| tyecopeland |
06-01-2022 12:15 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eureka
(Post 16311686)
You mean he stayed with the team that drafted him made the team better (Champions)? Just like MJ did for his Bulls.
It's funny how Curry is the star of his team yet is 3>1 versus Lebron in the Finals and is looked at as not as good as Lebron.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC_Connection
(Post 16311710)
There's a reason Durant won Finals MVP both years (and why Curry has never won one in his entire career). KD was the best player on those Warriors teams.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy
(Post 16311740)
I can't stand Lebron, but he was a much better overall player than Curry is. Lebron is top 5 for sure..Curry isn't and I don't think ever really should considered that high.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie
(Post 16314511)
I heard them debating on some dumb Stephen A Smith show that Curry needs to win a 5th ti surpass KD. If you ask me, outside of Lebron, Curry is #2 as far as legacy. He doesn't need to do shit to surpass KD.
|
https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelph...breaking-point
Quote:
Since KD arrived at the start of the 2016-17 season, Curry, Thompson, Durant and Green have played 1,921 minutes as a group on the floor, according to the powerful pbpstats.com database. During that span, the Warriors are plus-16.9 per 100 possessions with that foursome on the court. When people complain that the Warriors are unfair, this is what they’re talking about -- a plus-16.9 point differential is the stuff of legend. (For reference, only three teams in the past decade have crossed the double-digit zone for a full season: the 2015-16 Warriors (who won 73 games), the '15-16 Spurs (who won 67 games) and the '14-15 Warriors that won (67 games).)
Actually, without KD, the Warriors are still super dominant. Golden State is plus-14.8 in 672 minutes with Curry, Thompson and Green playing without Durant.
Same result: The Warriors are still juggernauts, registering a plus-13.9 in 526 minutes with Curry and Green on the floor without the help of Durant or Thompson.
With Curry rolling solo, the Warriors are still plus-14.3 in 216 minutes of action. That’s without the help of an MVP, a former Defensive Player of the Year and perhaps the second-greatest shooter ever not named Stephen Wardell Curry. The offense scores 116.6 points per 100 possessions in these lineups, which would be the league-leading offensive rating this season.
|
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/s...-goat-debates/
Quote:
So the Steph-could-be-better-than-LeBron conversation isn't insane. Steph is the greatest shooter in the history of the sport -- so great, in fact, he changed the NBA and shifted the course of its history as much as Wilt, or Bird-Magic, or Jordan. The game's focus on 3-point shooting and positionless play is rooted first and foremost in Curry.
He defined, and changed, an era.
And as the best shooter ever, and the guy who didn't bounce from team to team, his narrative game is on point. This is the guy Durant had to join, rather than the other way around. And yet Curry, the then-reigning MVP, welcomed Durant to the team by subjugating his own shine -- and the shots, accolades and credit that accompanied it. Everyone says the team and winning come first. Curry practiced that by diminishing himself to do so.
No all-time great has ever done that in his prime. That, too, is easy to look past but worthy of consideration in any GOAT debate.
That is a big part of the reason Curry is the superior player, historically speaking, to Durant. Durant needed Curry to win titles. Curry is about to prove, he, most decidedly, did not need Durant. That -- plus the statistical reality of Steph's import over Durant when on the floor in Golden State, as often outlined excellently by NBA writer Tom Haberstroh -- elevates Curry over Durant.
There is no Golden State Warriors as we know them without Steph. And without Steph, Durant might have as many rings as James Harden or Russell Westbrook.
The argument over Steph vs. Durant is a warmup for the one about Steph vs. LeBron. Steph, by NBA standards, is not an imposing athlete. He's not a freak of nature physically -- not like M.J., or LeBron, or Kareem, or Wilt, or Shaq, or Magic, or virtually any of the other all-time greats who look more like Avengers superheroes than athletes.
As we always do, then, the talk on Steph Curry both celebrates him and misses the larger, current point. Curry coming up on LeBron's legacy, true and interesting though it is, still probably ends with LeBron ahead when both retire.
But that's not the actual point, at least not today.
This is: The fact we're having this conversation means that if Steph does lead Golden State to a fourth title starting Thursday, he'll narrow the gap between himself and LeBron so much that it is other all-time greats who he will have surpassed.
Names like Kobe. Duncan. Durant. Bird. Magic.
Another title, and Steph and the Warriors show that everything that's preceded this was about Steph Curry. Not Durant and the two titles he piggy-backed on board for, despite his obvious contributions. Not Kyrie Irving leaving Cleveland. Just an all-time great shaping the game's history, and his team's destiny, utilizing his own rare, astounding gifts.
Another title, and the all-time great debate looks something like this:
1. Jordan
2. LeBron
3. Kareem
4. Shaq
5. Steph
Can Steph eventually pass LeBron? Maybe, but unlikely.
But beat the Celtics, and he will have launched himself further than any one of his patented deep shots.
|
|
