Peaks project update: #8

[Bel]

1-Magic Johnson 1987
2-Magic Johnson 1990
3-Magic Johnson 1991

Best player left by far, imo should have been in already. Has a great case as the best offensive player of all-time, I have him #2 after Bird but it's close. He was one of the GOAT offensive players even as a rookie but just got better and better as his career went on, by his late years he could control the pace of the game at will, put his teammates in the best possible positions to succeed, dominate the game while not monopolizing the offense and score efficiently when necessary. He was GOAT level in the halfcourt, where he was the best post player ever imo, and the undisputed GOAT transition player.

He, and not Kareem, was the leader and the catalyst of the Showtime Lakers, one of the NBA's greatest dynasties.

As for bolded parts;
- That's just an overrating. Seriously. Bill Russell, Hakeem Olajuwon and Kevin Garnett are still in the pool. How Magic is better than them, by far?..
- I don't mean to be rude or shallow but WTH. If he was such a great post player how the hell he got locked up by Pippen in '91 Finals? The answer can not be Pippen being one of the goat defenders because if the best post player ever gets owned by one of the the greatest defenders, that would make defense more important than offense and you lose your reason to rate Magic so highly.
- Well, the Lakers weren't the showtime Lakers in 1980 and 1982 titles, their playstyle was way different. Also, Kareem was still the leader of the team in early seasons of showtime era. He was the leader in dressing room and he was the leader of halfcourt play/scoring. It was the upset in 1986, against Houston, that caused the change. After it, Riley asked Kareem to give the reign to Magic and Kareem agreed.

Magic did not get locked up by Pippen in the 91 finals. He bamboozled Pippen on multiple plays and forced him into early foul trouble in game 3. Pippen did reasonably well in the second half of g2, but that was about it. Magic had Jordan (probably 75%) and Pippen (25%) switching onto him throughout the entire series to wear him down, though to be fair he was coasting on D more than usual. Given the injuries to Worthy and Scott as the series went on, Magic played phenomenally on offense (but rested on defense, to be fair).

Per the book 'Showtime' Magic, not Kareem was the team leader already in 1980. That's why when Kareem, the clear MVP, gets injured and the team is all depressed and losing hope before g6, Magic reinvigorates them, gets them believing they can win, and I think Wilkes, Cooper, and Chones all have their best game in the series. Having the MVP get injured before a key game is a massive psychological blow, but the Lakers shrugged it off and won in dominating fashion. It is true though that the Lakers and Magic played very differently for their first 2 titles.

I think Bill has a clear edge over Magic here, but the guy has a very strong case for this or the next slot.

[Odinn21]

Magic did not get locked up by Pippen in the 91 finals. He bamboozled Pippen on multiple plays and forced him into early foul trouble in game 3. Pippen did reasonably well in the second half of g2, but that was about it. Magic had Jordan (probably 75%) and Pippen (25%) switching onto him throughout the entire series to wear him down, though to be fair he was coasting on D more than usual. Given the injuries to Worthy and Scott as the series went on, Magic played phenomenally on offense (but rested on defense, to be fair).

Per the book 'Showtime' Magic, not Kareem was the team leader already in 1980. That's why when Kareem, the clear MVP, gets injured and the team is all depressed and losing hope before g6, Magic reinvigorates them, gets them believing they can win, and I think Wilkes, Cooper, and Chones all have their best game in the series. Having the MVP get injured before a key game is a massive psychological blow, but the Lakers shrugged it off and won in dominating fashion. It is true though that the Lakers and Magic played very differently for their first 2 titles.

I think Bill has a clear edge over Magic here, but the guy has a very strong case for this or the next slot.

viewtopic.php?p=77899431#p77899431

This is just sitting 10-12 posts behind...

Via Sports Illustrated from 6/29/87

This year the Lakers finally were Magic's team: Speed is power, power is speed. Slowly the cast had changed. Michael Cooper had emerged; A.C. Green and James Worthy had been added. Even Mychal Thompson, the most important pickup by either team this year, once was strong enough to play center yet was fast enough to play small forward at times. One had, at certain moments, a sense of watching a prototype of a different breed of athlete -- strong, fast, disciplined -- playing at a level of stunning intensity, with surprisingly few turnovers.

The teams don't have one leader. Parker and Ginobili were leaders as well in the Spurs. But it was TD's team. The Lakers in the '80s were Kareem's team until the end of 1985-86 season. Magic had leader qualities, surely. But that doesn't mean he was the man in the team.

