around a certain player and that team adds a better player, the team will look worse if the player in which the team is built around is out than the better player.

for example, replace Joe Johnson with Kobe on the 7 seconds or less suns. if Nash is out, the team will lose more games than if Kobe was out. but everybody knows Kobe is better than Nash. the same could be said about Steph and KD.

we've almost always seen Steph have the perfect circumstance around him and rarely have we seen him face adversity. Steph has klay guarding the opposing team's best perimeter player and Draymond being the QB on defense, being the vocal leader, and coaching new additions (gp, Wiggins, looney). the one year he didn't have klay he barely was the 8th seed and couldn't get past the play-in.

like you can't look at Steph's playoff resume and be impressed. it's weak.

you said curry is the system and the data proves. what does that mean?

I think we've covered that you're placing high value on the traditional iso shop creator role when talking about guys like Wade and Jordan. I'm just point out height isn't the driver here that you're making it out to be. Curry isn't CP3 or AI.

I'm not sure I see why Kobe couldn't step in to the nash role. Harden did it better than Nash. CP3 actually had the top RPM the year he was healthy and paired with Harden in that system. If Kobe is a better offensive player at his peak than Nash, which is EXTREMELY questionable and very much up for debate, he should be completely capable of running that system. The problem with that system is that having two stars doesn't really work that well because it demands one guy be far more ball dominate. Now Kerr...he's running a triangle with elements of Pop's motion offense to create better space in the mid range. The triangle is built on having two elite scorers. This is an ideal offense to maximize KD with shooters, one of those shooters can be Curry. The whole point of a system like that is that your shooters can maximize the value of the other players on the floor without touching the ball. But like any system it does need someone to create shots at the end of the clock. KD again was the PERFECT guy to fit into it, he just had a massive tendency to play outside the offensive sets too early in the clock. What ultimately made that system work was that Curry is a unicorn in terms of his off ball ability. Due to his incredible strength for his size he sets chaotic screens and can freeze defenders with them. His high motor allows him to keep going on these moves.

OK that's a block of text. 2016 warriors 9.3 11.9 2017 10.7 12.9 2018 13.9 14.4. These are their percentage of shots taken 10-16 and 16 to 3P. As you see the warriors went from a team near the bottom of the league in mid range attempts to near the top and they were about the most efficient in that area among the top teams if not the most. Essentially, the warriors shifted to feature KD over Curry on the offense, but despite that Curry continued to be the most impactful player - see below.



There are countless images like this out there, but this shows the absurd impact Curry has on the floor. Curry isn't an elite passer nor is he with the ball creating all these better looks. Instead him just being on the floor and moving off ball makes everyone better. This is exceptionally rare and it isn't just the system. Again the warriors modified their system to optimize getting KD mid range shots using the triangle (the same concepts that got MJ the ball to lead the league in scoring from the mid range) with shooters in motion to create even better spacing than MJ got. With and without those changes it was still Curry who made everyone on the floor better. This is why Curry is the greatest offensive player of all time. Not his scoring, not his ability to create a shot in the "clutch", but his ability over the 40 minutes he plays to make every single play easier for the other 4 guys on the floor.

As for Curry's playoff stats, I'm not sure what about a 23 PER, .191, or 7.0 BPM aren't impressive to you. Especially when the above points out how most of what Curry does on the court isn't even captured by the box score. Those stats are still ahead of someone like Kobe that you brought up earlier. They aren't MJ or Lebron numbers by any means, but those guys are different animals when it comes to box score metrics.

all that chart shows me is a point guard makes his teammates get better looks. im sure harden and nash have similar impacts. and also regular season stats, so what

we're jus never gonna agree. teams build their roster around their stars. if you replace nash with kobe on the '07 suns you're gonna have to change your playstyle drastically and that's not gonna happen overnight. nash is pass-first, kobe does not have that mentality. that team is gonna have less wins and the offense won't be as high scoring. im really not trying to have discussions without someone who thinks steph has powerlifter strength. we're never gonna agree on this so lets agree to disagree

[dhsilv2]

going by bball reference they're both 6'6. going by Google Jordan is 6'6 and Harper is 6'4. either way, Jordan is a physically imposing player who can create his own shot against the best defenders and he isn't short. you're so focused

my point with the football reference is that if a team is built around a certain player and that team adds a better player, the team will look worse if the player in which the team is built around is out than the better player.

for example, replace Joe Johnson with Kobe on the 7 seconds or less suns. if Nash is out, the team will lose more games than if Kobe was out. but everybody knows Kobe is better than Nash. the same could be said about Steph and KD.

we've almost always seen Steph have the perfect circumstance around him and rarely have we seen him face adversity. Steph has klay guarding the opposing team's best perimeter player and Draymond being the QB on defense, being the vocal leader, and coaching new additions (gp, Wiggins, looney). the one year he didn't have klay he barely was the 8th seed and couldn't get past the play-in.

like you can't look at Steph's playoff resume and be impressed. it's weak.

you said curry is the system and the data proves. what does that mean?

