UnbelievablyRAW wrote:If I knew nothing about the rest of the roster than I’m taking Curry.
If you take Magic and end up with a team of non shooters you’ll get zoned to death. There is almost no combination of players (playing in position) I can think of that Curry couldn’t fit in with. There are combinations of teams I’d rather have Magic in though
What could Curry do with a team of non shooters? I don't see any reason to believe that Magic would fare much worse in this situation and it's not like getting shooters is a huge problem these days.
Curry needing to be guarded from anywhere passed half court means those high screens will allow anyone to be open. As long as these non shooters aren’t scrubs and can drive they will have open lanes all day
Peak Curry damn near needs 2 people watching him at all times on defense
"Above average role player is now being paid like a superstar from one good playoff series. This will end up as one of the worst contracts in the league." paulbball on Pascal Siakam
Da ThRONe wrote:Steph. Shooting is king in the NBA and he's the best shooter the game his seen.
Yes shooting/scoring in general is king today, but so is having a guy who can open the floor up to help get the ball to said shooters. That's why I'd take Magic over Curry.
Magic would draw so many double teams because of his size and speed today, and when they do that he will make them pay for it by kicking it out to that sharpshooting 3 point shooter. Plus he himself was no liability at making shots himself.
UnbelievablyRAW wrote:If I knew nothing about the rest of the roster than I’m taking Curry.
If you take Magic and end up with a team of non shooters you’ll get zoned to death. There is almost no combination of players (playing in position) I can think of that Curry couldn’t fit in with. There are combinations of teams I’d rather have Magic in though
What could Curry do with a team of non shooters? I don't see any reason to believe that Magic would fare much worse in this situation and it's not like getting shooters is a huge problem these days.
Curry needing to be guarded from anywhere passed half court means those high screens will allow anyone to be open. As long as these non shooters aren’t scrubs and can drive they will have open lanes all day
Peak Curry damn near needs 2 people watching him at all times on defense
You can always trap Curry, he's not great at dealing with them. What would you do to slow down Magic? He was way too good to be defended with single coverage, but he's way too good to send any help on him.
NbaAllDay wrote:Curry is the clear choice in todays game. You almost take Curry over anyone not named MJ or Jordan the way the game is played today. People undervalue his impact on the way the game is played. If I wanted anyone playing with LBJ in todays game for example it would be Curry over MJ, Kobe etc etc etc.
He is also more portable in todays game.
If we are talking about the 80s then Magic wins out, again it's not a fair comparison when both were the best PG's in two completely different eras and gamestyles.
No he is not... Curry has missed playoffs twice in a row now... He can't carry teams and only reason he has more championships than one is because of Durant.
He missed the playoffs twice in a row????
He played like 3 games the one year and last year his team "missed" the playoffs because of a stupid play in game. he just put a team on his back and dragged them to the playoffs, by every other reason in nba history's standards, despite his coach throwing away the first half the year trying to develop a rookie not ready to play in the nba.
Sitting out entire year because broken nail counts as missing playoffs to me. Quiter.
Pennebaker wrote:And Bird did it while being a defensive liability. But he also made All-Defensive teams, which was another controversial issue regarding Bird and votes.
JN61 wrote:No he is not... Curry has missed playoffs twice in a row now... He can't carry teams and only reason he has more championships than one is because of Durant.
He missed the playoffs twice in a row????
He played like 3 games the one year and last year his team "missed" the playoffs because of a stupid play in game. he just put a team on his back and dragged them to the playoffs, by every other reason in nba history's standards, despite his coach throwing away the first half the year trying to develop a rookie not ready to play in the nba.
Sitting out entire year because broken nail counts as missing playoffs to me. Quiter.
You can say that, but it remains wrong. When healthy Curry's teams do nothing but win.
70sFan wrote:What could Curry do with a team of non shooters? I don't see any reason to believe that Magic would fare much worse in this situation and it's not like getting shooters is a huge problem these days.
Curry needing to be guarded from anywhere passed half court means those high screens will allow anyone to be open. As long as these non shooters aren’t scrubs and can drive they will have open lanes all day
Peak Curry damn near needs 2 people watching him at all times on defense
You can always trap Curry, he's not great at dealing with them. What would you do to slow down Magic? He was way too good to be defended with single coverage, but he's way too good to send any help on him.