---

Well if I recall correctly, MJ defended Magic early in the series. He got worn down because Magic was a beast on the offensive end. I remember MJ asking P-Jax for some minutes on the bench in 3rd of game 1. MJ also got into foul trouble in 1st of game 2. Then Pippen defended Magic for most of the time till the end. As the series progressed Pippen became Magic's main defender (Worthy going down worths noting surely), and Magic had a far worse time against Scottie. That's how I remember it.

[LA Bird]

So I'm going to get to this now while people are just starting to mention him but... Curry.

So personally Curry isn't in my top 20. I want that to be known off top here for full transparency. I place him under people like Kobe, Wade, T-Mac, Westbrook, about even with people like KD, CP3, and Nash. I also see 2015 as his best season, pretty clearly IMO.

The main reason for that is his postseason performances. People here will remember I was saying Curry was the GOAT at the end of the regular season in 2016, even though I argued at the time I didn't see any improvements in his game from 2014 to 2015 to 2016 (he added that nasty floater after 2013 but there was no major improvements from 14 to 15). Kerr's ability to install an offense that was perfect for his skillset led to an offensive explosion. So with me not seeing any improvement in his game I personally don't put him up there, but many people do think he improved. In what? IDK, I've heard arguments for things, none that properly take into account the difference in role he's had, but honestly it's irrelevant in my case against him, just the reason I personally put him way under most as opposed to just being against him under some guys.

Now into the actual argument against him, and this is similar to my argument against 2013 LeBron, his postseason performance wasn't top tier. Or even the tier under that. Or even the tier under that.

In 2016 following that amazing regular season we got to see the team without him in 6 games in their first 2 rounds and the team went 4-2. He came back from his injury and looked perfectly healthy averaging 29.3/6.4/6.7 on 61.6 TS% in his 9 games before the Finals. Then in the Finals he was stopped by the same strategy that stopped him in the 2015 Finals and was the 4th best player in the series if I'm being generous (he has no argument over Draymond, Lebron, and Kyrie).

Now I don't think I have to explain why his 2016 Finals performance was ****, that's a given. What I do find more compelling is the argument that Draymond Green is more valuable to the team than Curry. Now I don't think he's better but someone earlier this year (maybe Spaceman?) brought up Draymond being better than Curry and it's kinda been burrowing into my head the more I think about it. Flat out I'm taking Draymond if you ask me which of the two I'd rather have if I'm trying to win 4 7 game series. Looking at postseason RAPM Draymond comes out tied for first with Lebron since 1998:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=112475182&single=true

And Curry's +/- numbers in the postseason outside of 2017 have always tailed Draymond's. Basically we have a guy that has the biggest regular season to postseason numbers drop in league history, played below superstar level in back to back Finals and wasn't the best player on his team in them, and falls behind a great teammate in all +/- metrics in both 2016 and other seasons. To me that signifies how much exactly the team helped him get those numbers in the regular season, how much they helped him get those impact numbers (it's worth mentioning Draymond had better +/- numbers in 2016 in the regular season too), and how his true level of play really wasn't super elite.

Other guys had great teammates and coaches of course but they were also clearly the best player on their rosters at all times. Can we say the same about Curry, and if we cannot can we put him over guys like Russell, KG, Dirk, Wade, Kobe, etc?

If your argument against 2016 Curry is his lacklustre playoffs performance and Draymond outperforming him in playoff +/-, why pick 2015 as Curry's peak instead of 2017? Curry's best playoffs performance across pretty much every stat came in 2017 and he also had one of the best raw +/- postseason run of all time that year. Draymond was far ahead of Curry in playoff on/off in 2015.

I wouldn't vote for Curry's peak yet either but it doesn't make sense to have 2015 as "clearly" his best season over 2017 when you seem to value playoffs performance and specifically +/- highly.

[E-Balla]

So I'm going to get to this now while people are just starting to mention him but... Curry.

So personally Curry isn't in my top 20. I want that to be known off top here for full transparency. I place him under people like Kobe, Wade, T-Mac, Westbrook, about even with people like KD, CP3, and Nash. I also see 2015 as his best season, pretty clearly IMO.

