Rob Parker: Curry NOT a transcendent player, NOT that guy

[WarriorGM]

That's literally the definition of special pleading. You've been doing it this whole time.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/special-pleading

It's outcome based. It doesn't matter what excuse you want to drone on about. He didn't have good enough team success to win multiple playoff rounds and he didn't have good enough individual success to garner awards in those years.

I'm sorry, I don't think he's transcendent. The unanimous MVP is his signature achievement, I give him a lot of credit for that, but I think he is truly a product of his era and not the other way around.

What kind of drivel is this? One learns new sophistry everyday!

It's outcome based? Well what else should conclusions be based on if not outcomes? Usain Bolt sets the 100m dash world record time. Expert says he's not really the fastest man on earth [for reasons]. Is contesting the "expert" based on the world record time "special pleading"?

I have another fallacy for you to look up: appeal to authority.

You're not following my conversation. I said it's outcome based because the person I was talking to kept saying things like, "Curry deserved this award this year even though he didn't get it." Meaning when it comes to being a transcendent player, one of the 20 best of all time, it doesn't matter what the reason was you did get it, only the outcome matters. I know my fallacies very well. I don't know what authority you think I'm appealing to. All these Curry stans love using the appeal to popularity though.

My apologies if I didn't quite get the thread of your conversation. But I will say this: when you look at statistics and winning, Curry is an outlier and that is based on numbers taken from results on the court not opinion based awards. A sixth seed beating a third seed in the playoffs causing an upset is uncommon. A team winning 67 games in the regular season is a rarity. A team winning a championship in its first appearance in an NBA finals is exceptional. A team winning 73 games in the regular season is singular. A team having three consecutive 67-win seasons in a row is unprecedented. A team going 16-1 in the playoffs is nonpareil. These are numbers not compared just to one season but to all of NBA history. That is what Curry is associated with: achievements that are rarer than an NBA championship. In the realm of basketball achievements he has produced outlier after outlier after outlier. Don't bother arguing about Curry on the basis of All-Star games appearances, those are cheap Chinese knockoffs or candy that they hand out every year compared to what Curry has.

[Galloisdaman]

Which to me is a top 15 all time guy and 2nd best pg all time. If he wins another ring then he’s in the top 10 imo.

So how far off are we?

I have no problem saying he isn’t as good as lebron or Jordan although you could say he’s had just as big an impact on the game.

We're quite far off.

I've always been someone who really valued the older eras, defense, and longevity. I don't value rings as much as others. Barring something crazy he's not going to win another ring. The vast majority of the Steph Curry story has already been written. He's a player who was a product of his era and fit it perfectly and had an all-time great offensive peak. His unanimous MVP is his signature achievement and it's one of the very best single seasons ever, but he'll always be remembered as someone who, when there were times when he could have made his legacy much greater, failed. He was never outstanding enough to be Finals MVP, and I do take marks off for the fact that without KD we really don't know how those two years play out. He's not going to have very good counting stats or career awards compared to others in the top 30. He has never done anything at an elite level other than scoring. His defense is meh. I have never felt he was a particularly good leader.

I have him around 25th-30th right now; I acknowledge it's much more arguable towards the end of my list that's why I gave a range.

In No Order.

Bob Pettit
Bob Cousy
Bill Russell
Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Moses Malone
Larry Bird
Magic Johnson
Michael Jordan
Karl Malone
Tim Duncan
LeBron James
Kevin Durant
Kobe Bryant
Shaquille O'Neal
Hakeem Olajuwon
Dirk Nowitzki
Kevin Garnett
Julius Erving
Jerry West
Oscar Robertson
David Robinson
Rick Barry
Elgin Baylor
Scottie Pippen
Chris Paul
John Stockton

If Harden wins a ring as #1a/1b I'd have him ahead of Curry too.

Ok I can respect that opinion but to me it feels like you have penalized curry for what you are about to give harden credit for. I also get that he has fallen short in some moments but you could say the same thing for everyone on your list, in some cases far more egregious bad performances.

