Stephen Curry All-NBA (2nd) Jimmy Butler and Draymond 24-25 NBA Season Thread

[parsnips33]

As far as KD, I think an unfortunate byproduct of joining what was already one of the greatest teams of all time at that point. Gotta give him big credit for going there and making history anyways

No, no we do not.

The 2017 playoffs are literally the only time the Warriors played the way they should adding an alleged top 5 player.

Let me run with my narrative

[parsnips33]

This guys cracks me up lol

Best player getting credit for team winning? This is some kind of conspiracy

People like Steph more than the guy who lost to him every single year for half a decade? I just know that's a conspiracy

Greatest 3 point shooter of all time gets more credit for the 3 point revolution than the 3rd most impressive stat-padder of his era? Tin foil hat time

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.

the 19-24 guy getting credit over the 16-3 guy would be kind of weird, though. right?

This logic doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Obviously we’d fully expect that a team is going to do better in its games with two star players than it will in its games with one star player. That doesn’t somehow mean that the second star player added to the team must be the most important/impactful one. The fact that the Warriors are better with Jimmy Butler than without Jimmy Butler doesn’t really tell us which one of Steph or Jimmy is more impactful on the team. All it tells us is basically that Jimmy Butler is a better player and a better fit on the team than Andrew Wiggins. There’s no counterfactual where we see how the Warriors do with Jimmy Butler and Andrew Wiggins and no Steph.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

Numbers are well and good.

But if you watch the team it's exceedingly obvious how much the current roster (before and after the Jimmy trade) relies on Steph for offense. What are we to make of that?

[parsnips33]

When is Steph gonna quit riding these guys coattails

warriors willing to fall into the play-in to make steph look good .

It's time to bring in another Hall of Famer

[AEnigma]

This guys cracks me up lol

Best player getting credit for team winning? This is some kind of conspiracy

People like Steph more than the guy who lost to him every single year for half a decade? I just know that's a conspiracy

Greatest 3 point shooter of all time gets more credit for the 3 point revolution than the 3rd most impressive stat-padder of his era? Tin foil hat time

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

Numbers are well and good.

But if you watch the team it's exceedingly obvious how much the current roster (before and after the Jimmy trade) relies on Steph for offense. What are we to make of that?

I think we can balance the idea that Butler is more of a “star” than someone like Dave DeBusschere (who elevated the Knicks from 18-17 without to 36-11 with, even though the Knicks gave up two starters as part of the trade) but is also not inherently “better” than Steph just because his immediate effect on the team looks more significant so far.

[OhayoKD]

This guys cracks me up lol

Best player getting credit for team winning? This is some kind of conspiracy

People like Steph more than the guy who lost to him every single year for half a decade? I just know that's a conspiracy

Greatest 3 point shooter of all time gets more credit for the 3 point revolution than the 3rd most impressive stat-padder of his era? Tin foil hat time

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.

This logic doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Obviously we’d fully expect that a team is going to do better in its games with two star players than it will in its games with one star player. That doesn’t somehow mean that the second star player added to the team must be the most important/impactful one. The fact that the Warriors are better with Jimmy Butler than without Jimmy Butler doesn’t really tell us which one of Steph or Jimmy is more impactful on the team. All it tells us is basically that Jimmy Butler is a better player and a better fit on the team than Andrew Wiggins. There’s no counterfactual where we see how the Warriors do with Jimmy Butler and Andrew Wiggins and no Steph.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

Numbers are well and good.

But if you watch the team it's exceedingly obvious how much the current roster (before and after the Jimmy trade) relies on Steph for offense. What are we to make of that?

You're going to have to detail what you're seeing that makes it exceedingly obvious the Butler-Warriors were still highly Steph dependent, even setting aside the focus on offense for a team with a star-defensive anchor anchoring the league's 8th best defense.

[OhayoKD]

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

Numbers are well and good.

But if you watch the team it's exceedingly obvious how much the current roster (before and after the Jimmy trade) relies on Steph for offense. What are we to make of that?

I think we can balance the idea that Butler is more of a “star” than someone like Dave DeBusschere (who elevated the Knicks from 18-17 without to 36-11 with, even though they gave up two significant rotation players) but is also not inherently “better” than Steph just because his immediate effect on the team looks more significant so far.

Nah, Steph is just the Klay guy now.

[lessthanjake]

This guys cracks me up lol

Best player getting credit for team winning? This is some kind of conspiracy

People like Steph more than the guy who lost to him every single year for half a decade? I just know that's a conspiracy

Greatest 3 point shooter of all time gets more credit for the 3 point revolution than the 3rd most impressive stat-padder of his era? Tin foil hat time

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.

the 19-24 guy getting credit over the 16-3 guy would be kind of weird, though. right?