The main reason for that is his postseason performances. People here will remember I was saying Curry was the GOAT at the end of the regular season in 2016, even though I argued at the time I didn't see any improvements in his game from 2014 to 2015 to 2016 (he added that nasty floater after 2013 but there was no major improvements from 14 to 15). Kerr's ability to install an offense that was perfect for his skillset led to an offensive explosion. So with me not seeing any improvement in his game I personally don't put him up there, but many people do think he improved. In what? IDK, I've heard arguments for things, none that properly take into account the difference in role he's had, but honestly it's irrelevant in my case against him, just the reason I personally put him way under most as opposed to just being against him under some guys.

Now into the actual argument against him, and this is similar to my argument against 2013 LeBron, his postseason performance wasn't top tier. Or even the tier under that. Or even the tier under that.

In 2016 following that amazing regular season we got to see the team without him in 6 games in their first 2 rounds and the team went 4-2. He came back from his injury and looked perfectly healthy averaging 29.3/6.4/6.7 on 61.6 TS% in his 9 games before the Finals. Then in the Finals he was stopped by the same strategy that stopped him in the 2015 Finals and was the 4th best player in the series if I'm being generous (he has no argument over Draymond, Lebron, and Kyrie).

Now I don't think I have to explain why his 2016 Finals performance was ****, that's a given. What I do find more compelling is the argument that Draymond Green is more valuable to the team than Curry. Now I don't think he's better but someone earlier this year (maybe Spaceman?) brought up Draymond being better than Curry and it's kinda been burrowing into my head the more I think about it. Flat out I'm taking Draymond if you ask me which of the two I'd rather have if I'm trying to win 4 7 game series. Looking at postseason RAPM Draymond comes out tied for first with Lebron since 1998:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=112475182&single=true

And Curry's +/- numbers in the postseason outside of 2017 have always tailed Draymond's. Basically we have a guy that has the biggest regular season to postseason numbers drop in league history, played below superstar level in back to back Finals and wasn't the best player on his team in them, and falls behind a great teammate in all +/- metrics in both 2016 and other seasons. To me that signifies how much exactly the team helped him get those numbers in the regular season, how much they helped him get those impact numbers (it's worth mentioning Draymond had better +/- numbers in 2016 in the regular season too), and how his true level of play really wasn't super elite.

Other guys had great teammates and coaches of course but they were also clearly the best player on their rosters at all times. Can we say the same about Curry, and if we cannot can we put him over guys like Russell, KG, Dirk, Wade, Kobe, etc?

If your argument against 2016 Curry is his lacklustre playoffs performance and Draymond outperforming him in playoff +/-, why pick 2015 as Curry's peak instead of 2017? Curry's best playoffs performance across pretty much every stat came in 2017 and he also had one of the best raw +/- postseason run of all time that year. Draymond was far ahead of Curry in playoff on/off in 2015.

I wouldn't vote for Curry's peak yet either but it doesn't make sense to have 2015 as "clearly" his best season over 2017 when you seem to value playoffs performance and specifically +/- highly.

2017 was just so blatantly stacked he was dealing with next to no defensive pressure when compared to anyone else good enough to be mentioned here. KD had a 68 TS% in that postseason, on a regular stacked team like the 2016 Thunder right before then he had a 54 TS%.

2015 is a solid high MVP/low tier ATG level regular season, and a superstar level postseason. His Finals was meh, but not bad and his performance in most series was good but he didn't play any starting PGs outside of hobbled Conley. I'm not saying that's some amazing year it's just better than a year where he had a GOAT level regular season, only to get completely shutdown in the Finals so bad people created an injury to claim he was hurt (he played perfectly fine against Portland and OKC, the injury was only relevant when Kyrie was making him look bad) and a season where his team was incredibly stacked to the point where he was able to enjoy luxuries no other player in league history outside of KD that same year has gotten a chance to enjoy.

[E-Balla]

So, what are the arguments against Curry?! Your personal vision?

Sent from my CLT-L09 using RealGM mobile app

No, it's actually analyzing how he performs in the playoffs relative to how other players perform in the playoffs and seeing if his drop in numbers are more than there's. No observation made in basketball comes without comparing the performance to what's expected. For example in a league where the average player shoots 30% from 3 35% shooting is better than it is in a league where average is 40%. For a quick example of Curry vs others let's use Kobe who isn't the greatest playoff performer himself, but isn't bad by any means:

Kobe Bryant 08-10 in RS: 27.4 PTS / 5.1 AST / 5.6 TRB with 56.1 TS%

Kobe Bryant 08-10 in the PS: 29.8 PTS / 5.5 AST / 5.7 TRB with 56.9 TS%

That's mid level for the guys we're talking about. We can look at guys like Wade, T-Mac, CP3, Iverson, Miller, Allen, IT, Westbrook, Payton, Kidd, Nash, etc. and their regular season numbers compared to their postseason numbers and see Curry doesn't come out looking better than any of them.

