Which Hall of Famer would be worse if they had Stephen Currys skills?

[oaktownwarriors87]

I was wondering about the most skilled player of all time, and it got me thinking, which Hall of famer would be a worse player if they had Stephen Curry skills?

[Wallace_Wallace]

If any hall of famer had Steph Curry skills, then he would be a goat candidate. Let's use a HOF player on the lower hand, like my idol Ben Wallace....that's a GOAT right there. We can use anyone really, he'll become an alien like player, not the other way around

[mattg]

I was wondering about the most skilled player of all time, and it got me thinking, which Hall of famer would be a worse player if they had Stephen Curry skills?

How are you going to make any player worse by giving them additional skills? Especially since you're talking about the most skilled shooter ever and a ridiculously skilled ball handler/passer/off ball movement guy.

Unless you're saying like take Michael Jordan, remove his post game, midrange jumper, and slashing, etc and instead give him Curry's handles, passing, shooting, movement, is that player worse than original Jordan?

[parsnips33]

I was wondering about the most skilled player of all time, and it got me thinking, which Hall of famer would be a worse player if they had Stephen Curry skills?

How are you going to make any player worse by giving them additional skills? Especially since you're talking about the most skilled shooter ever and a ridiculously skilled ball handler/passer/off ball movement guy.

Unless you're saying like take Michael Jordan, remove his post game, midrange jumper, and slashing, etc and instead give him Curry's handles, passing, shooting, movement, is that player worse than original Jordan?

Seems pretty obvious it's replacing the skillset of the player in question, otherwise wouldn't be a particularly interesting question

MJ with Curry skills is probably better than normal MJ right?

[O_6]

Steve Nash is really the only one I can think of.

Curry's shooting edge on Nash is smaller than Nash's edge as a passer/floor general.

And Nash is one great player where Curry clearly has an athletic edge over. Nash had no vertical (0 career dunks vs. 26 for Curry) and was an awful defender due to his lack of strength and lateral agility. So he'd be a clearly less athletic version of the current Steph, which might not necessarily be more impactful than he already was as a 2x league MVP and offensive force.

You could also maybe argue Jerry West. Without the 3pt line, is Curry's deep outside shooting edge really valuable enough to overcome West's more mixed slashing/shooting style? Tough to say, as West (unlike Nash) was definitely more athletic than Curry.

[oaktownwarriors87]

Steve Nash is really the only one I can think of.

Curry's shooting edge on Nash is smaller than Nash's edge as a passer/floor general.

And Nash is one great player where Curry clearly has an athletic edge over. Nash had no vertical (0 career dunks vs. 26 for Curry) and was an awful defender due to his lack of strength and lateral agility. So he'd be a clearly less athletic version of the current Steph, which might not necessarily be more impactful than he already was as a 2x league MVP and offensive force.

You could also maybe argue Jerry West. Without the 3pt line, is Curry's deep outside shooting edge really valuable enough to overcome West's more mixed slashing/shooting style? Tough to say, as West (unlike Nash) was definitely more athletic than Curry.

Agree to disagree, but if the swap skills then I'm saying Nash>Curry.

[RCM88x]

George Mikan

[jalengreen]

How is defense handled here? Like, suppose Bill Russell is the Hall of Famer in question. Not sure how to extrapolate guard defensive skill to a big’s body lol (and I guess BBIQ isn’t considered a skill?)

Anyway, probably would need to look at pre-3pt era players who would gain less from getting Steph’s outlier 3pt shooting ability. Oscar was an efficient 30 PPG guy and probably better passer and rebounder than Steph, at least era relative

[parsnips33]

How is defense handled here? Like, suppose Bill Russell is the Hall of Famer in question. Not sure how to extrapolate guard defensive skill to a big’s body lol (and I guess BBIQ isn’t considered a skill?)

Anyway, probably would need to look at pre-3pt era players who would gain less from getting Steph’s outlier 3pt shooting ability. Oscar was an efficient 30 PPG guy and probably better passer and rebounder than Steph, at least era relative

Was just thinking about the defensive HOF big archetype. Do you gain/lose more rom turning Bill Russell into an average defensive big man with quick feet and strong IQ, who is also a 7ft flamethrower with guard skills

[O_6]

Steve Nash is really the only one I can think of.

Curry's shooting edge on Nash is smaller than Nash's edge as a passer/floor general.