I couldn’t comment on some of the guys before the 80s as I just haven’t seen them (Cousy, petit etc) but I just don’t see how cp3, Stockton, pippen, Robinson can be considered better... for sure 5-10 after that are arguable like nowistki, Durant,Garnett and fair enough people have different opinions.

In terms of leadership, there are different styles. Personally think he should have reigned in draymond more but he leads by example, always 100% effort on both sides and plays the game the right way. Again, many on your list have leadership shortcomings.

I think where we differ though is I don’t think he is a product of the era. I think his style is the era, he broke the mould and ushered in the 3pt era.

I would also say I think he has kind of killed off the traditional PG role. Almost everyone emerging is in his mould.

If he stays on the warriors then maybe the story is done, personally think it would be fantastic to see him on a good but not stacked team make a run and see where it goes.

Robinson, Dirk and Durant were better than Curry. The rest I agree with you on.

[fianchetto]

That's literally the definition of special pleading. You've been doing it this whole time.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/special-pleading

It's outcome based. It doesn't matter what excuse you want to drone on about. He didn't have good enough team success to win multiple playoff rounds and he didn't have good enough individual success to garner awards in those years.

I'm sorry, I don't think he's transcendent. The unanimous MVP is his signature achievement, I give him a lot of credit for that, but I think he is truly a product of his era and not the other way around.

What kind of drivel is this? One learns new sophistry everyday!

It's outcome based? Well what else should conclusions be based on if not outcomes? Usain Bolt sets the 100m dash world record time. Expert says he's not really the fastest man on earth [for reasons]. Is contesting the "expert" based on the world record time "special pleading"?

I have another fallacy for you to look up: appeal to authority.

+1 for "sophistry" love that word. Not taking sides on this just appreciate good arguments.

[beantownski]

Rob Barker is one of the worst sport "journalists" out there. He just says dumb stuff on purpose now. He did when he tried not before too, but now it's deliberate. His next step is to just paint his face, put on a wig, and a red nose to complete his transformation.

[The_Hater]

Read on Twitter

the team does suck post Durant, so maybe he does have a point.

You and your anti-Curry posts. Didn’t you learn anything from that thread during the first week of the season which only made you look foolish?

Just for the record, the Warriors were really, really good before Durant ever got there. Curry had won a championship, Durant had not. Since Durant has never won a crown without Curry but Curry has without KD, maybe he doesn’t have a point. Or he just makes really bad points.

[NO-KG-AI]

I think LeBron is the only transcendent player playing right now, but I don’t throw that word around much. We’ll see with some of the younger guys.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[fianchetto]

I think LeBron is the only transcendent player playing right now, but I don’t throw that word around much. We’ll see with some of the younger guys.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Agreed. But in his prime Curry was playing that way too. Man was godly (minus the dancing)

[Woodsanity]

Warriors loss 77-130 against the Raptors a bad team this season when Curry was out.

Rob Parker is one of the worst analyst ever too btw....

[Sedale Threatt]

We have so many weird-ass debates in American sports. Stuff like the GOAT or Top 10 lists are one thing. But whether or not, say, particular teams qualify as "dynasties" has always struck me as so pointless. Or whether or not a player is "transcendent." I don't know if this kind of arbitrary and useless labeling happens anywhere else in the world.

I also have no idea why people pay so much attention to people like this, Smith, Bayless, etc. None of these guys believe half the sh*t they say. They're just trying to provoke responses, and unfortunately, as you can see by this thread, it works.

[WarriorGM]

We have so many weird-ass debates in American sports. Stuff like the GOAT or Top 10 lists are one thing. But whether or not, say, particular teams qualify as "dynasties" has always struck me as so pointless. Or whether or not a player is "transcendent." I don't know if this kind of arbitrary and useless labeling happens anywhere else in the world.

I also have no idea why people pay so much attention to people like this, Smith, Bayless, etc. None of these guys believe half the sh*t they say. They're just trying to provoke responses, and unfortunately, as you can see by this thread, it works.

Welcome to the world of the sports Kardashians.

[Biff]

Team went 73-9 without Durant but Curry sucks? Interesting.