[LA Bird]

2017 was just so blatantly stacked he was dealing with next to no defensive pressure when compared to anyone else good enough to be mentioned here. KD had a 68 TS% in that postseason, on a regular stacked team like the 2016 Thunder right before then he had a 54 TS%.

2015 is a solid high MVP/low tier ATG level regular season, and a superstar level postseason. His Finals was meh, but not bad and his performance in most series was good but he didn't play any starting PGs outside of hobbled Conley. I'm not saying that's some amazing year it's just better than a year where he had a GOAT level regular season, only to get completely shutdown in the Finals so bad people created an injury to claim he was hurt (he played perfectly fine against Portland and OKC, the injury was only relevant when Kyrie was making him look bad) and a season where his team was incredibly stacked to the point where he was able to enjoy luxuries no other player in league history outside of KD that same year has gotten a chance to enjoy.

Whose peaks do you consider 2017 Curry to be comparable to then? Is there anything more Curry could have done that season for you to rank it above 2015 as his peak or was the Warriors being super stacked simply a dealbreaker?

I don't think you are giving 2017 Curry enough credit by just waving it off because of how stacked the team was. Durant missed a sizeable chunk of the season and the team marched on with a 10+ SRS without him. The 2017 Warriors with Curry minus Durant (+14.7 in RS, +23.4 in PO) was far better than with Durant minus Curry (+2.7 in RS, -5.4 in PO). Curry was not only selfless enough to accommodate Durant, he maintained his impact in the new team to show that he was still the engine behind their offensive success, not just somebody who benefited from it. He had the luxury of playing on a stacked team but we have seen teams with a lot of talent underperform and not realize their full potential due to personality clashes and poor fit in playing style.

[Mavericksfan]

2017 was just so blatantly stacked he was dealing with next to no defensive pressure when compared to anyone else good enough to be mentioned here. KD had a 68 TS% in that postseason, on a regular stacked team like the 2016 Thunder right before then he had a 54 TS%.

I’m sorry but this is incorrect. Durant was the one benefitting from the gravity Curry brings. We watched for 3 staight seasons teams would rather allow Durant 1 on 1 opportunities vs allowing Curry to roam free.

Same dynamic between Shaq and Kobe. Shaq took pressure off of Kobe not the other way around.

[E-Balla]

Whose peaks do you consider 2017 Curry to be comparable to then? Is there anything more Curry could have done that season for you to rank it above 2015 as his peak or was the Warriors being super stacked simply a dealbreaker?

If Curry had a clearly better regular season or improved his game tangibly I'd rank 2017 over 2015 but he actually had what's his worst regular season of the last 5 years (when ignoring injuries).

As for comparable peaks it's not that much worse than Curry's peak so it's like McAdoo, Barkley level IMO.

I don't think you are giving 2017 Curry enough credit by just waving it off because of how stacked the team was. Durant missed a sizeable chunk of the season and the team marched on with a 10+ SRS without him.

They had a 10+ SRS without him in 2015 and 16 too, I'm not seeing that as a compelling argument for 2017 when his numbers were worse.

The 2017 Warriors with Curry minus Durant (+14.7 in RS, +23.4 in PO) was far better than with Durant minus Curry (+2.7 in RS, -5.4 in PO). Curry was not only selfless enough to accommodate Durant, he maintained his impact in the new team to show that he was still the engine behind their offensive success, not just somebody who benefited from it. He had the luxury of playing on a stacked team but we have seen teams with a lot of talent underperform and not realize their full potential due to personality clashes and poor fit in playing style.

This is an argument for Curry over KD, not really a good argument for why it's his best season.

[Sublime187]

I'm actually surprised Bird got in before Hakeem and Russell. Nothing outlandish of course but still.

[LA Bird]

Whose peaks do you consider 2017 Curry to be comparable to then? Is there anything more Curry could have done that season for you to rank it above 2015 as his peak or was the Warriors being super stacked simply a dealbreaker?

If Curry had a clearly better regular season or improved his game tangibly I'd rank 2017 over 2015 but he actually had what's his worst regular season of the last 5 years (when ignoring injuries).

