RealGM Top 25 Player Poll-#17 2018-19

[ITYSL]

That’s actually 4 years in a row that Dray’s had a better RPM than Durant. He’s a better playmaker, a better rebounder, and a much better defender. I’d still take KD, but I can see a legitimate argument the other way.

And on a basis of more impact, I'd agree with iggy that Dray's impact is well above Durant's. And really, that's all I care about in a team sport.

Yikes.

73 wins with Iggy there, and lineups that had Iggy and no Curry being better than Curry without Iggy.

When was Durant on a 73 win team now?

Harrison Barnes had the 4th most minutes on that 73-win team.

Harrison Barnes > Kevin Durant

Impeccable logic.

[bondom34]

Yikes.

73 wins with Iggy there, and lineups that had Iggy and no Curry being better than Curry without Iggy.

When was Durant on a 73 win team now?

Harrison Barnes had the 4th most minutes on that 73-win team.

Harrison Barnes > Kevin Durant

Impeccable logic.

Voted Paul George.

And as someone who likes OKC.

Yikes.

Yikes at PG being the 17th best player in the league? OK. Yeah, that's definitely in the same stratosphere as saying you prefer Draymond over KD.

Except again, we have lineup data for this. And it's clearly showing Green's impact. Better in a vacuum isn't more impact.

And yeah, PG at 17 is about 5 or so spots too high. Green, KAT, Simmons, and Lowry at least.

[ITYSL]

Yikes at PG being the 17th best player in the league? OK. Yeah, that's definitely in the same stratosphere as saying you prefer Draymond over KD.

Except again, we have lineup data for this. And it's clearly showing Green's impact. Better in a vacuum isn't more impact.

And yeah, PG at 17 is about 5 or so spots too high. Green, KAT, Simmons, and Lowry at least.[/quote]
If you prefer Draymond over KD, then that means you are relying heavily on lineup data.

If you rely that much on lineup data, then you would prefer Jrue Holiday over Anthony Davis and Robert Covington over Joel Embiid.

Again, impeccable logic.

[bondom34]

Yikes at PG being the 17th best player in the league? OK. Yeah, that's definitely in the same stratosphere as saying you prefer Draymond over KD.

Except again, we have lineup data for this. And it's clearly showing Green's impact. Better in a vacuum isn't more impact.

And yeah, PG at 17 is about 5 or so spots too high. Green, KAT, Simmons, and Lowry at least.

If you prefer Draymond over KD, then that means you are relying heavily on lineup data.

If you rely that much on lineup data, then you would prefer Jrue Holiday over Anthony Davis and Robert Covington over Joel Embiid.

Again, impeccable logic.[/quote]
Jrue and Covington Don't play nearly as large a role as Green. Green is at worst the 2nd best defender in the NBA and is a plus offensively with a large role on both ends of the court.

Again, impact isn't better player in a vacuum. Your logic is not sound here. You're picking random examples, some of which don't fit what you're trying to say.

[SlowPaced]

73 wins with Iggy there, and lineups that had Iggy and no Curry being better than Curry without Iggy.

When was Durant on a 73 win team now?

Harrison Barnes had the 4th most minutes on that 73-win team.

Harrison Barnes > Kevin Durant

Impeccable logic.

And as someone who likes OKC.

Yikes.

Yikes at PG being the 17th best player in the league? OK. Yeah, that's definitely in the same stratosphere as saying you prefer Draymond over KD.

Except again, we have lineup data for this. And it's clearly showing Green's impact. Better in a vacuum isn't more impact.

And yeah, PG at 17 is about 5 or so spots too high. Green, KAT, Simmons, and Lowry at least.

This is a strawman. The guy you're responding to said, in green font, "saying you prefer Draymond over KD", not "saying Draymond has more impact than KD".

The "impact isn't better player in vacuum" argument doesn't falsify his point, it falsifies a point that he never raised.

[bondom34]

Harrison Barnes had the 4th most minutes on that 73-win team.

Harrison Barnes > Kevin Durant

Impeccable logic.

Yikes at PG being the 17th best player in the league? OK. Yeah, that's definitely in the same stratosphere as saying you prefer Draymond over KD.

Except again, we have lineup data for this. And it's clearly showing Green's impact. Better in a vacuum isn't more impact.

And yeah, PG at 17 is about 5 or so spots too high. Green, KAT, Simmons, and Lowry at least.

This is a strawman. The guy you're responding to said, in green font, "saying you prefer Draymond over KD", not "saying Draymond has more impact than KD".

My first response was that Draymond has more impact than Durant, and that all I care about ultimately is impact. If I'm voting the best players in the NBA should I vote on how they actually effect a team or how they may hypothetically impact a team?