And Nash is one great player where Curry clearly has an athletic edge over. Nash had no vertical (0 career dunks vs. 26 for Curry) and was an awful defender due to his lack of strength and lateral agility. So he'd be a clearly less athletic version of the current Steph, which might not necessarily be more impactful than he already was as a 2x league MVP and offensive force.

You could also maybe argue Jerry West. Without the 3pt line, is Curry's deep outside shooting edge really valuable enough to overcome West's more mixed slashing/shooting style? Tough to say, as West (unlike Nash) was definitely more athletic than Curry.

Agree to disagree, but if the swap skills then I'm saying Nash>Curry.

If Steve Nash was a worse athlete than Steph Curry, how can Steve Nash be better as Steph than Steph himself?

[penbeast0]

I was thinking a great post scorer like Wilt or Kareem from the pre-3 ball era. If they had the skills, they might turn into a (more effective) Ralph Sampson type, staying away from the basket on offense to shoot jump shots which, while going in at a 50+% rate wouldn't hurt by itself, but you lose the offensive rebounding and even with Curry's skills, someone over 7' putting it on the floor that much (which he would have to be doing to gain/keep the skills) is going to get his dribble stripped a lot more than a shorter player like Curry. There's a reason Muggsy Bogues is arguably the GOAT at assist/turnover ratio.

[Cavsfansince84]

I think most all the top 20 players from before 1985(including Bird and Magic) are worse. Most atg bigs imo couldn't trade out their low post/defensive skill for Steph's perimeter based skills and be better for it(there may be a few exceptions to both groups). Part of that isn't just adapting his skill set to a league without a 3 pt line but also a league where coaches are simply not going to allow those players to use Steph's skill set the way he does in the 10's&20's.

[penbeast0]

Well, Russell would certainly be better! Once the moved him out to the high post (and he's a guy who wasn't even good at FTs), his shooting percentages slipped both in raw numbers and to a much greater extent, relative to the league. Pumping those midrange shots to 50%+ and the FT% to 90% would make a big difference offensively even if the actual number of shots remain low.

[Cavsfansince84]

Well, Russell would certainly be better! Once the moved him out to the high post (and he's a guy who wasn't even good at FTs), his shooting percentages slipped both in raw numbers and to a much greater extent, relative to the league. Pumping those midrange shots to 50%+ and the FT% to 90% would make a big difference offensively even if the actual number of shots remain low.

But can you trade Russell's skill set out for Steph's and think he has even close to the defensive impact? I would see his def instincts and overall bbiq(including his memory) as part of his skill set. So if he becomes maybe the 4th or 5th best defensive player in the league but becomes a great mid range shooter is his impact close to what it was much less better? I sort of doubt it would be.

[penbeast0]

.

I wasn't thinking trading it out, I was thinking adding it to the existing skill set. Trading it out isn't interesting.

That's why I was looking at things like, does it take great offensive rebounders away from the basket rather than just, well, everyone bigger and more athletic would probably be better if they had Curry's skill set. Look, It's SHAQ shooting 45% from 3 and 90% from the line! That's not interesting analytically.

[Cavsfansince84]

.

I wasn't thinking trading it out, I was thinking adding it to the existing skill set. Trading it out isn't interesting.

That's why I was looking at things like, does it take great offensive rebounders away from the basket rather than just, well, everyone bigger and more athletic would probably be better if they had Curry's skill set. Look, It's SHAQ shooting 45% from 3 and 90% from the line! That's not interesting analytically.

I see it more as the opposite. I mean how you can just add atg mid/long range/ft shooting to a player and make them worse? That's fine though, I took the thread to mean you trade skill sets so I'm not gonna argue the premise you are working from.

[penbeast0]

That's why I took the thread as a challenge, lol. You are more likely to be right about the OP's intent though; looking at it with your explanation, I think I jumped to the wrong conclusion.

[Dr Positivity]

CP3 if you include future inductees, you lose the passing and too short to be open as much. Maybe Stockton.

[bedwetter_v2]

I would say any centre player because it would take away any size advantage they have - since they would be playing away from the basket and would need another big man to cover the hole there.

No ads on this site please

[ShotCreator]

Nash is a definitive one.

Jokic is probably worse without all his touch, footwork and passing/anticipation. Even if he was the greatest shooter ever.