This logic doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Obviously we’d fully expect that a team is going to do better in its games with two star players than it will in its games with one star player. That doesn’t somehow mean that the second star player added to the team must be the most important/impactful one. The fact that the Warriors are better with Jimmy Butler than without Jimmy Butler doesn’t really tell us which one of Steph or Jimmy is more impactful on the team. All it tells us is basically that Jimmy Butler is a better player and a better fit on the team than Andrew Wiggins. There’s no counterfactual where we see how the Warriors do with Jimmy Butler and Andrew Wiggins and no Steph.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

The “without” samples for Draymond and Steph are not big enough to be meaningful. And the with-sample for Butler is with a more talented team than the with-samples for Draymond and Steph are, because Jimmy is way better than Wiggins and most of Draymond’s and Steph’s with-samples are when they had Wiggins instead (while obviously all of Butler’s with-sample is with himself instead of Wiggins). The Warriors’ record with Jimmy certainly does indicate he’s far better than Andrew Wiggins (and a better fit on the team)! And if you stepped back from looking at small-sample data and actually watched games, I think you’d see how important Steph is to the team. The offense revolves around him and his unique capabilities. Of course, Butler and Draymond are important too. Draymond is their most impactful player defensively, and Butler has been acting as a really good glue guy that fills in some important gaps in the team. While this might not be true if Steph was in his earlier years, they almost certainly need all three in order to be a good team that has any hope of going anywhere in the playoffs (if they even make it there). So, in a sense, the question of who should get the “credit” is a silly question, because if the Warriors are successful then it’ll probably be the case that all three of these guys are necessary components to that success. Steph is their best player, but at age 37 he’s not enough for them to be a genuinely good team without other good players.

[OhayoKD]

This guys cracks me up lol

Best player getting credit for team winning? This is some kind of conspiracy

People like Steph more than the guy who lost to him every single year for half a decade? I just know that's a conspiracy

Greatest 3 point shooter of all time gets more credit for the 3 point revolution than the 3rd most impressive stat-padder of his era? Tin foil hat time

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.

This logic doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Obviously we’d fully expect that a team is going to do better in its games with two star players than it will in its games with one star player. That doesn’t somehow mean that the second star player added to the team must be the most important/impactful one. The fact that the Warriors are better with Jimmy Butler than without Jimmy Butler doesn’t really tell us which one of Steph or Jimmy is more impactful on the team. All it tells us is basically that Jimmy Butler is a better player and a better fit on the team than Andrew Wiggins. There’s no counterfactual where we see how the Warriors do with Jimmy Butler and Andrew Wiggins and no Steph.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

The “without” samples for Draymond and Steph are not big enough to be meaningful.

Why is someone who used (and provided incorrect data about) 1 game samples now arguing 14 and 12 game samples aren't meaningful?

And if you stepped back from looking at small-sample data and actually watched games, I think you’d see how important Steph is to the team. The offense revolves around him and his unique capabilities.

This is definitely what someone whose watched the games would say.

Maybe it's just time to accept Steph has -2 port and is tough to maximise

[parsnips33]

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.


https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

Numbers are well and good.

But if you watch the team it's exceedingly obvious how much the current roster (before and after the Jimmy trade) relies on Steph for offense. What are we to make of that?

You're going to have to detail what you're seeing that makes it exceedingly obvious the Butler-Warriors were still highly Steph dependent, even setting aside the focus on offense for a team with a star-defensive anchor anchoring the league's 8th best defense.

You're not gonna like this answer but a big part of it is GRAVITY

He's either drawing 2 on the ball or pulling away defenders with screening and movement. It sounds basic, but all of the easy shots the Warriors get come from playing off of Steph.

Surely there's a way to quantify that, but it's above my paygrade.

The Jimmy-Draymond combo on defense is ridiculous and we can talk about that all day. Just think it's extremely difficult to overstate the importance of Steph to the offense

[parsnips33]

Numbers are well and good.

But if you watch the team it's exceedingly obvious how much the current roster (before and after the Jimmy trade) relies on Steph for offense. What are we to make of that?

I think we can balance the idea that Butler is more of a “star” than someone like Dave DeBusschere (who elevated the Knicks from 18-17 without to 36-11 with, even though they gave up two significant rotation players) but is also not inherently “better” than Steph just because his immediate effect on the team looks more significant so far.

Nah, Steph is just the Klay guy now.

Streets are saying Jimmy is aging more gracefully than Bron, don't give them any more ammo

[OhayoKD]

Numbers are well and good.

But if you watch the team it's exceedingly obvious how much the current roster (before and after the Jimmy trade) relies on Steph for offense. What are we to make of that?