[SlowPaced]

Except again, we have lineup data for this. And it's clearly showing Green's impact. Better in a vacuum isn't more impact.

And yeah, PG at 17 is about 5 or so spots too high. Green, KAT, Simmons, and Lowry at least.

This is a strawman. The guy you're responding to said, in green font, "saying you prefer Draymond over KD", not "saying Draymond has more impact than KD".

My first response was that Draymond has more impact than Durant, and that all I care about ultimately is impact. If I'm voting the best players in the NBA should I vote on how they actually effect a team or how they may hypothetically impact a team?

But what you're saying suggests being the better player in vacuum doesn't always mean you should rank higher in a list of best players, which clearly makes no sense.

If a player is better, he's better. You can't divorce being better from having more impact. Impact depends on circumstance.

[bondom34]

This is a strawman. The guy you're responding to said, in green font, "saying you prefer Draymond over KD", not "saying Draymond has more impact than KD".

My first response was that Draymond has more impact than Durant, and that all I care about ultimately is impact. If I'm voting the best players in the NBA should I vote on how they actually effect a team or how they may hypothetically impact a team?

But what you're saying suggests being the better player in vacuum doesn't always mean you should rank higher in a list of best players, which clearly makes no sense.

If a player is better, he's better. You can't divorce being better from having more impact. Impact depends on circumstance.

And I'd vote Durant better (pretty sure I did, and said as much earlier that he's a tier up from these guys). But if I'm really asking who I think is more important it's Green. I was way unclear there.

[SlowPaced]

My first response was that Draymond has more impact than Durant, and that all I care about ultimately is impact. If I'm voting the best players in the NBA should I vote on how they actually effect a team or how they may hypothetically impact a team?

But what you're saying suggests being the better player in vacuum doesn't always mean you should rank higher in a list of best players, which clearly makes no sense.

If a player is better, he's better. You can't divorce being better from having more impact. Impact depends on circumstance.

And I'd vote Durant better (pretty sure I did, and said as much earlier that he's a tier up from these guys). But if I'm really asking who I think is more important it's Green. I was way unclear there.

I get your point. Though I'd argue Green is more important to the Warriors specifically, and not as important in vacuum.

[bondom34]

But what you're saying suggests being the better player in vacuum doesn't always mean you should rank higher in a list of best players, which clearly makes no sense.

If a player is better, he's better. You can't divorce being better from having more impact. Impact depends on circumstance.

And I'd vote Durant better (pretty sure I did, and said as much earlier that he's a tier up from these guys). But if I'm really asking who I think is more important it's Green. I was way unclear there.

I get your point. Though I'd argue Green is more important to the Warriors specifically, and not as important in vacuum.

When compared to Durant I'd probably agree there too. I don't think I'd argue that vs other guys in this poll (PG, Irving from the last poll, etc)

[PizzaSteve]

Green vs Klay, close, but defense wins titles. That said, a young healthy Boogie on Warriors with Curry to keep him focused...he would be higher in polls...has all the tools.

[ITYSL]

Jrue and Covington Don't play nearly as large a role as Green. Green is at worst the 2nd best defender in the NBA and is a plus offensively with a large role on both ends of the court.

Again, impact isn't better player in a vacuum. Your logic is not sound here. You're picking random examples, some of which don't fit what you're trying to say.

Strongly disagree in regards to Jrue. Fair enough re:Covington/Embiid. So then you'd take Covington over Klay. Still ridiculous.

You are the one choosing players in a vacuum based on lineup data. You said that all that matters to you in a team sport is impact. Therefore, you'd choose Green over Durant. Then you cited the fact that Iggy was on a 73-win team, while Durant wasn't. Or something.

[bondom34]

Jrue and Covington Don't play nearly as large a role as Green. Green is at worst the 2nd best defender in the NBA and is a plus offensively with a large role on both ends of the court.

Again, impact isn't better player in a vacuum. Your logic is not sound here. You're picking random examples, some of which don't fit what you're trying to say.

Strongly disagree in regards to Jrue. Fair enough re:Covington/Embiid. So then you'd take Covington over Klay. Still ridiculous.

You are the one choosing players in a vacuum based on lineup data. You said that all that matters to you in a team sport is impact. Therefore, you'd choose Green over Durant. Then you cited the fact that Iggy was on a 73-win team, while Durant wasn't. Or something.

Sorry, I haven't had coffee yet.

73 wins with Iggy there, and lineups that had Iggy and no Curry being better than Curry without Iggy.

When was Durant on a 73 win team now?

This was the post. It shouldn't have said Iggy, that should have said Green. That post probably made no sense originally.

Also Jrue wasn't that good in the RS, but had a great playoffs.

