Steph Top 10 All Time - According to Bleacher report

[B_Creamy]

What's the gap between Kawhi and Curry?

MVP: +2 Curry
Finals MVP: +2 Kawhi
DPOY: +2 Kawhi
Championships: +1 Curry
All-NBA: +3 Curry
All-Defense: +5 Kawhi
All-Star: +3 Curry

Seems pretty even, given Kawhi's setup, could he pass him next season? Or the one after?

You have to admit this is an exceedingly flawed approach to player rankings

[righterwriter]

That's why it's bleacher report

Off the top of my head in no particular order:

MJ
Magic
Bird
Wilt
Russell
Kareem
Lebron
Duncan
Kobe
Shaq

That's 10 right there. And I haven't looked at a list yet so I'm sure I'm missing a few

If we're being honest, Russell should have no place on any of these lists.

If you had to pick a team to put together to defend your life, you wouldn't pick the 6'9, 220 lb defensive center with no offensive game who shot 44%fg/56%ft and dominated at a time when the NBA was in its relative infancy.

It's great to pay homage to the guys who were good in their era, but if you are picking the most dominant players you have to take all of his into consideration.

By extension, Wilt and Kareem should be behind Shaq and Hakeem.

My top-10 list

MJ
Lebron
Shaq
Hakeem
Magic
Kareem
Wilt
Duncan
Curry
Bird


Right on the edge are KG, KD (if he can carve out his own success in BKN) AD (jf he stays healthy and starts winning now that he's out of NO), and Kawhi (who could take over Bird soon).

[JN61]

This has to take the cake for worst list this off season. Curry is somewhere 20-25 and Durant 15-20, both will rise eventually more they play but their careers been too short to justify higher.

Another thing is Pau Gasol on the list and no Allen Iverson.

[JN61]

What's the gap between Kawhi and Curry?

MVP: +2 Curry
Finals MVP: +2 Kawhi
DPOY: +2 Kawhi
Championships: +1 Curry
All-NBA: +3 Curry
All-Defense: +5 Kawhi
All-Star: +3 Curry

Seems pretty even, given Kawhi's setup, could he pass him next season? Or the one after?

It's mainly curry being too high on the list. If you place him around 20 it makes way more sense considering both have had relatively short careers.

[Gooner]

A little high for right now. I was expecting the list to have Kobe top 5, so the fact it doesn't have him in the top 10 makes it more legitimate to me.

You are a loyal Lakers fan.

[Sulico]

I kind of disagree with this list personally, but it really feels like if I put my own bias aside this list would be close to perfect.
So I really commend bleacher for great job.

[WarriorGM]

What's the gap between Kawhi and Curry?

MVP: +2 Curry
Finals MVP: +2 Kawhi
DPOY: +2 Kawhi
Championships: +1 Curry
All-NBA: +3 Curry
All-Defense: +5 Kawhi
All-Star: +3 Curry

Seems pretty even, given Kawhi's setup, could he pass him next season? Or the one after?

The gap is in terms of records and dominance. Kawhi's wins and accolades while qualifying for best in the year category in the main don't challenge in the best in history category. Curry's do.

[Pablo Escobar]

Top 20ish, hasn't lead his team to a title and he falls off once the post season comes around.

[scrabbarista]

Agree or Disagree?

Steph is by far my favourite player this past decade, and i hope one day he'll deserve this spot, but I personally have him sitting around 15-20 range at the moment.

If you agree - then why?
If you dont agree - then what do you feel Steph needs to accomplish to reach top ten all time?

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2854727-bleacher-reports-all-time-player-rankings-nbas-top-50-revealed#slide42

I got him 12th right now. I use a formula, so I can't say exactly what he needs to do - there are different paths he could take - but I think he's got a decent chance of getting there. (Even jumping one spot can sometimes take a lot once you get that high on the list.) I'd probably put it between 40% and 50%. I think his odds of getting to 11th (where I have Kobe) are probably more like 80% to 90%. I'm factoring in the possibility of injury in these numbers.

[scrabbarista]

That's why it's bleacher report

Off the top of my head in no particular order:

MJ
Magic
Bird
Wilt
Russell
Kareem
Lebron
Duncan
Kobe
Shaq

That's 10 right there. And I haven't looked at a list yet so I'm sure I'm missing a few

If we're being honest, Russell should have no place on any of these lists.

If you had to pick a team to put together to defend your life, you wouldn't pick the 6'9, 220 lb defensive center with no offensive game who shot 44%fg/56%ft and dominated at a time when the NBA was in its relative infancy.

It's great to pay homage to the guys who were good in their era, but if you are picking the most dominant players you have to take all of his into consideration.

By extension, Wilt and Kareem should be behind Shaq and Hakeem.