You're going to have to detail what you're seeing that makes it exceedingly obvious the Butler-Warriors were still highly Steph dependent, even setting aside the focus on offense for a team with a star-defensive anchor anchoring the league's 8th best defense.

You're not gonna like this answer but a big part of it is GRAVITY

He's either drawing 2 on the ball or pulling away defenders with screening and movement. It sounds basic, but all of the easy shots the Warriors get come from playing off of Steph.

Isn't one of the perks of adding Butler that he draws extra-attention inside forcing teams to give Steph more daylight? If you want to argue that's not what's happening, fine, but I'd want to see tracking for that. If that is what's happening then Steph should be trading off gravity for better scoring numbers and at least the second part of that is happening.

Surely there's a way to quantify that, but it's above my paygrade.

I mean you could just do the same statmuse searches but replace record with offensive-rating. Or get into the EDTO business

[OhayoKD]

I think we can balance the idea that Butler is more of a “star” than someone like Dave DeBusschere (who elevated the Knicks from 18-17 without to 36-11 with, even though they gave up two significant rotation players) but is also not inherently “better” than Steph just because his immediate effect on the team looks more significant so far.

Nah, Steph is just the Klay guy now.

Streets are saying Jimmy is aging more gracefully than Bron, don't give them any more ammo

I don't know what the streets are saying but The LAND is saying give Draymond MVP and I find this acceptable

[lessthanjake]

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.


https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

The “without” samples for Draymond and Steph are not big enough to be meaningful.

Why is someone who used (and provided incorrect data about) 1 game samples now arguing 14 and 12 game samples aren't meaningful?

And if you stepped back from looking at small-sample data and actually watched games, I think you’d see how important Steph is to the team. The offense revolves around him and his unique capabilities.

This is definitely what someone whose watched the games would say.

Maybe it's just time to accept Steph has -2 port and is tough to maximise

I have no idea what you’re talking about, and honestly you often just speak in vague shorthand that no one understands. I’m consistent in talking about issues with sample sizes, and if I’m talking about things that involve small sample sizes then I virtually always make sure to caveat what I’m saying by noting the sample-size issue. The idea that I’m inconsistent about this subject is just nonsense—which is probably why you’re resorting to responding with such vague accusations.

[jalengreen]

This guys cracks me up lol

Best player getting credit for team winning? This is some kind of conspiracy

the 19-24 guy getting credit over the 16-3 guy would be kind of weird, though. right?

This logic doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Obviously we’d fully expect that a team is going to do better in its games with two star players than it will in its games with one star player. That doesn’t somehow mean that the second star player added to the team must be the most important/impactful one. The fact that the Warriors are better with Jimmy Butler than without Jimmy Butler doesn’t really tell us which one of Steph or Jimmy is more impactful on the team. All it tells us is basically that Jimmy Butler is a better player and a better fit on the team than Andrew Wiggins. There’s no counterfactual where we see how the Warriors do with Jimmy Butler and Andrew Wiggins and no Steph.

The logic is fine enough for claiming that Steph shouldn't get all of the credit for their turnaround. We saw what this team was capable of without Butler. It wasn't much. Steph wasn't good enough to make them a serious team on his own (how many players would be? debatable), clearly, so they needed to make a move and they did, and that move made them a much better team.

[lessthanjake]

the 19-24 guy getting credit over the 16-3 guy would be kind of weird, though. right?

This logic doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Obviously we’d fully expect that a team is going to do better in its games with two star players than it will in its games with one star player. That doesn’t somehow mean that the second star player added to the team must be the most important/impactful one. The fact that the Warriors are better with Jimmy Butler than without Jimmy Butler doesn’t really tell us which one of Steph or Jimmy is more impactful on the team. All it tells us is basically that Jimmy Butler is a better player and a better fit on the team than Andrew Wiggins. There’s no counterfactual where we see how the Warriors do with Jimmy Butler and Andrew Wiggins and no Steph.

The logic is fine enough for claiming that Steph shouldn't get all of the credit for their turnaround. We saw what this team was capable of without Butler. It wasn't much. Steph wasn't good enough to make them a serious team on his own (how many players would be? debatable), clearly, so they needed to make a move and they did, and that move made them a much better team.

I agree with that, and it’s quite consistent with a post I made on this thread earlier today. Peak Steph might potentially have been good enough to make them a serious team on his own, but 37-year-old Steph clearly is not. I just don’t think that’s mutually exclusive with him being the team’s best player. Steph is still a really good player, but he’s not playing at an all-time-great level anymore, so he needs help from good players in order for his team to be really good. Jimmy Butler is definitely a very good player who seemingly fits well with him (and of course Draymond is a good player who fits well too).

