RealGM Top 25 Player Poll-#12 2018-19

[Saints14]

Also - I've seen Kyrie rank highly for like the past 5 polls with no one commenting on why. I think there's an argument to be made for him at this point but I'd like to see someone make it otherwise I'm gonna assume there's just a disproportionate amount of C's fans here.

[clyde21]

True but I get the sense this poll is about who is better now as opposed to who played better last year. I'm not a Boogie hater but there's also the reality that the Pels did just fine without him. Redundancy between him and AD was likely a big reason for that.

Then don't vote for him, but the notion that he doesn't deserve to at least be an option on the poll at this point is nonsense.

Would you take Cousins and his injury uncertainty over a healthy Horford or Simmons? I don't think the gap between a healthy Boogie and those guys is so large that he'd stay ahead of them without knowing how good he'll be returning from that achilles. Keep in mind NBA GMs wouldn't give him over $5M to play this season.

I can only go by what I saw last of Cousins, and based on what I saw last, yes I would. I cannot guess on what he'll look like after the injury, so he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

[deneem4]

Also - I've seen Kyrie rank highly for like the past 5 polls with no one commenting on why. I think there's an argument to be made for him at this point but I'd like to see someone make it otherwise I'm gonna assume there's just a disproportionate amount of C's fans here.

This....its alot of quiet celtics fans here

[Edrees]

True but I get the sense this poll is about who is better now as opposed to who played better last year. I'm not a Boogie hater but there's also the reality that the Pels did just fine without him. Redundancy between him and AD was likely a big reason for that.

Then don't vote for him, but the notion that he doesn't deserve to at least be an option on the poll at this point is nonsense.

Would you take Cousins and his injury uncertainty over a healthy Horford or Simmons? I don't think the gap between a healthy Boogie and those guys is so large that he'd stay ahead of them without knowing how good he'll be returning from that achilles. Keep in mind NBA GMs wouldn't give him over $5M to play this season.

It sure didn't stop Chris Paul from being voted high even though he's always injured when it counts and at age 34 it is very likely to only get worse. i'd take Ben Simmons over an injured Chris Paul as well.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Also - I've seen Kyrie rank highly for like the past 5 polls with no one commenting on why. I think there's an argument to be made for him at this point but I'd like to see someone make it otherwise I'm gonna assume there's just a disproportionate amount of C's fans here.

This....its alot of quiet celtics fans here

The response I usually get is "he made the winning shot in Game 7 of the finals" but I can't imagine putting so much weight on a single shot. He's an extraordinary offensive talent but (a) not someone who elevates his teammates and (b) a clear negative defensively.

[HoopsterJones]

Add Wall.

[Saints14]

Then don't vote for him, but the notion that he doesn't deserve to at least be an option on the poll at this point is nonsense.

Would you take Cousins and his injury uncertainty over a healthy Horford or Simmons? I don't think the gap between a healthy Boogie and those guys is so large that he'd stay ahead of them without knowing how good he'll be returning from that achilles. Keep in mind NBA GMs wouldn't give him over $5M to play this season.

It sure didn't stop Chris Paul from being voted high even though he's always injured when it counts and at age 34 it is very likely to only get worse. i'd take Ben Simmons over an injured Chris Paul as well.

Paul's injuries are never of the career-altering variety and he's been consistently impactful when healthy for the past decade +.

I'm interpreting this poll as best player when playing, so my issue with Boogie is that even when he gets healthy he might not be the same. So personally I don't dock Paul or Irving in this poll for getting hurt in/before the playoffs although others are free to interpret that differently.

[Duke4life831]

Also - I've seen Kyrie rank highly for like the past 5 polls with no one commenting on why. I think there's an argument to be made for him at this point but I'd like to see someone make it otherwise I'm gonna assume there's just a disproportionate amount of C's fans here.

After a kind of rough first month, Kyrie averaged

26/4/5 on 51/43/89 shooting (63 TS%)

Those are some pretty elite offensive numbers. Before he went down with his injury, we had plenty of threads in early March asking to predict the all NBA teams and Kyrie was on the 2nd team for the majority of the posts. I personally think 10-15 is pretty damn close.

[nolang1]

Also - I've seen Kyrie rank highly for like the past 5 polls with no one commenting on why. I think there's an argument to be made for him at this point but I'd like to see someone make it otherwise I'm gonna assume there's just a disproportionate amount of C's fans here.