So in this hypothetical, you have a team of non shooters AND nobody can pass? Frankly at that point I think your team is missing the playoffs with Magic or Curry.
UnbelievablyRAW wrote: Curry needing to be guarded from anywhere passed half court means those high screens will allow anyone to be open. As long as these non shooters aren’t scrubs and can drive they will have open lanes all day
Peak Curry damn near needs 2 people watching him at all times on defense
You can always trap Curry, he's not great at dealing with them. What would you do to slow down Magic? He was way too good to be defended with single coverage, but he's way too good to send any help on him.
So in this hypothetical, you have a team of non shooters AND nobody can pass? Frankly at that point I think your team is missing the playoffs with Magic or Curry.
Curry struggled with traps even in a team with good shooters and passers. Of course his struggles are relative to someone like Magic, who couldn't be trapped successfully at all.
70sFan wrote:You can always trap Curry, he's not great at dealing with them. What would you do to slow down Magic? He was way too good to be defended with single coverage, but he's way too good to send any help on him.
So in this hypothetical, you have a team of non shooters AND nobody can pass? Frankly at that point I think your team is missing the playoffs with Magic or Curry.
Curry struggled with traps even in a team with good shooters and passers. Of course his struggles are relative to someone like Magic, who couldn't be trapped successfully at all.
I don't disagree with that you can trap him due to his questionable stupid passes and he sometimes doesn't give it up fast enough when he sees it. But if they're trapping, just run him off ball. You need passers there and then his screening and picks can often create layups for others. Its a very effective counter.
dhsilv2 wrote: This is so wrong. Curry is an elite scorer in iso and he can run a heliocentric offensive with talent and everyone sucks if their team sucks around them enough. The thing is the topic is VERSATILE!
To be the optimal versatile guy you have to be able to switch seamlessly between being a play maker AND a spacer. Those are really the two roles in the nba today. Curry can do both at an all nba level. I'm not so sure Magic can be a spacer that seamlessly. But even if he can, can he ALSO become the guy who also can make the cuts and move off ball as needed? He was NEVER that...
Your first part of your post looks like a lot of assumptions you put in my mouth so you can say they're wrong. That's an old trick.
I never said Curry is not an elite ISO scorer, I never said he can't run a heliocentric offense and of course everyone's talents will be wasted if their team sucks.
Facts are, Curry proved he is indeed an elite ISO scorer. I remember RealGM during the 13 and 14 seasons, when polls popped up every other week asking who's the most fun player to watch and the majority of the posters answered "Curry when he's in the zone is an absolute joy to watch, most fun in the league".
And his natural position is PG, so yeah he can run a heliocentric offense because he can score and playmake with the best of them.
But I don't want Curry to be with the best of them, I want Curry to be ahead of the rest, which he proved he can be when he's used as an off-the-ball warping vortex (decoy sounds a bit demeaning, and I don't think it encapsulates Curry's importance).
And his team didn't "suck" when he was used in a more traditional way under Mark Jackson, in fact it was the same team and the only meaningful change was the coach. It unlocked a level of offensive domination that it transformed the NBA landscape and redefined defenses just against that team. But the team was the same, the talent was already there. It just wasn't being used the optimal way.
System matters. Coaching matters.
I disagree with you on Magic, though. You claim you're not sure Magic would be a good enough spacer, I think he proved he can be a very good shooter, way better than some of the highly coveted 3+D guys that are being paid sweet salaries today. If you disagree with me on that, it's fine, but I think Magic's numbers -especially in the second half of his career- prove my point. He would have no problem hitting the three at an above average clip, which is what makes someone a good spacer. Moving without the ball shouldn't be a problem for someone with such unique IQ, considering he already did that in spurts like 70sFan mentioned.
Curry can be a GOAT level spacer and an all-NBA level playmaker. Magic can be an all-NBA spacer and a GOAT level playmaker. They are essentially a reverse image of each other. What makes me think Magic is more portable is that good playmakers are more scarce than spacers, so his primary skill would be more treasured.
