Curry is on track to surpass MJ, better than Lebron.
- Thread starter Un-AmericanDreamer
- Start date
BlueHeffner
Veteran
“Steph played worse than last year”
Steph had his best NBA Finals against the best defense in the league. Thats why they won.
They got rid of Woatmore (a player that started here but was buried on the bench while on a team w Lebron), Wiseman didnt play, and Oubre left in FA.
Acting like those werent additions by subtraction is comical.
“Steph played worse than last year”
Steph had his best NBA Finals against the best defense in the league. Thats why they won.
We're talking about why they made the playoffs in the position they did.
You blatantly missed "regular season" in the comment you quoted.
I don't disagree with that at all. And Wiggins/Poole improving is meaningful too.
None of that has anything to do with Steph's play. Steph did not play any better than last year. So the guy shouting, "They werne't even expected to make the playoffs and look how they outperformed expectations!" is being rediculous. Steph didn't have to surpass expectations at all for them to make the playoffs or even get to the Finals.
BlueHeffner
Veteran
We are talking about winning the chipWe're talking about why they made the playoffs in the position they did.
You blatantly missed "regular season" in the comment you quoted.
I don't disagree with that at all. And Wiggins/Poole improving is meaningful too.
None of that has anything to do with Steph's play. Steph did not play any better than last year. So the guy shouting, "They werne't even expected to make the playoffs and look how they outperformed expectations!" is being rediculous. Steph didn't have to surpass expectations at all for them to make the playoffs or even get to the Finals.
Not many doubted the Warriors would make the playoffs. Especially since Klay would be back and no more Bazemore and Oubre.
They were an 8th-seed last season and were on pace for the 6th-seed until Steph got hurt.
I brought up the Finals to show that his team was no stacked in any form or fashion.
Guys like OPJ, Weedplate, Bjelica, and GP2 were big contributors this run and they werent even wanted by their former teams.
We are talking about winning the chip
You jumped into the middle of a conversation not knowing what was going on.
A poster claimed (falsely) that the Warriors weren't even projected to make the playoffs. I pointed out to him both that that was false, and that it was a dumb argument anyway because the Warriors exceeded expectations during the regular season due to the rest of their roster, Steph's play had nothing to do with that because Steph played no better than expected, in fact he played slightly worse.
That particular conversation had nothing to do with Steph's Finals play.
BlueHeffner
Veteran
The first quote is what you said. 1 playoff series win in the 6 seasons he played with anything other than a stacked team.
Are those not your words?
I jumped into the middle of a convo? Nikka u quoted me
I said nobody thought this team was winning a chip this year besides 1 poster. You quote me saying thats bc no one thought this roster would be healthy (nonsense).
Like what does that even mean
So we thought at the beginning of this season that everyone would be hurt and thats what would be our demise?
No. Most of us thought no team that relied on fukking Andrew Weedplate Wiggins as a third option would be a serious title contender.
Alot of Dubs fans were clamoring for them to make a trade because we didnt feel this team was good enough.
Stop this revisionist nonsense breh
Yes.
I jumped into the middle of a convo? Nikka u quoted me
I was going back and forth with Homer about expectations and you jumped in about expectations. If you weren't responding to us who were you responding to? Nothing in the OP had anything to do with preseason expectations.
I said nobody thought this team was winning a chip this year besides 1 poster. You quote me saying thats bc no one thought this roster would be healthy (nonsense).
Like what does that even mean
That's not what I said, I said no one thought they would be the ONLY healthy team out of all the ones I listed.
Some of the main favorites in preseason were the Bucks, Lakers, Nets, Nuggets, Mavs, and Sixers. ALL of those teams ended up with serious injury and/or roster issues. The only other two teams that really had higher expectations were the Suns and the Jazz, and both of those underperformed so poorly the Warriors didn't even have to face them. The Celtics had even lower expectations during the preseason than the Warriors did.
Curry closer to Bron then Bron to Jordan, but let LeGBT tell it
very true
hater shyt.
murksiderock
Superstar
you're just gonna act like this last ring didn't happen huh lol
saying Curry's a better winner than Jordan is crazy tho
Saying Steph a better winner than Mike isn't crazy at all...
His career isn't "more successful" thru 13 years than Mike's, as he has fewer of all the compiling markers of success: fewer MVPs, fewer championships, fewer All-Stars, fewer All-NBAs, fewer stat victories (scoring/assists/rebound champions, etc), fewer All-D's, etc...
So OP was wrong when he said Steph's career is more successful than Mike's, Mike is smoking him in all the categories that we measure success...
Except winning. It ain't crazy at all to say Steph is a bigger winner than Mike...
they wouldnt be in the play-in if Steph didnt get hurt and Wiseman wasn't a one man tank job
What's LeBron's excuse for ending the season 16 games under .500 with a worse cast than Curry had in 2021
A .500 record is 41-41. The Lakers were 33-49, that's 8 games below .500. You can't finish 49-49, an NBA regular season isn't 98 games...
LeBron was 37 and in Y19. It was the greatest Age 37/Y19 season in NBA history, if measured by individual performance. When he was in Y13 like Steph, he also won the championship and won it in historic fashion...
It's not even remotely true...
feelosofer
#ninergang
If you're talking in terms of team accomplishments you can argue Steph belongs in the conversation with LeBron.
LeBron is the better player BUT.
The Warriors won and if they stay healthy are favorites the next year. So as a winner Curry belongs in the room.
LeBron is the better player BUT.