After a kind of rough first month, Kyrie averaged

26/4/5 on 51/43/89 shooting (63 TS%)

Those are some pretty elite offensive numbers. Before he went down with his injury, we had plenty of threads in early March asking to predict the all NBA teams and Kyrie was on the 2nd team for the majority of the posts. I personally think 10-15 is pretty damn close.

There are a lot of pretty elite offensive players in the league (who would look even more elite if you threw out their worst stretch of games), and if he's closer to a top 10 rather than a top 5 offensive player while being a negative on defense, there are still a few players better than him overall.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Also - I've seen Kyrie rank highly for like the past 5 polls with no one commenting on why. I think there's an argument to be made for him at this point but I'd like to see someone make it otherwise I'm gonna assume there's just a disproportionate amount of C's fans here.

After a kind of rough first month, Kyrie averaged

26/4/5 on 51/43/89 shooting (63 TS%)

Those are some pretty elite offensive numbers. Before he went down with his injury, we had plenty of threads in early March asking to predict the all NBA teams and Kyrie was on the 2nd team for the majority of the posts. I personally think 10-15 is pretty damn close.

No doubt he's an incredible offensive talent, but what is his argument over Lillard? Less ppg, apg, rbg, worse RPM/BPM/VORP/ WSper48. He was marginally more efficient but that's been a trend for players in Brad Stevens' system. Lillard's TS% was better than every other year of Kyrie's career.

[Duke4life831]

Also - I've seen Kyrie rank highly for like the past 5 polls with no one commenting on why. I think there's an argument to be made for him at this point but I'd like to see someone make it otherwise I'm gonna assume there's just a disproportionate amount of C's fans here.

After a kind of rough first month, Kyrie averaged

26/4/5 on 51/43/89 shooting (63 TS%)

Those are some pretty elite offensive numbers. Before he went down with his injury, we had plenty of threads in early March asking to predict the all NBA teams and Kyrie was on the 2nd team for the majority of the posts. I personally think 10-15 is pretty damn close.

There are a lot of pretty elite offensive players in the league (who would look even more elite if you threw out their worst stretch of games), and if he's closer to a top 10 rather than a top 5 offensive player while being a negative on defense, there are still a few players better than him overall.

That's over half a season. He was 8th in WS/48 last year. He wasn't that negative defensively since Boston still had an elite and #1 defense in the league. I think that he is close if not a top 5 offensive player, which by itself puts him in that top 10-15 range, that is how important elite offense is.

[Duke4life831]

Also - I've seen Kyrie rank highly for like the past 5 polls with no one commenting on why. I think there's an argument to be made for him at this point but I'd like to see someone make it otherwise I'm gonna assume there's just a disproportionate amount of C's fans here.

After a kind of rough first month, Kyrie averaged

26/4/5 on 51/43/89 shooting (63 TS%)

Those are some pretty elite offensive numbers. Before he went down with his injury, we had plenty of threads in early March asking to predict the all NBA teams and Kyrie was on the 2nd team for the majority of the posts. I personally think 10-15 is pretty damn close.

No doubt he's an incredible offensive talent, but what is his argument over Lillard? Less ppg, apg, rbg, worse RPM/BPM/VORP/ WSper48. He was marginally more efficient but that's been a trend for players in Brad Stevens' system. Lillard's TS% was better than every other year of Kyrie's career.

I think they are very similar players. BPM and WS/48 is very close last year. Kyrie had the better TS% in 2015 and both have a 57 TS% for their career. I can definitely see the argument for either one. I personally give the edge to Kyrie because of individual playoff performances (+Duke bias).

[Aliasego]

Vote Gobert (honestly his production just seems to be the hardest to reproduce)

Add Porzingis.

[jpengland]

It's time for me to vote Gobert.

Head and shoulders above any other player defensively. His offense is also vastly underrated. His gravity on the roll makes a huge difference and he sets hard, well timed screens that disrupt an entire defense.

He isn't flashy, or showy, but he has a tremendous impact on a team.

People may throw out a bad series for a reason not to vote for him, but who hasn't had a bad series? He will come back stronger this year IMO.

[nolang1]

After a kind of rough first month, Kyrie averaged

26/4/5 on 51/43/89 shooting (63 TS%)

Those are some pretty elite offensive numbers. Before he went down with his injury, we had plenty of threads in early March asking to predict the all NBA teams and Kyrie was on the 2nd team for the majority of the posts. I personally think 10-15 is pretty damn close.