I think we've covered that you're placing high value on the traditional iso shop creator role when talking about guys like Wade and Jordan. I'm just point out height isn't the driver here that you're making it out to be. Curry isn't CP3 or AI.

I'm not sure I see why Kobe couldn't step in to the nash role. Harden did it better than Nash. CP3 actually had the top RPM the year he was healthy and paired with Harden in that system. If Kobe is a better offensive player at his peak than Nash, which is EXTREMELY questionable and very much up for debate, he should be completely capable of running that system. The problem with that system is that having two stars doesn't really work that well because it demands one guy be far more ball dominate. Now Kerr...he's running a triangle with elements of Pop's motion offense to create better space in the mid range. The triangle is built on having two elite scorers. This is an ideal offense to maximize KD with shooters, one of those shooters can be Curry. The whole point of a system like that is that your shooters can maximize the value of the other players on the floor without touching the ball. But like any system it does need someone to create shots at the end of the clock. KD again was the PERFECT guy to fit into it, he just had a massive tendency to play outside the offensive sets too early in the clock. What ultimately made that system work was that Curry is a unicorn in terms of his off ball ability. Due to his incredible strength for his size he sets chaotic screens and can freeze defenders with them. His high motor allows him to keep going on these moves.

OK that's a block of text. 2016 warriors 9.3 11.9 2017 10.7 12.9 2018 13.9 14.4. These are their percentage of shots taken 10-16 and 16 to 3P. As you see the warriors went from a team near the bottom of the league in mid range attempts to near the top and they were about the most efficient in that area among the top teams if not the most. Essentially, the warriors shifted to feature KD over Curry on the offense, but despite that Curry continued to be the most impactful player - see below.



There are countless images like this out there, but this shows the absurd impact Curry has on the floor. Curry isn't an elite passer nor is he with the ball creating all these better looks. Instead him just being on the floor and moving off ball makes everyone better. This is exceptionally rare and it isn't just the system. Again the warriors modified their system to optimize getting KD mid range shots using the triangle (the same concepts that got MJ the ball to lead the league in scoring from the mid range) with shooters in motion to create even better spacing than MJ got. With and without those changes it was still Curry who made everyone on the floor better. This is why Curry is the greatest offensive player of all time. Not his scoring, not his ability to create a shot in the "clutch", but his ability over the 40 minutes he plays to make every single play easier for the other 4 guys on the floor.

As for Curry's playoff stats, I'm not sure what about a 23 PER, .191, or 7.0 BPM aren't impressive to you. Especially when the above points out how most of what Curry does on the court isn't even captured by the box score. Those stats are still ahead of someone like Kobe that you brought up earlier. They aren't MJ or Lebron numbers by any means, but those guys are different animals when it comes to box score metrics.

all that chart shows me is a point guard makes his teammates get better looks. im sure harden and nash have similar impacts. and also regular season stats, so what

we're jus never gonna agree. teams build their roster around their stars. if you replace nash with kobe on the '07 suns you're gonna have to change your playstyle drastically and that's not gonna happen overnight. nash is pass-first, kobe does not have that mentality. that team is gonna have less wins and the offense won't be as high scoring. im really not trying to have discussions without someone who thinks steph has powerlifter strength. we're never gonna agree on this so lets agree to disagree

No...that is 100% false. Those numbers are completely unheard of and not matched by anyone else.

We aren't going to agree if you make up false numbers. I just showed you mind blowing stats and without looking you just assume others have similar impact which is absurd!

And no, steph doesn't have powerlifter strength. Most NBA players are really weak in those terms. Curry is better than most, but lets not be absurd. He's a 400 deadlifts, lol. Not 800.

[bovice]

No...that is 100% false. Those numbers are completely unheard of and not matched by anyone else.