I don't know. I won't argue with anyone who picks Curry here, because I can see the merits on that pick. I am a huge Curry fan, and I believe you will never be wrong by picking Curry for your team. It just seems to me that Magic personifies the one-man-army even better than him, and a secondary playmaker is less frequent than another shooter in that spot.
Fair enough. I would point out Kerr's system brought in Dray, who both was a better offensive player, but night and day better defender. And I'd point out small ball lineups could work in a Jackson style (a lot of teams are running that to success)...so it was more than just unlocking Curry's off ball brilliance. But the bigger point I want to draw you to is that Curry was first by a MARGIN in ORPM in 2014 and was second in RPM.
Curry was already playing like an MVP in 2014, we as fans just hadn't accepted the little guy not scoring 30 was actually THAT good yet. And this was really more my point, Curry as both the traditional point AND the off ball super charger is an MVP level player. Could magic become a better spacer than Danny Green? Yeah, I think that's reasonable...I'm not sure and I never saw it, but it's reasonable. Could he become a Ray Allen type off ball guy? I don't see that at all.
That said I'm fine with taking magic because as I said, I think a dumb coach would figure out magic a lot easier than curry. And I have to assume my roster is poor and my coach is a moron in this exercise.
Oh I'm aware that Curry had a claim to the throne before the Warriors exploded. He was that good already. His team -his system might be the more accurate term- wasn't, though, and as you said people have a hard time accepting such notions because we have problems telling the difference between player and team performance.
And yeah, no doubt Curry would excel in a heliocentric, ball-dominating system. Many teams do well with lesser PGs. But I don't wanna simply do well, I wanna beat everyone. My goal wouldn't be to build a contender, but to build a dynasty. We know both these players are perfectly capable of being the foundation of one because, well, both of them achieved it in real life. And for Curry to carry his team to several finals in a row, he needs to unlock his off-ball game. Otherwise I'm getting around 60% of Curry's potential instead of the full 100%. So when building that roster, I would comb the market looking for the best secondary ball handler I can get. That would be my primary target.
As for Magic, becoming a better spacer than Danny Green is more than enough, considering his primary role will be playmaking every time he is on the court. All I would want is opposing defenses respecting his outside shot enough to cover him when he approaches the 3 point line. As for Magic becoming a Ray Allen level spacer... Hey, I'm not a greedy guy, all I want is to keep defenses honest. Ray Allen is arguably a top 2 shooter (and spacer) ever, and IMO way better than Klay Thompson in that role. If Magic trained and suddendly were able to hit the three at Ray's clip, all I would say is GG EZ to the rest of the league for at least half a decade (minimum), and I want my rings made out of platinum instead of gold
In the end, you're right. It all comes down to what kind of team I'm getting next to my superstar. Which is why I think Magic is slightly more portable than Curry, as portable as Curry is: because decent spacers are easier to get than playmakers.
In your scenario, with a poor roster and a stupid coach, Magic is the player to get. He doesn't need a fine tuned offensive system, he just needs the ball. He is a better floor raiser than Curry.
In a different scenario, with a well built roster around my superstar's skills and a smart coach, I honestly couldn't care less. Give me either one of them and I'll get those rings. Curry's team might have a tiny potential advantage because his human torch form is less stoppable than Magic's. Curry is perfectly capable of obliterating the rival on his own if he has a hot hand no matter what the defense does. The ultimate ceiling raiser. Magic still relies on his teammates to make those shots and the law of averages kicks in, telling us that Magic's team will be more consistent but less prone to those explosions. Curry's team will have lower lows but higher highs. Again, depending on Curry. In any case, both would destroy the league, as proven by history: both destroyed the league when surrounded by a good team.
I'm taking Magic. He can play any position, and you could have him play point center in today's NBA. Also, in the NBA playoffs, height matters. Giannis has been the best player in the finals for a large part because he's 6-11. Look at the height of the Finals MVPS since 2011:
BallerTalk wrote: You mean Earvin "Magic" Johnson, the 6'9" point guard widely regarded as the best to ever play the position? Magic Johnson, the guy who has notoriously played all 5 positions on the court in the NBA? The Magic Johnson who has LITERALLY been a champion on ever level of the sport with a disparate assortment of talent around him?