My top-10 list

MJ
Lebron
Shaq
Hakeem
Magic
Kareem
Wilt
Duncan
Curry
Bird


Right on the edge are KG, KD (if he can carve out his own success in BKN) AD (jf he stays healthy and starts winning now that he's out of NO), and Kawhi (who could take over Bird soon).

I think you're way too low on Duncan and I disagree with your premise, but otherwise I like this ranking very, very much. It makes sense to me. EDIT: I mean, my rankings are different than these because I use a formula, but if I didn't use a formula and just let my own personal opinion run my rankings, it might look a lot like this, other than Duncan.

[Raps in 4]

There's an achievement "bias", in that Curry simply hasn't achieved as much nor has he been able to actually dominate any high stakes playoff game from start to finish. He's never won a series as the underdog, and in the biggest season of his career, he only managed to deliver LeBron's culminating achievement.

I'm a big fan of Curry's, but he hasn't the same success as the other guys in the top 10 in terms of memorable high stakes achivements. Wilt is the guy who's most lacking in playoff coups in the top 10, and his regular season dominance was in such a league of its own, for such an extended time, that there's really not much more you can ask of him.

LeBron's got the same issue when he's compared to MJ.

When you're talking about the 10 greatest ever, we are inevitably going to get into this line drawing excercise about who did what.

The other thing about Curry is that he voluntarily punted away his shot at the top 10 to team up with KD. He ate up two years of his prime as the largely seen as 'Pippen' of the duo for all but guaranteed rings. That was a choice he was fully entitled to make, but his legacy is absolutely going to suffer for it, and IMO deservedly.

Just to be clear I still have LeBron decisively over Curry- I was just making a point about Steph's stature and the bias that comes with it.

I don't agree with the unnecessary emphasis on high stakes/memorable moments in these debates. Doing it when it's not sexy is just as important.

More than that, I go back to my Tim Duncan example. He didn't have to "take over" in playoff games for people to recognize his value. The oversimplified explanation for that would be "yeah because Duncan is a much better defender". Sure, but if we weigh defensive impact into our assessment (as we should) then we should weigh Curry's effect on the cumulative offense which doesn't hinge on his scoring volume the way it does for Kobe/Durant/etc. Like Lowry in TOR, Curry is the great facilitator in GS in a way that isn't represented in the box. His willingness to deflect to teammates in the context of cohesive team basketball is much more of a strength than it is a fault. It was one of Duncan's trademarks. Who gives a damn if worse players like Tony Parker or young Kawhi get to steal the spotlight with meaningless accolades? The team accomplishment is what matters.

Of course team accomplishment matters a lot. That’s why KD joined a 73-9 team. That’s why Curry told KD he could care less who gets the recognition in his sales pitch. He values winning more. The thing is, we are not discussing who the greatest team here, we’re discussing if Curry is top ten all time, and individual accolades matters when deciding.

And Curry has amassed more than enough individual accolades to cement a top-10 legacy.

[liamliam1234]

And Curry has amassed more than enough individual accolades to cement a top-10 legacy.

He has by far the fewest all-NBA appearances of anyone in the general top fifteen, and similarly has by far the lowest career totals. Looking at the top eleven, every one of them was Finals MVP twice (presumed in Russell’s case); Curry has none. Fine, dismiss that because he was the clear leader, but that still leaves him one behind everyone else (penalty for splitting easy titles with Durant). He has more titles than only Hakeem and Wilt, but Wilt went up against the league’s greatest dynasty and has twice as many MVPs, and Hakeem never had anywhere close to Curry’s team quality.

I think, if you extrapolate a bit, you could make a case to put Curry in the twelfth spot. Maaaaaaaaaaybe over Kobe if you put a ton of value into advanced metrics and again extrapolate a fair bit. But he really has no good case to be top ten even as a thought experiment, and certainly nowhere near enough of one for it to be “cemented”.

[XxIronChainzxX]

Just to be clear I still have LeBron decisively over Curry- I was just making a point about Steph's stature and the bias that comes with it.

I don't agree with the unnecessary emphasis on high stakes/memorable moments in these debates. Doing it when it's not sexy is just as important.

More than that, I go back to my Tim Duncan example. He didn't have to "take over" in playoff games for people to recognize his value. The oversimplified explanation for that would be "yeah because Duncan is a much better defender". Sure, but if we weigh defensive impact into our assessment (as we should) then we should weigh Curry's effect on the cumulative offense which doesn't hinge on his scoring volume the way it does for Kobe/Durant/etc. Like Lowry in TOR, Curry is the great facilitator in GS in a way that isn't represented in the box. His willingness to deflect to teammates in the context of cohesive team basketball is much more of a strength than it is a fault. It was one of Duncan's trademarks. Who gives a damn if worse players like Tony Parker or young Kawhi get to steal the spotlight with meaningless accolades? The team accomplishment is what matters.