As for comparable peaks it's not that much worse than Curry's peak so it's like McAdoo, Barkley level IMO.

So you don't rank 2016 Curry highly mainly because of postseason performances but the only one time when he did have an all time level postseason performance, it is the regular season that matters? How valuable is the RS advantage of 2015 over 2017 when Curry couldn't sustain that level of performance in the playoffs as we have seen time and time throughout his career? Ignoring injury, I would rank 15~17 Curry as RS: 16 >> 15 > 17 and PO: 17 >> 15 > 16. If the regular season performance is so important that you would rank 2015 over 2017, I think you would also have to rank 2016 over 2015.

McAdoo is an interesting mention. I would personally rank 15 Curry around Barkley level but 17 Curry even higher.

I don't think you are giving 2017 Curry enough credit by just waving it off because of how stacked the team was. Durant missed a sizeable chunk of the season and the team marched on with a 10+ SRS without him.

They had a 10+ SRS without him in 2015 and 16 too, I'm not seeing that as a compelling argument for 2017 when his numbers were worse.

The 2017 Warriors with Curry minus Durant (+14.7 in RS, +23.4 in PO) was far better than with Durant minus Curry (+2.7 in RS, -5.4 in PO). Curry was not only selfless enough to accommodate Durant, he maintained his impact in the new team to show that he was still the engine behind their offensive success, not just somebody who benefited from it. He had the luxury of playing on a stacked team but we have seen teams with a lot of talent underperform and not realize their full potential due to personality clashes and poor fit in playing style.

This is an argument for Curry over KD, not really a good argument for why it's his best season.

The 15/16 Warriors were 10+ SRS too but more of that margin is coming from Draymond than in 17. Per 48 minutes,
In 2015, Curry minus Dray was +8.1 while Dray minus Curry was +5.1.
In 2017, Curry minus Dray was +15.9 while Dray minus Curry was +2.7.
Weighing the playoffs more heavily, one could easily argue Draymond was more valuable than Curry in 15/16. You can't make that case in 17 because Curry was the clear +/- leader of the team from start to end. In 2017, Curry was decidely the most impactful player on the team (over either Draymond or Durant), the team was at its peak, and he had the only playoff run of his career where he improved from RS to PO. I would take that over the RS box score advantage 2015 Curry has over 2017.

[90sAllDecade]

Good lord, so much for objectivity and balance.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, I wasn't involved so I can't judge but this list is tough to respect.

Oh well, it is what it is don't mind me, I''ll contribute another time.

[E-Balla]

So you don't rank 2016 Curry highly mainly because of postseason performances but the only one time when he did have an all time level postseason performance, it is the regular season that matters? How valuable is the RS advantage of 2015 over 2017 when Curry couldn't sustain that level of performance in the playoffs as we have seen time and time throughout his career? Ignoring injury, I would rank 15~17 Curry as RS: 16 >> 15 > 17 and PO: 17 >> 15 > 16. If the regular season performance is so important that you would rank 2015 over 2017, I think you would also have to rank 2016 over 2015.

McAdoo is an interesting mention. I would personally rank 15 Curry around Barkley level but 17 Curry even higher.

So when you notice Curry playing way outside of his usual in 2017, the thought should be why. To me when looking at it, and especially when looking for a why it's obvious Curry performs well against teams that are overwhelmed by that offense and his game. Once a team with enough defenders to cover Curry and the rest of the team comes along he struggles similar to how Dirk had his fatal flaw against smaller guys but less exploitable considering the team Steph was on. The Cavs weren't amazing on D but they had Tristan Thompson who can reasonably switch on Curry and allows them to defend all the Warriors at once. The other teams Golden State have played without KD (excluding the Raptors) haven't had that, how'd he perform in those situations? Well take out Curry's Finals series and the first 2 games he played in 2016 where he was injured and he's averaged:

30.4/5.9/6.5 on 62.4 TS% with a 120 ORTG and 28.6 PER in 29 games.

That's in line with his numbers in 2017 (slightly less efficient, slightly lower PER, more ppg). His Finals numbers in those 3 years against opponents that weren't overwhelmed?

26.2/5.1/5.3 on 58.8 TS% with a 109 ORTG and 20.8 PER in 19 games.

And I'm confident saying it's a trend now after 3 Finals series without KD against tough defenses that could key in on him. He might've avoided that weakness in 2017, but I don't think it makes his postseason performance actually better, it just means he got favorable matchups (I will acknowledge that yes, every matchup ever would be favorable with that squad).