We aren't going to agree if you make up false numbers. I just showed you mind blowing stats and without looking you just assume others have similar impact which is absurd!

And no, steph doesn't have powerlifter strength. Most NBA players are really weak in those terms. Curry is better than most, but lets not be absurd. He's a 400 deadlifts, lol. Not 800.

can you pull up the numbers for nash then? because i don't know where to find them

[dhsilv2]

No...that is 100% false. Those numbers are completely unheard of and not matched by anyone else.

We aren't going to agree if you make up false numbers. I just showed you mind blowing stats and without looking you just assume others have similar impact which is absurd!

And no, steph doesn't have powerlifter strength. Most NBA players are really weak in those terms. Curry is better than most, but lets not be absurd. He's a 400 deadlifts, lol. Not 800.

can you pull up the numbers for nash then? because i don't know where to find them

NBA.com had all this in a pretty easy to get tool with their "VSs" stuff. But I can't tell if the pulled it or if they've hidden it somewhere. Rather frustrating that the NBA has spent hundereds of millions of dollars on all this data and they give us such trash tools to use it. Odds are Ben Taylor (elgee if you know him from here) has it on his patreon site. But I don't pay for his content currently. Maybe someone else pays and would be willing to share.

Here is however the data when 538 did it for the 2017 MVP discussion, keep in mind, we are talking about curry vs KD pretty directly and why Curry not KD was the system. Not that a system was built around him per say.



From the article with the chart.

There are stories to be told in each section of that chart, but for our purposes, focus on the fire raining down from the sky in the Curry section. Not only do virtually all of his teammates (10 of 11 players with at least 30 shots, representing over 1,700 shots taken without him3) shoot worse without Curry on the court to draw attention, they shoot dramatically worse. Overall, Curry’s teammates shoot 7.3 percentage points worse with Curry off the court, with his average teammate4 shooting 8.3 points worse. Among our MVP candidates, LeBron has the next-highest impact on average teammate shooting (3.9 points), followed by Westbrook (2.5 points). When it comes to opening up a team’s offense, Curry has no equal.

[GreatWhiteStiff]

50 seconds is actually a weird qualifier IMO. I wonder if it's cherry picked and Curry is like 6-20 inside of 1 minute or something. That's still not great, but not nearly as insulting.

Yeah it's almost certainly designed to excluse some of his makes. Still 0-14 is pretty awful, even considering. I'm basicly saying what you said, I've realized.

[bovice]

No...that is 100% false. Those numbers are completely unheard of and not matched by anyone else.

We aren't going to agree if you make up false numbers. I just showed you mind blowing stats and without looking you just assume others have similar impact which is absurd!

And no, steph doesn't have powerlifter strength. Most NBA players are really weak in those terms. Curry is better than most, but lets not be absurd. He's a 400 deadlifts, lol. Not 800.

can you pull up the numbers for nash then? because i don't know where to find them

NBA.com had all this in a pretty easy to get tool with their "VSs" stuff. But I can't tell if the pulled it or if they've hidden it somewhere. Rather frustrating that the NBA has spent hundereds of millions of dollars on all this data and they give us such trash tools to use it.

Here is however the data when 538 did it for the 2017 MVP discussion, keep in mind, we are talking about curry vs KD pretty directly and why Curry not KD was the system. Not that a system was built around him per say.

but you're saying I'm 100% false and curry's numbers are unheard of compared to rockets' harden and suns' nash yet you don't know how their numbers compare.

I'll have to check NBA.com's site later

[dhsilv2]

can you pull up the numbers for nash then? because i don't know where to find them

NBA.com had all this in a pretty easy to get tool with their "VSs" stuff. But I can't tell if the pulled it or if they've hidden it somewhere. Rather frustrating that the NBA has spent hundereds of millions of dollars on all this data and they give us such trash tools to use it.

Here is however the data when 538 did it for the 2017 MVP discussion, keep in mind, we are talking about curry vs KD pretty directly and why Curry not KD was the system. Not that a system was built around him per say.

but you're saying I'm 100% false and curry's numbers are unheard of compared to rockets' harden and suns' nash yet you don't know how their numbers compare.

I'll have to check NBA.com's site later

I said I can't currently pull the data. I then also stated in the past the stats were there...which implies I've looked at how they compare. I then, when you USED harden, I showed you in a chart exactly how he compared in a year both were considered strongly for MVP...