Does Steph really have PORT?

[OhayoKD]

So, players moving in the opposite direction. Steph is experiencing a downgrade in offensive environment and overall team offensive potency, but his impact is still there, so there's no real clue what the OP is driving at. And that's without accounting for age/career phase and all that.

That is the Ben Taylor conception of "Port" (largely designed as an excuse to overrate jump-shooters) but the common definition of port in basketball and the one relevant to even a ben-taylorian player assessment(chance of championship on a random team) would not be limited to offense or cieling-raising. Certain skills benefit "port" either way, ex, being able to protect the rim or orchestrate teammates. In that extent to those who were, for whatever reason, under the impression Curry is literally the perfect fit in every situation(not you) and would see his impact maximized with every and any sort of "star", perhaps Curry's on/off looking bad staggering with a good pg(not too dissimilar to what we saw from Lebron with Wade or Duncan with Robinson), and his performance faltering without the teammate who offers both those things on the warriors is notable.

If you were not sipping that kool-aid, then no, Curry struggling should not be too suprising, nor is it a meaningful indictment. Curry can scale unusually well with ball-dominant players offensively as he is the best (offensive) off-ball player ever. But, like pretty much any guard(for some lesser than others), the lack of latent "nearly every possession" impact on the defensive end and being a strong as opposed to all-time passer/decision-maker carries some risk of diminishing returns.

The proper term for what you are describing would be scalability[u] and even then the ben taylor version should be called [u]offensive scalability.

I’ve always said curry is not a floor raiser but a ceiling raiser. This is why to me jokic is the better OFFENSIVE PLAYER between the two. You put a player like jokic, harden, lebron, prime cp3 on any team in the league and they would more than likely make the playoffs( especially in the era of the play-in tournament).

We all understand that port was specifically about ceiling raising, not floor raising, right?

[/quote]
Steph carrying a not so talented team around water well past his most impactful years isn't really an indictment on his floor-raising. Steph has a pretty excellent track-record carrying teams(though he does tend to cost his teams with missed games when put under significant enough duress). Especially in the regular season.

He does need certain not easy to find things to have his value optimized there, but that was also true for players like Jordan and Jokic and Bird(and really almost anyone ever).

I do think this season should serve as a caution for those using on/off and on/off derivations as the start and finish of "impact" analysis. Steph(like Lebron in Miami, Harden with CP3, and Duncan with david robinson) would almost certainly grade alot better in terms of "impact" if he were to miss a bunch of games and used the warriors performance without him. But when you only take a few minutes without a player in a game, having a good player who plays a similar role or position will generally be dealt via staggering which will generally hurt on/off numbers.

In his best(at least in the rs) years Steph was playing nearly all his minutes with his best players and replaced with not good replacements so his on/off outpaced how he looked over larger samples.

Ofc I doubt OP was really intending all that, but in general this season can be instructive for those clinging to certain generous assumptions or misusing impact data

[tsherkin]

That is the Ben Taylor conception of "Port" (largely designed as an excuse to overrate jump-shooters) but the common definition of port in basketball and the one relevant to even a ben-taylorian player assessment(chance of championship on a random team) would not be limited to offense or cieling-raising. Certain skills benefit "port" either way, ex, being able to protect the rim or orchestrate teammates. In that extent to those who were, for whatever reason, under the impression Curry is literally the perfect fit in every situation(not you) and would see his impact maximized with every and any sort of "star", perhaps Curry's on/off looking bad staggering with a good pg(not too dissimilar to what we saw from Lebron with Wade or Duncan with Robinson), and his performance faltering without the teammate who offers both those things on the warriors is notable.

Sure sure, but in general, downscaling isn't really the point of any portability assessment, was my general point. As team quality erodes, you don't evaluate a player's ability to slot in to those different places and have given effect. The whole notion of portability is about how varied a team concept into which a given player could fit, and how they scale with higher levels of talent.

But the OP is essentially cracking on a 35 year-old Steph for not exerting more offensive impact than he has based on raw +/-, without attention to any contextual details. So it's fairly useless as a criticism.

The proper term for what you are describing would be scalability[u] and even then the ben taylor version should be called [u]offensive scalability.

That would be somewhat more precise, yes.

Steph carrying a not so talented team around water well past his most impactful years isn't really an indictment on his floor-raising.

Agreed, yes. I'm in the pro-Steph camp here.

[AEnigma]

Wait, playing different positions can change your impact indicators?

[LukaTheGOAT]

I don't really see how Steph isn't portable.

Steph and KD won 131 games together during this time period which equates to a win percentage of .780

But, in games KD played and Steph didn’t play, the Warriors had a record of 23-17.

And in games Steph played and KD didn’t play, the Warriors had a record of 27-4.

On/off datatype of the time further suggested that Steph was really catapulting those Warriors teams that were quite good without him. To me this is suggestive of his port.

Net Ratings 2017-2019 When both play:

+11.91 kd Net on/off in PS
+11.41 in RS

+15.34 steph net on/off in PS
+15.5 in RS

Steph without kd
+8.34 Net Rating in the RS
+3.9 Net Rating in the PS

Kd without steph
+4 Net Rating in RS
-1.77 in PS

You would never not consider KD portable, so I believe the same would apply here with Steph.