There are a lot of pretty elite offensive players in the league (who would look even more elite if you threw out their worst stretch of games), and if he's closer to a top 10 rather than a top 5 offensive player while being a negative on defense, there are still a few players better than him overall.

That's over half a season. He was 8th in WS/48 last year. He wasn't that negative defensively since Boston still had an elite and #1 defense in the league. I think that he is close if not a top 5 offensive player, which by itself puts him in that top 10-15 range, that is how important elite offense is.

Jokic averaged 21-10-7 over a similar stretch (like I said, lots of elite offensive players) and was 5th in BPM and RPM if you want to throw out all-in-one numbers. The Nuggets were the #1 offense in the league over that stretch, and Jokic is better at defense than Kyrie. Younger and not coming off of surgery as well.

[Cartuse]

Add klay

[Duke4life831]

There are a lot of pretty elite offensive players in the league (who would look even more elite if you threw out their worst stretch of games), and if he's closer to a top 10 rather than a top 5 offensive player while being a negative on defense, there are still a few players better than him overall.

That's over half a season. He was 8th in WS/48 last year. He wasn't that negative defensively since Boston still had an elite and #1 defense in the league. I think that he is close if not a top 5 offensive player, which by itself puts him in that top 10-15 range, that is how important elite offense is.

Jokic averaged 21-10-7 over a similar stretch (like I said, lots of elite offensive players) and was 5th in BPM and RPM if you want to throw out all-in-one numbers. The Nuggets were the #1 offense in the league over that stretch, and Jokic is better at defense than Kyrie. Younger and not coming off of surgery as well.

Ya and you can make the argument that Jokic is better and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you. Like I said before I think around 10-15 it gets really really close between these guys. I can't see an argument for Jokic over Kyrie, I can see an argument for Kyrie over Dame, I can see an argument for Dame over Jokic and so on.

[Saints14]

After a kind of rough first month, Kyrie averaged

26/4/5 on 51/43/89 shooting (63 TS%)

Those are some pretty elite offensive numbers. Before he went down with his injury, we had plenty of threads in early March asking to predict the all NBA teams and Kyrie was on the 2nd team for the majority of the posts. I personally think 10-15 is pretty damn close.

There are a lot of pretty elite offensive players in the league (who would look even more elite if you threw out their worst stretch of games), and if he's closer to a top 10 rather than a top 5 offensive player while being a negative on defense, there are still a few players better than him overall.

That's over half a season. He was 8th in WS/48 last year. He wasn't that negative defensively since Boston still had an elite and #1 defense in the league. I think that he is close if not a top 5 offensive player, which by itself puts him in that top 10-15 range, that is how important elite offense is.

Appreciate the sound reasoning.

My issue with Kyrie is that his highest finish in RPM is 38th in the league back in 2015. I know RPM isn't the end-all-be-all, but not even sniffing the top 25 is a pretty big red flag for me in terms of the impact he's actually bringing to a team, and it bore out last year when Boston almost reached the finals without him. Kyrie is clearly one of the most talented individual scorers in the league (and that does have value in the postseason) but I think with his playmaking and off-ball limitations he falls short of having the elite offensive impact of a Curry/Harden/Paul, while being a clear negative defensively. He's also not a horrible rebounder for a point guard, but that's still an area where he doesn't provide the value of a Jokic/Green/Towns.

[clyde21]

There's no way Irving is the 12th best player in the league, sorry.

[Edrees]

There are a lot of pretty elite offensive players in the league (who would look even more elite if you threw out their worst stretch of games), and if he's closer to a top 10 rather than a top 5 offensive player while being a negative on defense, there are still a few players better than him overall.

That's over half a season. He was 8th in WS/48 last year. He wasn't that negative defensively since Boston still had an elite and #1 defense in the league. I think that he is close if not a top 5 offensive player, which by itself puts him in that top 10-15 range, that is how important elite offense is.

Jokic averaged 21-10-7 over a similar stretch (like I said, lots of elite offensive players) and was 5th in BPM and RPM if you want to throw out all-in-one numbers. The Nuggets were the #1 offense in the league over that stretch, and Jokic is better at defense than Kyrie. Younger and not coming off of surgery as well.

Jokic is only slightly under 3 years younger than Kyrie. The difference between 23 and 26 is not going to be noticeable. The injury/surgery thing is a totally different story though and could be reason enough.