Of course team accomplishment matters a lot. That’s why KD joined a 73-9 team. That’s why Curry told KD he could care less who gets the recognition in his sales pitch. He values winning more. The thing is, we are not discussing who the greatest team here, we’re discussing if Curry is top ten all time, and individual accolades matters when deciding.

And Curry has amassed more than enough individual accolades to cement a top-10 legacy.

Hard disagree. He's got a 2 year peak, and the only guy who's really in the top 10 on that is Hakeem. Who also had a way longer prime.

[LKN]

Of course team accomplishment matters a lot. That’s why KD joined a 73-9 team. That’s why Curry told KD he could care less who gets the recognition in his sales pitch. He values winning more. The thing is, we are not discussing who the greatest team here, we’re discussing if Curry is top ten all time, and individual accolades matters when deciding.

And Curry has amassed more than enough individual accolades to cement a top-10 legacy.

Hard disagree. He's got a 2 year peak, and the only guy who's really in the top 10 on that is Hakeem. Who also had a way longer prime.

I see no way Curry can be ranked above Hakeem. Hakeem has a high peak too (and arguably a higher playoff peak).

Curry has:

2x MVP
3x 1st team all NBA
2x 2nd team all NBA
1x 3rd team all NBA


Hakeem has:

1x MVP
2x DPOTY
2x FMVP
6x 1st team all NBA
3x 2nd team all NBA
3x 3rd team all NBA
5x 1st team all defense
4x 2nd team all defense

[dhsilv2]

Given Steph's 5-6 year peak rivals anyone short of Kareem, MJ, Lebron, and maybe 1-2 others I can't think of....I can see a strong case for him top 10 if you really focus on peak play. I'm not sure I'm ready to go there personally, but anyone thinking this is crazy just hasn't been watching how out and out stupid good Curry has been the last 6 years.

[I_Like_Dirt]

I would probably put him below Hakeem for sure though.

I think Curry and Hakeem are really close right now, honestly. Hakeem might have a bit of an edge because his career is already over but he really didn't do so much more despite that fact. And yeah, people will point to defense and he was way better there but Curry is way better on offense. They're such different players that comparing them is weird and largely unnatural but overall I feel they were similar players both in their era and in terms of achievements, though Curry probably pulls past him given more time.

[cpower]

I would say another MVP or another ring will make him a clearcut

[The4thHorseman]

[url][/url]

Seems about right for Steph. I think you can put him anywhere in the 9-14 range. The one player who’s rated way too high IMO is Larry Bird. He was the 3rd best player in a weak decade, his numbers fell off quite a bit in the postseason, and he wasn’t an impact defender like all the top 8-9 players should be IMO.

I would liken his defense to Curry's, maybe a tad better. Super high IQ and minimized his athletic disadvantages enough to be a good not great defender relative to position.

Yeah, that seems fair. Bird was probably even a better defender than Curry. But whereas Magic and Curry were both capable of being one man elite offenses to elevate them to the 10-14 range even without much of an impact on defense, I don't think Bird was quite at that level on O. He certainly doesn't belong in the Top 8 with the elite 2-way superstars.

What makes you think Magic was capable of being an elite one man offense???

[LKN]

I would probably put him below Hakeem for sure though.

I think Curry and Hakeem are really close right now, honestly. Hakeem might have a bit of an edge because his career is already over but he really didn't do so much more despite that fact. And yeah, people will point to defense and he was way better there but Curry is way better on offense. They're such different players that comparing them is weird and largely unnatural but overall I feel they were similar players both in their era and in terms of achievements, though Curry probably pulls past him given more time.

Curry does not have a playoff peak like Hakeem though. Hakeem actually increased his performance pretty significantly in the postseason during his peak. Curry - while he's been great in the postseason - has seen his numbers fall off in the postseason to some degree.

Hakeem was the offensive AND defensive anchor of back to back title teams.

[XxIronChainzxX]

Given Steph's 5-6 year peak rivals anyone short of Kareem, MJ, Lebron, and maybe 1-2 others I can't think of....I can see a strong case for him top 10 if you really focus on peak play. I'm not sure I'm ready to go there personally, but anyone thinking this is crazy just hasn't been watching how out and out stupid good Curry has been the last 6 years.

Even if you count his KD time, I just don't see how that rivals Hakeem, much less MJ, LeBron and Kareem. He had a player (almost) as great as him for a 2 year period, and achieved less than Shaq. For Shaq the top 10 case isn't just his threepeat year in isolation, it's the full body of work.