Read this how you will but to me Steph has shown to be able to elevate several lineups with star talent in them. It helps that KD, Klay can play off ball too, but I think Steph's off-ball skills surpasses them. His movement is relentless in a way their's isn't.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Holy crap he has been mid as hell lately lol

He and bron have the same trajectories this year lmao

[NBA4Lyfe]

Holy crap he has been mid as hell lately lol

He and bron have the same trajectories this year lmao

bron was still a beast at age 35 tho

[MyUniBroDavis]

Holy crap he has been mid as hell lately lol

He and bron have the same trajectories this year lmao

bron was still a beast at age 35 tho

+5 years I mean

Both started out great and started sucking but one of them is doing it on purpose lmao

[cpower]

You do realize that Curry's next best available player on this team is Saric who is a min player? The roster six they need to trade up.

[Cavsfansince84]

You do realize that Curry's next best available player on this team is Saric who is a min player? The roster six they need to trade up.

I think you can both acknowledge that his teammates are pretty bad and that Steph is both a combination of declining some(which includes motor on a night to night basis) and is less than thrilled about trying to carry this team into the play in. He may bounce back next year with more talent around him but I don't think he wants to kill himself to get a team to 40 wins. He's having a lot of 4-13, 2-9 from 3 type games lately.

[cpower]

You do realize that Curry's next best available player on this team is Saric who is a min player? The roster six they need to trade up.

I think you can both acknowledge that his teammates are pretty bad and that Steph is both a combination of declining some(which includes motor on a night to night basis) and is less than thrilled about trying to carry this team into the play in. He may bounce back next year with more talent around him but I don't think he wants to kill himself to get a team to 40 wins. He's having a lot of 4-13, 2-9 from 3 type games lately.

True but he was put on some ridiculous lineup where him and klay are the only two who can generate some offense. It's not he is trying to bring the team to a playin he is trying to contend. Why would he killing himself for a playin spot?

[Cavsfansince84]

True but he was put on some ridiculous lineup where him and klay are the only two who can generate some offense. It's not he is trying to bring the team to a playin he is trying to contend. Why would he killing himself for a playin spot?

Of course he'd rather be on a legit contending team. My point is that he isn't interested in carrying a team to 40 wins. It's sort of pointless in his mind imo. Which is why if the Warriors get off to another bad start next year I think the #1 thing the media will be talking about is him getting traded. They will talk about it every day until both he and the gs brass break down and do it.

[MartinToVaught]

Oh, look, someone fell into the trap.

“If Steph is so portable, why is his impact only high when he is not playing with stars?”

I first heard about "portability" when people would use it to blame LeBron for not beating the mega-stacked Warriors with Steph and KD by himself, so what goes around comes around, I suppose.

To me, it's always felt like a buzzword that people use to tear down some players for not winning in impossible situations and elevate other players for being in perfect situations.

[LewisnotMiller]

Only way to settle this portability did discussion is to plonk Steph on the Celts, and see if he can fit.

I know it doesn't work cap wise, etc...the NBA is clearly invested in keeping us down.

[LewisnotMiller]

Oh, look, someone fell into the trap.

“If Steph is so portable, why is his impact only high when he is not playing with stars?”

I first heard about "portability" when people would use it to blame LeBron for not beating the mega-stacked Warriors with Steph and KD by himself, so what goes around comes around, I suppose.

To me, it's always felt like a buzzword that people use to tear down some players for not winning in impossible situations and elevate other players for being in perfect situations.

I think it makes sense, particularly for secondary and tertiary players. But with prime Steph or prime LeBron, you're not really talking about portability so much as how flexibly you can fill out a team around them.

Steph's shooting, and general combination of on-ball and off-ball offensive talent is great for that. His defence and size less so, although he got decent for a while there.

When looking at someone like Lauri Markennan, I think one of the things generating noise and attention is his portability. You could throw him into any team (offensively at least) and he'll fit because of the combo of size and shooting. Jrue Holiday was similar, because of the defence and combo guard skills.

But judging players on a team by their ability to play with constraints isn't too valuable beyond a basic assessment of 'is this guy hard to build around', unless you're a GM assessing free agents and draft picks.

[tsherkin]

Holy crap he has been mid as hell lately lol

He and bron have the same trajectories this year lmao

bron was still a beast at age 35 tho

James is a 6'9 physical monstrosity who aged into playing PF, though. Steph does not have those tools/options.

[ShaqAttac]

Warriors cant even win at home now and even wiggins playin bad now. Is steph really a port god? Dont seem like chef can cook without the drayman. Ppl like to talk bout his on/off but hes -10

Also, I meant to circle back to this.

He's also playing a third of his minutes at the 2 for the first time since his rookie season... and is still 9th in the league in O-EPM.

How does that square with your narrative?

idk what oepm is

[falcolombardi]

Oh, look, someone fell into the trap.

“If Steph is so portable, why is his impact only high when he is not playing with stars?”

I first heard about "portability" when people would use it to blame LeBron for not beating the mega-stacked Warriors with Steph and KD by himself, so what goes around comes around, I suppose.

To me, it's always felt like a buzzword that people use to tear down some players for not winning in impossible situations and elevate other players for being in perfect situations.

Couldnt agree more with the bolded lmao

[penbeast0]

I think he does, a sweet red with dessert, especially living that close to Napa Valley and having a chef as a wife, would seem to be an integral part of any rich superstar’s wine cellar. However, it remains unclear if he does indeed have PORT, and to what extent his PORT stock is.

I was thinking, of course he does, he's 29-11 against the Trailblazers career, but this is considerably better.