The 15/16 Warriors were 10+ SRS too but more of that margin is coming from Draymond than in 17. Per 48 minutes,
In 2015, Curry minus Dray was +8.1 while Dray minus Curry was +5.1.
In 2017, Curry minus Dray was +15.9 while Dray minus Curry was +2.7.
Weighing the playoffs more heavily, one could easily argue Draymond was more valuable than Curry in 15/16. You can't make that case in 17 because Curry was the clear +/- leader of the team from start to end. In 2017, Curry was decidely the most impactful player on the team (over either Draymond or Durant), the team was at its peak, and he had the only playoff run of his career where he improved from RS to PO. I would take that over the RS box score advantage 2015 Curry has over 2017.

That's ignoring the overlap between KD and Dray and what it did to Draymond's impact. There's not many meaningful minutes Curry played without Dray and KD or Dray played without Curry and KD anyway, IIRC KD was the one playing alone of the trio most often but I would be interested in seeing those numbers.

[freethedevil]

So you don't rank 2016 Curry highly mainly because of postseason performances but the only one time when he did have an all time level postseason performance, it is the regular season that matters? How valuable is the RS advantage of 2015 over 2017 when Curry couldn't sustain that level of performance in the playoffs as we have seen time and time throughout his career? Ignoring injury, I would rank 15~17 Curry as RS: 16 >> 15 > 17 and PO: 17 >> 15 > 16. If the regular season performance is so important that you would rank 2015 over 2017, I think you would also have to rank 2016 over 2015.

McAdoo is an interesting mention. I would personally rank 15 Curry around Barkley level but 17 Curry even higher.

So when you notice Curry playing way outside of his usual in 2017, the thought should be why. To me when looking at it, and especially when looking for a why it's obvious Curry performs well against teams that are overwhelmed by that offense and his game. Once a team with enough defenders to cover Curry and the rest of the team comes along

Oh so like... two teams in the last 5 years?

Which ATG attacker in recent history hasn't had teams that couldn't greatly limit the effectiveness of his game? Do you think 2015 curry would have fared significantly better?



I'm also not sure what the relevancy of assist #'s are. Curry got 4 assists against an ATG defence in the raps(their affect on playoff offences was only second to the pistons) during game 2 but created 13 scoring opportunities. Unless the point of playmaking isn't to make it easier for your teammates to score, other players eating up his assists on heaviest passing team in the league shouldn't matter. Even when his scoring goes down against a single team built and tactically inclined to stopping him, his creation remains immensely impactful.

[euroleague]

Amazing how many people ITT didn't actually watch the Playoffs in '16.

Curry had a an injured MCL. The game after he came back, he couldn't hit anything. He was clearly hobbled. He had a legendary overtime period, and went harder than he ever went before despite being injured against Portland....and managed to play at an "ok" level against OKC... therefor, he's healthy? We already know he had a sprained MCL. Have you ever sprained your MCL? It's science, and if you knew anything about medicine, you wouldn't have to even watch the games to know he's not healthy.

Saying he had a few ok series (not as good as his regular season) despite being injured - then saying because of that clearly the injury wasn't a factor - is laughable.

What a joke.

The stats here are so blatantly cherry picked, with excuses like "these teams weren't overwhelmed offensively, so only these stats are important", it's an insult to my brain to even read these...

[Gibson22]

I will open the next thread when the time is up (and vote before that time)

[E-Balla]

Oh so like... two teams in the last 5 years?

I mean 2 of them beat him in the Finals including the biggest upset ever, and the other took 2 games with LeBron being the only player of note on their offense. Plus it's not only one team that can stop him, he's just only faced one a year. If he saw a full strength San Antonio in either 2016 or 2017 I'd bet they'd do the same to him.

Which ATG attacker in recent history hasn't had teams that couldn't greatly limit the effectiveness of his game? Do you think 2015 curry would have fared significantly better?

Of guys not yet voted in Dwyane Wade immediately comes to mind immediately. Chris Paul is another one (his injuries are a whole different issue). There's tons of guys. Now I don't think 2015 Curry would do better. He'd probably do just as good if thrown on the 17 Warriors. The reason I'm taking 2015 Curry is because his regular season is considerably better. The 2017 regular season was the only time Steph ran hot and "cold" (cold being shooting under 40% for extended periods in the case of Curry).