The Warriors won and if they stay healthy are favorites the next year. So as a winner Curry belongs in the room.
my fault.they finished with 16 more losses than wins.
And that's why LeBron isnt the GOAT. because you compare him to Steph curry
even wizards Jordan had a better record than what lebron did last season
Curry basically snatched what was supposed to be LeBron's era.
Be a suppsed GOAT and have to share your era with a 6'3point guard, brehs
murksiderock
Superstar
Let's get this out the way first:
I do not think Steph is a better basketball player than Mike. Steph isn't close to Mike on an All-Time scale and at 13 years in, he's running outta time to shrink the gap by any meaningful margin. He isn't a more successful basketball player than Mike, as all the markers of success favor Mike (All-NBAs, MVPs, Top 5 MVP finishes, All-Stars, championships, conference finals appearances, DPOYs, All-D teams, etc etc etc)...
Except for one category: winning, and the correlated impact on winning. Thinking Basketball just released a video that showed the peak versions of Steph are right in line with Peak Mike in terms of plus/minus splits...
Basketball Culture for a long time has minimized "winning" to solely the champion, ignoring all other aspects of winning. For years I've pushed back on people who claim Harden isn't a "winning" player because he hasn't won a championship, as that's obviously false and easily disproven. Conversely, Dwyane Wade gets hella burn as a "winning" basketball player because he has 3 rings, ignoring all other markers of winning...
So I directly compared objective "winning" criteria between Mike and Steph, and these arent statistics. These are the actual results in these guys' careers, and I took out seasons that both guys didn't even play more than 18 games in...
Not only is it closer than guys wanna acknowledge, but Steph had a higher peak win season, more wins per year, more 50-win seasons, and a higher win percentage in both playoff games and playoff series...
HE IS NOT A BETTER BASKETBALL PLAYER THAN MIKE. And at this time, he doesn't even yet have the longevity as an elite player Mike had, and longevity does matter, so that favors Mike...
But anyone who thinks Steph isn't, at bare minimum, as much of a winner as Mike, needs to stop talking about sport because you obviously don't know how to measure winning impact!
..............
PRIME STEPH (2013-present)
•58.75 wins/year (minus lost '20 season; peaked at 73-9)
•1 70-win season, 2x 60-wins, 4x 50-wins
•6x Finals (4-2); 3x Finals as #1 (2-1)
•6x WCF (6-0); 3x WCF as #1 (3-0)
•7x playoff appearances
•21-3 playoff series record (.875); 87-35 playoff games record (.713)
•as #1: 11-2 playoff series record (.846); 46-22 playoff games record (.676)
PRIME MIKE (1984-1998)
•56.18 wins/year (minus lost '86 and '95 seasons; peaked at 72-10)
•1 70-win season, 4x 60-wins, 3x 50-wins, 2x sub-500 seasons
•6x Finals (6-0)
•8x ECF (6-2)
•13x playoff appearances
•30-7 playoff series record (.811); 119-60 playoff games record (.665)
I do not think Steph is a better basketball player than Mike. Steph isn't close to Mike on an All-Time scale and at 13 years in, he's running outta time to shrink the gap by any meaningful margin. He isn't a more successful basketball player than Mike, as all the markers of success favor Mike (All-NBAs, MVPs, Top 5 MVP finishes, All-Stars, championships, conference finals appearances, DPOYs, All-D teams, etc etc etc)...
Except for one category: winning, and the correlated impact on winning. Thinking Basketball just released a video that showed the peak versions of Steph are right in line with Peak Mike in terms of plus/minus splits...
Basketball Culture for a long time has minimized "winning" to solely the champion, ignoring all other aspects of winning. For years I've pushed back on people who claim Harden isn't a "winning" player because he hasn't won a championship, as that's obviously false and easily disproven. Conversely, Dwyane Wade gets hella burn as a "winning" basketball player because he has 3 rings, ignoring all other markers of winning...
So I directly compared objective "winning" criteria between Mike and Steph, and these arent statistics. These are the actual results in these guys' careers, and I took out seasons that both guys didn't even play more than 18 games in...
Not only is it closer than guys wanna acknowledge, but Steph had a higher peak win season, more wins per year, more 50-win seasons, and a higher win percentage in both playoff games and playoff series...
HE IS NOT A BETTER BASKETBALL PLAYER THAN MIKE. And at this time, he doesn't even yet have the longevity as an elite player Mike had, and longevity does matter, so that favors Mike...
But anyone who thinks Steph isn't, at bare minimum, as much of a winner as Mike, needs to stop talking about sport because you obviously don't know how to measure winning impact!
..............
PRIME STEPH (2013-present)
•58.75 wins/year (minus lost '20 season; peaked at 73-9)
•1 70-win season, 2x 60-wins, 4x 50-wins
•6x Finals (4-2); 3x Finals as #1 (2-1)
•6x WCF (6-0); 3x WCF as #1 (3-0)
•7x playoff appearances
•21-3 playoff series record (.875); 87-35 playoff games record (.713)
•as #1: 11-2 playoff series record (.846); 46-22 playoff games record (.676)
PRIME MIKE (1984-1998)
•56.18 wins/year (minus lost '86 and '95 seasons; peaked at 72-10)
•1 70-win season, 4x 60-wins, 3x 50-wins, 2x sub-500 seasons
•6x Finals (6-0)
•8x ECF (6-2)
•13x playoff appearances
•30-7 playoff series record (.811); 119-60 playoff games record (.665)