[Galloisdaman]

While I think Durant is the better player Curry is only current player to make my "dream team". That is the team I would want if I had to pick a team to play with each other not the best players.

C- Drob
PF-Duncan
SF-Bird
SG-Jordan
PG-Curry

Curry over Magic because I would want his lights out shooting for all the wide open shots he would get from the other 4 guys.

[bovice]

you don't understand basketball and I don't care to explain it. curry's style of play isn't an imposing one. he fluked his way to his first ring because everyone else was injured and kd carried him the other 2 times. those teams were not beating Lebron without kd. stop posting with emotion, my argument is a logical one.

No, it's you who doesn't understand basketball. How in the hell does someone "fluke" their way to a ring? Let me guess, he also fluked his way to back-to-back MVPs in an era with peak Lebron, KD and Kawhi, too?

He fluked his way to five consecutive finals coming from the Western Conference. Am I using the word "fluke" right? Can someone check?

I didn't say that. re read what I said

[Memories]

I both agree and disagree.

Curry did change the game as we know it today. The dude is going to go down as the greatest shooter of all time, and will go down as such for quite a while.

However, the dude couldn't even win a Finals MVP over a 6th man who was also out of his prime in 2015. And is clearly an inferior player in the playoffs compared to the regular season. So on the biggest stage, he often had teammates that simply outshined him.

Kevin Durant, as much hate as he gets on a personal level, he was, is, and will always be the better and more transcendent talent. Kevin Durant is the human living cheat code on a Basketball court. Curry as great as he is, can be stopped and is more limited than even a Durant after his Achilles/ACL injuries.

[bovice]

you don't understand basketball and I don't care to explain it. curry's style of play isn't an imposing one. he fluked his way to his first ring because everyone else was injured and kd carried him the other 2 times. those teams were not beating Lebron without kd. stop posting with emotion, my argument is a logical one.

No, it's you who doesn't understand basketball. How in the hell does someone "fluke" their way to a ring? Let me guess, he also fluked his way to back-to-back MVPs in an era with peak Lebron, KD and Kawhi, too?

This is basically the crux of the disagreement. Some people feel intuitively or by the eye test that curry can’t be better than KD or harden etc

This is despite all the accolades and stats that back his greatness up.

They look at the fact that he is the single most efficient volume scorer in nba history and it doesn’t gel with the fact that he’s scrawny and can’t do things physically that KD can do. It’s hard for some people to comprehend. This is despite the fact that he’s beaten many of these guys including KD head to head with equal supporting casts.

It’s the same with his playoff performance reputation, he has 1-2 bad games in big moments and some people are willing to ignore the body of evidence that gives him a top ten all time playoff scoring average. He’s held to a totally different standard to other superstars and all time talent. Lebron missed the playoffs with the lakers and of course it’s not lebron. But curry misses the playoffs in his second year and people act like it invalidates his whole career.

The haters have a hard time accepting the stats, accolades and accomplishments because they can’t understand how someone without the otherworldly athletic ability could be dominating the game like he does.

Which leaves you with the above, no real argument made, just empty phrases like fluke etc

I mean you don't have to take my word for it. you'll see steph struggle to make it past the first round for the rest of his career. just watch. if your only weapon is a jump shot, that's not reliable enough to carry a team in the playoffs. steph plays great in the regular season because defenses aren't as tough and his legs stay fresh. you take away any of the other players I listed's best weapon and they can beat you in other ways.

[Metallikid]

What kind of drivel is this? One learns new sophistry everyday!

It's outcome based? Well what else should conclusions be based on if not outcomes? Usain Bolt sets the 100m dash world record time. Expert says he's not really the fastest man on earth [for reasons]. Is contesting the "expert" based on the world record time "special pleading"?

I have another fallacy for you to look up: appeal to authority.

You're not following my conversation. I said it's outcome based because the person I was talking to kept saying things like, "Curry deserved this award this year even though he didn't get it." Meaning when it comes to being a transcendent player, one of the 20 best of all time, it doesn't matter what the reason was you did get it, only the outcome matters. I know my fallacies very well. I don't know what authority you think I'm appealing to. All these Curry stans love using the appeal to popularity though.

