Post#54 » by ccameron » Sun Nov 29, 2020 5:20 pm
Not sure if it's appropriate for me to vote because, full disclosure, I'm kind of jumping in because I think Wade should be getting more traction and want to open that discussion, but here is what I would vote, count it or don't count it:
1.Dwyane Wade
2. Chris Paul
3. Steph Curry
Just so you know, I see arguments for these three going in any order. All three have injury issues, especially in the playoffs, so that isn't a distinguishing factor for them. It comes down to peak and longevity, and I can see these three any order.
1. Dwyane Wade
Wade I think is not getting enough traction as I think he should. His peak was all time level, with the ability to raise his game in big moments like few players could. His ability to get to the rim in the half court is possibly second to none, and he did it for most of his prime in an era and on a team with no spacing and heavily congested paint. It's annoying to say a player from the past would be better today, but in Wade's case, he really would have a field day with the amount of spacing at the rim today. Which is why it's a shame a lot of people think he wouldn't be great today because he hardly shot 3s. And why it's also unfair to compare %FG at the rim with modern players -- very likely Wade's TS% and FG% would be higher if he played today.
I don't understand the point some have made that his success in '06 somehow taints the perception of him or gives him credit he didn't deserve, as Doctor MJ suggested. Dirk's ring in '11 might have made people realize how good he was, but that doesn't mean that ring gave him credit he didn't deserve. Especially since it's arguable Wade's '06 finals may not even be his best playoff series. A player doesn't rise to that occasion and take that kind of pressure down 2 games to none because of some fluke. He was an all time resilient playoff performer, which isn't reflected in his career stats because he made deep playoff runs when he was past his prime and injured alongside Lebron.
He is getting unfairly criticized for not leading all time offenses, when it is clear he has been on defensive minded teams his whole career, has never had a team that was catered to his offensive capabilities. Comparing the success of his offense with more modern players like Harden or Curry, who have had teams molded around their talents, is just not the right way to think of him. Had he played on teams like Harden, Curry, or Lebron in the second half of his career, there is every reason to think that his combination of attacking and passing would produce excellent offenses. Other underrated aspects of Wade's career is that he was much more portable than he is given credit for. Spoelstra called Wade a chameleon because of his ability to play any role he was asked. And it's surprising to me that more people don't recognize that he probably played more roles throughout his career than any other superstar -- he played the Kobe role of playing alongside a big man in Shaq (and throughout his career he played very well alongside a traditional big man), floor raiser on a trash team, and, what was perhaps the hardest thing of all, completely changed his game to play alongside Lebron, who occupied the exact space Wade was used to occupying. when Wade was healthy, that pairing was all time great -- think of mid season 2012 and mid-season 2013, when Wade was still healthy and close to prime. It's a shame people only remember injured Wade in the later playoffs, who didn't quite work well with Lebron because of those injuries (not because he couldn't adapt). Despite the lack of a 3 point shot, he had a very good off-ball game because of his slashing and his ability to "ghost" his defenders by catching them ball watching.
What is bad about him is his longevity and lack of a 3 point shot -- although his percentage was not indicative of his skill -- most of his 3 pt attempts were end of shot clock and he played in an era where he was told not to even bother with it.
His defense was also a very strong point but I won't get into that now so I can say something about CP3 and Curry.
2. Chris Paul
When I started writing this post I initially put Chris Paul at #1, because he just has a massive longevity advantage at this point over both Wade and Curry. He just consistently makes teams better his whole career. Peak wise, I don't think he had that "one-man-wrecking crew" ability of Wade, or the offensive warping capability of Curry, but it was an extremely high peak. Although I take Wade and Steph at their peak, last year I just couldn't ignore the fact that he is still making teams better this late in his career. Although his personality has been questioned as a team player, I think the fact that he is a ruthless competitor is in his favor, and with the right teammates who are equally intent on winning, it wouldn't be a problem (see Jimmy Butler on the Heat).
If Chris Paul has another season where he is contributing at or near the level he was in OKC, it will be hard for me not to put him at the top. His absolute ceiling is a little lower than the other two, but it's hard to deny his impact.
3. Steph Curry
Curry has a peak which I think is at Wade's level, with one of the best offensive season of all time. I give more credit to Curry than to Durant for success of Golden state, although it's hard to split hairs there. I think Curry's 3 point shot is up there with the best ever, but what really sets him apart for me is his off-ball movement. I think the combination of the threat of his range with his off-ball movement is what sets him apart and allowed the Warriors to produce such all-time offenses. Despite injuries, healthy curry has had some great playoff performances, and his 2019 finals I think is underrated. 2017 is his best finals statistically, but 2019 showed, I think, that he was capable of keeping his team in the game even when everything seemed to go to hell -- that's what you have to expect in the playoffs. He had a couple dud games/moments, but he had some brilliant games, and he didn't crumble under those circumstances. That's important. He changed the game, and his skill allowed the Warriors to run an offense that we hadn't seen before. His defensive instincts are good but there is no getting around the fact that he can be targeted on that end, but he more than makes up for that with his GOAT level offense.
I only put him last in this group because CP3 has a much longer prime, and although his peak is the same as Wade's I think, I trust Wade in the playoffs more (also, FWIW, I don't think he has a longevity advantage over Wade yet -- same amount of prime seasons, but I value Wade's '14, '15, and '16 seasons, although clearly post prime, as all star or at least near all-star level). Some people would take issue with the idea that Wade was a better playoff performer because from a statistical point of view Curry's prime playoff seasons compare favorably or at least comparable to Wade's prime playoff runs, but again, I think taking into account the different eras, and the team constructions and emphasis, that's not telling the whole story. I can make the same argument that prime Harden's numbers in the playoffs look as good as Wade's prime numbers, but that is even less convincing. I think Wade has more playoff resiliency and is probably less dependent on having the right cast around him. That is, we've seen Curry with an all-time cast perfectly catered to his talents and centered on his ability. I don't think we ever saw that for Wade, but he still had similar success. It's not an easy or obvious comparison, but I trust Wade more.
But basically I think these three could be in any order. I know Wade is probably not gong to get a lot of traction here so it's not going to change this round, but I want to make the argument now to get people thinking more, because I think he should start to get more traction than he is getting.