I'm also not sure what the relevancy of assist #'s are. Curry got 4 assists against an ATG defence in the raps(their affect on playoff offences was only second to the pistons) during game 2 but created 13 scoring opportunities. Unless the point of playmaking isn't to make it easier for your teammates to score, other players eating up his assists on heaviest passing team in the league shouldn't matter. Even when his scoring goes down against a single team built and tactically inclined to stopping him, his creation remains immensely impactful.

I'm not sure why it's not relevant to include all available numbers? Why would I exclude information at all?

And is Curry suddenly not making an impact when he's not passing the ball? We're comparing Curry to himself, unless you think he suddenly stops creating scoring opportunities without the ball when he's passing, it's relevant to bring up a rise, drop, or lack of a rise/drop in his numbers.

[Mavericksfan]

Good lord, so much for objectivity and balance.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, I wasn't involved so I can't judge but this list is tough to respect.

Oh well, it is what it is don't mind me, I''ll contribute another time.

What is wrong with the list? I dont necesarrily agree with the order but these are the players that belong in the discussion.

At the top it’s all splitting hairs anyway.

[freethedevil]

I mean 2 of them beat him in the Finals including the biggest upset ever, and the other took 2 games with LeBron being the only player of note on their offense. Plus it's not only one team that can stop him, he's just only faced one a year. If he saw a full strength San Antonio in either 2016 or 2017 I'd bet they'd do the same to him.

That "biggest upset" ever doesn't happen if his team's best defender isn't suspended and they sustain multiple injuries. Citing one as an example against curry and using the other against curry is woefully disingenuous. Especially because Curry was coming off injuries that affected his play.

Of guys not yet voted in Dwyane Wade immediately comes to mind immediately. Chris Paul is another one (his injuries are a whole different issue). There's tons of guys. Now I don't think 2015 Curry would do better. He'd probably do just as good if thrown on the 17 Warriors. The reason I'm taking 2015 Curry is because his regular season is considerably better. The 2017 regular season was the only time Steph ran hot and "cold" (cold being shooting under 40% for extended periods in the case of Curry).

Huh? Chris Paul has failed to have an amazing impact on defences multiple times. Ditto for wade who only avoided failure in his prime with shaq and lbj as co stars. Lebron himself has been rendered less effective against zone and struggled mightily for stretches against the spurs in 2013. Jordan, even on his title runs encountered defences which greatly lowered his effiency and was given the giannis treatment against the pistons. Two teams being able to draw blood from an otherwise dominant team doesn't make curry any different from basically any atg ever.

I'm not sure why it's not relevant to include all available numbers? Why would I exclude information at all?

You are though?

And is Curry suddenly not making an impact when he's not passing the ball? We're comparing Curry to himself, unless you think he suddenly stops creating scoring opportunities without the ball when he's passing, it's relevant to bring up a rise, drop, or lack of a rise/drop in his numbers.

Uh, 2015 Curry hadn't led the league in effiency and volume yet. 2015 Curry was not shooting threes as far back as 2016 curry was. Defences didn't shift themselves to defend curry the way they did 2016 onwards in 2015. Hence he didn't create as much. 2017 Curry had the biggest effect on teammate ts in 2017 league wide and led the 2016 nba in box creation. I don't see how 2015 curry was on the same level as a playmaker.

[freethedevil]

Good lord, so much for objectivity and balance.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, I wasn't involved so I can't judge but this list is tough to respect.

Oh well, it is what it is don't mind me, I''ll contribute another time.

What is wrong with the list? I dont necesarrily agree with the order but these are the players that belong in the discussion.

At the top it’s all splitting hairs anyway.

Such posters are not worth wasting words on.

[Gibson22]

1) Bill Russell 64
2) Bill Russell 65

It's always a bit of a bummer when players that have a legit chance (I mean, also when it comes to the voting) at going like #4 or #5 get ripeatedly screwed over by a bunch of votes, mainly because the guys that voted them in the previous threads just didn't get to vote them the next times.
Anyway, I would have put russell at five but I would have seen him better in the 3-4 range than in the 8-9, and I can't really see an argument for duncan or bird above him, I can actually see it more for hakeem, curry or jerry west than those two. I'm choosing 2 of his consensus best seasons.

3) Hakeem 94. With Hakeem it's obviously between 93 and 94, with his 93 season being considered a slightly better defensive season, but I'm putting his best playoffs over his best two way season.

The two goat defenders