My apologies if I didn't quite get the thread of your conversation. But I will say this: when you look at statistics and winning, Curry is an outlier and that is based on numbers taken from results on the court not opinion based awards. A sixth seed beating a third seed in the playoffs causing an upset is uncommon. A team winning 67 games in the regular season is a rarity. A team winning a championship in its first appearance in an NBA finals is exceptional. A team winning 73 games in the regular season is singular. A team having three consecutive 67-win seasons in a row is unprecedented. A team going 16-1 in the playoffs is nonpareil. These are numbers not compared just to one season but to all of NBA history. That is what Curry is associated with: achievements that are rarer than an NBA championship. In the realm of basketball achievements he has produced outlier after outlier after outlier. Don't bother arguing about Curry on the basis of All-Star games appearances, those are cheap Chinese knockoffs or candy that they hand out every year compared to what Curry has.

I do disagree, but I will give you a lot of credit for arguing it better than most do. They just say, 'he changed the game.'

And just for the record I was paying a lot more attention to All-NBA than I did to All-Star appearances.

[DoItALL9]

Hot take

This team of non-shooters would be worse with LeBron instead of Curry.

Sent from my LM-G710 using RealGM mobile app

[DB23]

No, it's you who doesn't understand basketball. How in the hell does someone "fluke" their way to a ring? Let me guess, he also fluked his way to back-to-back MVPs in an era with peak Lebron, KD and Kawhi, too?

This is basically the crux of the disagreement. Some people feel intuitively or by the eye test that curry can’t be better than KD or harden etc

This is despite all the accolades and stats that back his greatness up.

They look at the fact that he is the single most efficient volume scorer in nba history and it doesn’t gel with the fact that he’s scrawny and can’t do things physically that KD can do. It’s hard for some people to comprehend. This is despite the fact that he’s beaten many of these guys including KD head to head with equal supporting casts.

It’s the same with his playoff performance reputation, he has 1-2 bad games in big moments and some people are willing to ignore the body of evidence that gives him a top ten all time playoff scoring average. He’s held to a totally different standard to other superstars and all time talent. Lebron missed the playoffs with the lakers and of course it’s not lebron. But curry misses the playoffs in his second year and people act like it invalidates his whole career.

The haters have a hard time accepting the stats, accolades and accomplishments because they can’t understand how someone without the otherworldly athletic ability could be dominating the game like he does.

Which leaves you with the above, no real argument made, just empty phrases like fluke etc

I mean you don't have to take my word for it. you'll see steph struggle to make it past the first round for the rest of his career. just watch. if your only weapon is a jump shot, that's not reliable enough to carry a team in the playoffs. steph plays great in the regular season because defenses aren't as tough and his legs stay fresh. you take away any of the other players I listed's best weapon and they can beat you in other ways.

I’m not sure what you mean. His jump shot has already carried a team to a championship. You’re basically stating he can’t do something he’s already demonstrated.

[dhsilv2]

Robinson, Dirk and Durant were better than Curry. The rest I agree with you on.

I'll never understand this KD over Curry stuff. They played on the same team and it imo was unquestionable that Curry was better. Every metric and algorithm with them on or off the court clearly showed this and the eye test was just as clear. It's so hard to compare guys from different eras and on different teams. But we saw these two in their prime together and it wasn't questionable who was better in terms of making their team better.

[dhsilv2]

We have so many weird-ass debates in American sports. Stuff like the GOAT or Top 10 lists are one thing. But whether or not, say, particular teams qualify as "dynasties" has always struck me as so pointless. Or whether or not a player is "transcendent." I don't know if this kind of arbitrary and useless labeling happens anywhere else in the world.

I also have no idea why people pay so much attention to people like this, Smith, Bayless, etc. None of these guys believe half the sh*t they say. They're just trying to provoke responses, and unfortunately, as you can see by this thread, it works.

Eh, we could get into real politics where there are some weird topics. We could get into economic politics where things get worse. We could get into conspiracy theory where things get so crazy you wonder how humanity is still alive.