[ITYSL]

Jrue and Covington Don't play nearly as large a role as Green. Green is at worst the 2nd best defender in the NBA and is a plus offensively with a large role on both ends of the court.

Again, impact isn't better player in a vacuum. Your logic is not sound here. You're picking random examples, some of which don't fit what you're trying to say.

Strongly disagree in regards to Jrue. Fair enough re:Covington/Embiid. So then you'd take Covington over Klay. Still ridiculous.

You are the one choosing players in a vacuum based on lineup data. You said that all that matters to you in a team sport is impact. Therefore, you'd choose Green over Durant. Then you cited the fact that Iggy was on a 73-win team, while Durant wasn't. Or something.

Sorry, I haven't had coffee yet.

73 wins with Iggy there, and lineups that had Iggy and no Curry being better than Curry without Iggy.

When was Durant on a 73 win team now?

This was the post. It shouldn't have said Iggy, that should have said Green. That post probably made no sense originally.

Also Jrue wasn't that good in the RS, but had a great playoffs.

OK, but same difference. Using the same logic you're using to take Green over Durant would cause someone to take Jrue over Davis, and Klay over Covington. If you say that all that matters to you in a team sport is impact, and you say that Green has more impact than Durant, then you are doing exactly what you're arguing against, which is evaluating players in a vacuum.

[bondom34]

Strongly disagree in regards to Jrue. Fair enough re:Covington/Embiid. So then you'd take Covington over Klay. Still ridiculous.

You are the one choosing players in a vacuum based on lineup data. You said that all that matters to you in a team sport is impact. Therefore, you'd choose Green over Durant. Then you cited the fact that Iggy was on a 73-win team, while Durant wasn't. Or something.

Sorry, I haven't had coffee yet.

73 wins with Iggy there, and lineups that had Iggy and no Curry being better than Curry without Iggy.

When was Durant on a 73 win team now?

This was the post. It shouldn't have said Iggy, that should have said Green. That post probably made no sense originally.

Also Jrue wasn't that good in the RS, but had a great playoffs.

OK, but same difference. Using the same logic you're using to take Green over Durant would cause someone to take Jrue over Davis, and Klay over Covington. If you say that all that matters to you in a team sport is impact, and you say that Green has more impact than Durant, then you are doing exactly what you're arguing against, which is evaluating players in a vacuum.

I already said I voted Durant over green. I'm assuming you mean Embiid, not Klay?

Sorry I know this was really confusing and admitted to SP I worded it poorly.

[ITYSL]

I already said I voted Durant over green. I'm assuming you mean Embiid, not Klay?

Sorry I know this was really confusing and admitted to SP I worded it poorly.

If you say that 1) all that matters to you in a team sport is impact, and 2) Green has more impact than Durant, then 3) how could you vote for Durant over Green? We are, after all, voting for players that are playing in a team sport. It seems to completely upend your chain of logic.

I had originally cited Covington and Embiid as an example, and you correctly pointed out that they don't play the same role. That was a good point. So rather than Covington over Embiid, I cited Covington over Klay. They play similar roles, and Covington has far superior impact stats.

[bondom34]

I already said I voted Durant over green. I'm assuming you mean Embiid, not Klay?

Sorry I know this was really confusing and admitted to SP I worded it poorly.

If you say that 1) all that matters to you in a team sport is impact, and 2) Green has more impact than Durant, then 3) how could you vote for Durant over Green? We are, after all, voting for players that are playing in a team sport. It seems to completely upend your chain of logic.

I had originally cited Covington and Embiid as an example, and you correctly pointed out that they don't play the same role. That was a good point. So rather than Covington over Embiid, I cited Covington over Klay. They play similar roles, and Covington has far superior impact stats.

Klay takes nearly double the shot attempts per game than Covington, I'm not seeing a similar role.

Also I explained Durant/Green about 5 posts up, see reply to SP

Edit: 6 more FGA/game, still a huge gap.

[clyde21]

Still wondering how far people are willing to let Cousins drop.

Did people forget how good he was last season? How much should we consider the injury? We might as well not include him on the list at all at this point.

[Harry Garris]

KAT getting underrated big time. People are too caught up in the narrative that he's horrible on defense, yet we've voted Jokic, Dame, and Kyrie above him.

Add Horford to poll.

Jokic, Dame, and Kyrie at least all make their teammates better.

[bisme37]

I really don't know who to vote for here yet but I think Demar is getting underrated, he was an absolute beast last season. Stunk it up in the playoffs but that didn't stop Dame from getting chosen.

Horford needs to be added. He was just the 2nd best player in the entire East Playoffs after LeBron. Dude curb stomped Embiid who made the list at #11. And while I'm at it, Tatum just vastly outplayed Simmons, so if Ben is a choice in the poll JT should be too.