[jalengreen]

This logic doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Obviously we’d fully expect that a team is going to do better in its games with two star players than it will in its games with one star player. That doesn’t somehow mean that the second star player added to the team must be the most important/impactful one. The fact that the Warriors are better with Jimmy Butler than without Jimmy Butler doesn’t really tell us which one of Steph or Jimmy is more impactful on the team. All it tells us is basically that Jimmy Butler is a better player and a better fit on the team than Andrew Wiggins. There’s no counterfactual where we see how the Warriors do with Jimmy Butler and Andrew Wiggins and no Steph.

The logic is fine enough for claiming that Steph shouldn't get all of the credit for their turnaround. We saw what this team was capable of without Butler. It wasn't much. Steph wasn't good enough to make them a serious team on his own (how many players would be? debatable), clearly, so they needed to make a move and they did, and that move made them a much better team.

I agree with that, and it’s quite consistent with a post I made on this thread earlier today. Peak Steph might potentially have been good enough to make them a serious team on his own, but 37-year-old Steph clearly is not. I just don’t think that’s mutually exclusive with him being the team’s best player. Steph is still a really good player, but he’s not playing at an all-time-great level anymore, so he needs help from good players in order for his team to be really good. Jimmy Butler is definitely a very good player who seemingly fits well with him (and of course Draymond is a good player who fits well too).

Yeah I agree w that, I don't think Butler has ever been or ever will be better than Steph at any point in time. Been looking like a really good duo, though, and I don't think they're necessarily *that* far off with Steph's decline (though need to see more from Butler before I'm confident about where to rank him rn tbh) - would tentatively compare it to like a worse duo than LeBron/AD teams but with a better #3 in Draymond

[TroubleS0me]

Read on Twitter

[f4p]

Yeah I agree w that, I don't think Butler has ever been or ever will be better than Steph at any point in time.

i mean taking the names off the labels, he was pretty clearly ahead of steph in 2023 and 2024 so no reason to think he's not pretty clearly ahead of steph this year, what with better numbers and leading the turnaround (and his old team losing 9 in a row without him, even with all that heat culture there to sustain them). 2023 is a straight up elite regular season (other than games played) and then getting to the finals. 2024 wasn't amazing but easily clears steph in basically every stat as steph was "meh" in the regular season, had a negative on/off and missed the playoffs with an awful play-in game. and this year other than fighting with the heat, he has better numbers and has clearly been the catalyst to the turnaround.

[lessthanjake]

Yeah I agree w that, I don't think Butler has ever been or ever will be better than Steph at any point in time.

i mean taking the names off the labels, he was pretty clearly ahead of steph in 2023 and 2024 so no reason to think he's not pretty clearly ahead of steph this year, what with better numbers and leading the turnaround (and his old team losing 9 in a row without him, even with all that heat culture there to sustain them). 2023 is a straight up elite regular season (other than games played) and then getting to the finals. 2024 wasn't amazing but easily clears steph in basically every stat as steph was "meh" in the regular season, had a negative on/off and missed the playoffs with an awful play-in game. and this year other than fighting with the heat, he has better numbers and has clearly been the catalyst to the turnaround.

Steph was above Butler in EPM both of the last two seasons. And it’s just not the case at all that 2024 Butler “easily clears Steph in basically every stat.” For instance, Steph was ahead in EPM, DPM, and BPM, and their LEBRON was essentially equal but Steph played far more minutes. That said, I think it’d be reasonable to say Butler had a better 2022-23 year than Steph did, particularly given that he got to the Finals and had his best season ever in box terms. But I don’t think that leads to a conclusion that Butler is as good as Steph right now. Butler’s definitely significantly further off of his 2023 level than Steph is IMO, since 2023 was randomly perhaps Butler’s best year, while Steph is just on a slow-but-steady decline. More generally, I think the pecking order of the team is clear. Butler is playing a supporting role to Steph, not vice versa.

[Special_Puppy]

Giving steph credit for the improvement in trajectory that started with jimmy would be pretty weird.
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-draymond-green
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-steph-curry
https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/2025-warriors-record-with-and-without-jimmy-butler

Off the Warriors 3 stars, Steph's playing in games has correlated the least with winning this season

Numbers are well and good.

But if you watch the team it's exceedingly obvious how much the current roster (before and after the Jimmy trade) relies on Steph for offense. What are we to make of that?

I think we can balance the idea that Butler is more of a “star” than someone like Dave DeBusschere (who elevated the Knicks from 18-17 without to 36-11 with, even though the Knicks gave up two starters as part of the trade) but is also not inherently “better” than Steph just because his immediate effect on the team looks more significant so far.

Ditto with Gasol to LA in 2008.