You think Wardell Stephen Curry II is more versatile than that guy?
sorry, this just a myth, Magic ain't playing all 5 positions, at least not at any functional level where it's make sense..is he gonna play your off-ball 2? and do what? is he gonna be your off-ball 3? and do what? just nonsense it doesn't make any practical sense from a bball standpoint.
yes, Steph is more versatile, especially in today's NBA, it's pretty indisputable, he stretches the court in ways Magic can dream off, can play on ball and off-ball with another primary on-ball player, can score on 3 levels, can score on ball, can score off-ball, can faciliate offense, can play off facilitators, can play next to paint only bigs, can play next to stretch bigs, can set screens and cut/slash in ways Magic can't.
look at most of the top10 non Steph players in today's league
LeBron Kawhi KD Giannis Jokic Embiid Harden Dame Luka
i can make an easy and strong argument that Steph is a better fit next all these guys than Magic.
again, this aint saying Steph's better than Magic, he's not...but Steph might be the most versatile and portable player we've ever seen no cap.
With regard to Earvin, that's a matter of record. He's actually done that. You have no leg to stand on.
As for Curry, the problem is you apparently seem to think the terms "versatile" and "portable" are interchangeable. They are not.
Steph is elite at a high value skill; shooting. That indeed makes him playable in a variety of different systems and circumstances. But that's a product of the utility of his skill, not versatility of his game.
In fact, his value beyond elite shooting is fairly pedestrian. Objectively one could argue that makes him closer to one-dimensional (JJ Redick, Steve Kerr) than versatile (Grant Hill, Scottie Pippen). Of course Curry's also a gifted ball handler and a middling playmaker so no one will ever really call him one-dimensional but his value across systems is almost exclusively tied to his ability to shoot.
His talent in other areas (or lack thereof) doesn't set him apart from the pack and his relative lack of size mitigates his ability to play any position beyond the backcourt especially on the defensive side of the floor. That's the antithesis of versatility.
A very logical post.
Put Steph on a team with another small guard and you have all sorts of defensive issues (e.g. isaiah thomas new or old, damon stoudamire, lillard, cp3, etc.). REASON: steph lacks defensive versatility.
Put Steph on a team without primary playmakers or passers better than him in that facet, the team has limited upside. Magic could elevate them much better. (E.g. replace Doncic on dal, lebron on lakers, trae young on atl, lillard on por). REASON: steph is mediocre at elevating his supporting cast when asked to carry the lion's share of the load as the primary playmaker.
Of course Magic can't stretch the defense and run around screens like Steph Curry can, but isn't he just a modern ray allen with better scoring (althought arguably less versatile scoring) and clearly less defensive versatility? This isn't a knock on Steph, but being the best as what he does doesn't make him more "versatile" especially considering both ends if the court.
clyde21 wrote: sorry, this just a myth, Magic ain't playing all 5 positions, at least not at any functional level where it's make sense..is he gonna play your off-ball 2? and do what? is he gonna be your off-ball 3? and do what? just nonsense it doesn't make any practical sense from a bball standpoint.
yes, Steph is more versatile, especially in today's NBA, it's pretty indisputable, he stretches the court in ways Magic can dream off, can play on ball and off-ball with another primary on-ball player, can score on 3 levels, can score on ball, can score off-ball, can faciliate offense, can play off facilitators, can play next to paint only bigs, can play next to stretch bigs, can set screens and cut/slash in ways Magic can't.
look at most of the top10 non Steph players in today's league
LeBron Kawhi KD Giannis Jokic Embiid Harden Dame Luka
i can make an easy and strong argument that Steph is a better fit next all these guys than Magic.
again, this aint saying Steph's better than Magic, he's not...but Steph might be the most versatile and portable player we've ever seen no cap.
With regard to Earvin, that's a matter of record. He's actually done that. You have no leg to stand on.
As for Curry, the problem is you apparently seem to think the terms "versatile" and "portable" are interchangeable. They are not.
Steph is elite at a high value skill; shooting. That indeed makes him playable in a variety of different systems and circumstances. But that's a product of the utility of his skill, not versatility of his game.
In fact, his value beyond elite shooting is fairly pedestrian. Objectively one could argue that makes him closer to one-dimensional (JJ Redick, Steve Kerr) than versatile (Grant Hill, Scottie Pippen). Of course Curry's also a gifted ball handler and a middling playmaker so no one will ever really call him one-dimensional but his value across systems is almost exclusively tied to his ability to shoot.
His talent in other areas (or lack thereof) doesn't set him apart from the pack and his relative lack of size mitigates his ability to play any position beyond the backcourt especially on the defensive side of the floor. That's the antithesis of versatility.
A very logical post.
Put Steph on a team with another small guard and you have all sorts of defensive issues (e.g. isaiah thomas new or old, damon stoudamire, lillard, cp3, etc.). REASON: steph lacks defensive versatility.
Put Steph on a team without primary playmakers or passers better than him in that facet, the team has limited upside. Magic could elevate them much better. (E.g. replace Doncic on dal, lebron on lakers, trae young on atl, lillard on por). REASON: steph is mediocre at elevating his supporting cast when asked to carry the lion's share of the load as the primary playmaker.
Of course Magic can't stretch the defense and run around screens like Steph Curry can, but isn't he just a modern ray allen with better scoring (althought arguably less versatile scoring) and clearly less defensive versatility? This isn't a knock on Steph, but being the best as what he does doesn't make him more "versatile" especially considering both ends if the court.
All this talk of "both ends of the court" shows how many of the people here opining are still clueless. Magic is better because "both ends of the court"? Chris Paul is better because "both ends of the court"? Ray Allen is better because of "both ends of the court"? Klay Thompson is probably better on the other side of the court than all of the above and I doubt anyone is picking him over Steph despite possibly being the second best shooter of all-time and capable of getting on hotter shooting streaks.
Steph is better because he is better at a whole lot of things that none of you seem to appreciate.
magic. curry's one dimensional he needs prime dpoys to win. him not winning anything prior to iguodala/dray proves point. also if the rules were 30 yrs earlier, curry would struggle to make all nbas even if he had elite shooting coaches wouldnt play more than 30minutes thus he wouldnt develop.
DroseReturnChi wrote:magic. curry's one dimensional he needs prime dpoys to win. him not winning anything prior to iguodala/dray proves point. also if the rules were 30 yrs earlier, curry would struggle to make all nbas even if he had elite shooting coaches wouldnt play more than 30minutes thus he wouldnt develop.
How much did Magic win without Kareem? What point does that prove? Which Lakers championship team that Magic played on was less talented overall than the 2015 and 2016 Warriors?
Also, your point about Curry “needing a prime DPOY” to win. Imagine if Magic had played most of his career with a DPOY caliber player…man! Wait…
rzzzzz wrote:Curry is the better pg and shooter. Magic is the better player. If they both were in the same draft, I would draft Magic first. But if I had them both on the same team, I would play Curry at pg and put Magic back at pf.
How in the world is Curry a better PG than Magic? Magic is like definition of a playmaker. Curry is basically a short 2.
Magic cannot create plays as a decoy the way Curry can.
That's because Magic creates plays. If you're the best, you don't play decoy. Smh
Da ThRONe wrote:Steph. Shooting is king in the NBA and he's the best shooter the game his seen.
Yes shooting/scoring in general is king today, but so is having a guy who can open the floor up to help get the ball to said shooters. That's why I'd take Magic over Curry.
Magic would draw so many double teams because of his size and speed today, and when they do that he will make them pay for it by kicking it out to that sharpshooting 3 point shooter. Plus he himself was no liability at making shots himself.
It makes sense why most people would pick Magic over Curry, but you gave the worst reasoning for it. There's no scenario ever that Magic would draw more doubles than Curry, ever.
Da ThRONe wrote:Steph. Shooting is king in the NBA and he's the best shooter the game his seen.
Yes shooting/scoring in general is king today, but so is having a guy who can open the floor up to help get the ball to said shooters. That's why I'd take Magic over Curry.
Magic would draw so many double teams because of his size and speed today, and when they do that he will make them pay for it by kicking it out to that sharpshooting 3 point shooter. Plus he himself was no liability at making shots himself.
It makes sense why most people would pick Magic over Curry, but you gave the worst reasoning for it. There's no scenario ever that Magic would draw more doubles than Curry, ever.
That's because Magic couldn't be doubled. It's better strategy to double Curry than Magic, even though neither is perfect.
