Curry is on track to surpass MJ, better than Lebron.

Collateral

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Messages
34,016
Reputation
6,961
Daps
208,142
420x0.jpg


full
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,841
Reppin
the ether
I didnt sabotage anything

People argue that he's a scrub. When the warriors are successful, they say the team is stacked. When the Warriors struggle, Draymond is washed.
Wiggins made the all-star team this season, and NO ONE outside of Warriors fans agreed with it. Said he only made it because of KPop voters.


You destroyed your own argument again. Who gives a fukk about Coli threads, how about we look at the actual voting?





Players ranked Draymond as #3 frontcourt and Wiggins as #5
Media ranked Draymond as #4 frontcourt and Wiggins as #6

So both the players and the media CLEARLY have Draymond and Wiggins as All-Stars this year. In fact the players would have had Draymond starting!!!


The Warriors objectively had 3 all-stars this year, the only such team in the NBA, and neither the players nor the media had any doubt that all three deserved it. Then they had a 20ppg guy and an 18ppg guy as their 4th and 5th players, and were solid 8-deep.

Reality biting you in the ass.
 

Don Homer

Molto Bene
Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
30,629
Reputation
4,516
Daps
103,502
Claiming that Draymond wouldn't be able to start on most teams without Curry is nonsense. A defender of his caliber with 0 offensive skill would still start, and he often benefits his team offensively as well with his passing. Off the top of my head the Celtics, Heat, and Bucks are the only squads that might not have started him this year, depending on how they wanted to play.

Most of the rest of what you say is accurate, and it still adds up to a stacked team.

Steph was an MVP candidate
Wiggins was a legitimate all-star even if he was a weak all-star starter
Draymond was an all-star and DPOY candidate
Klay took time getting back and yet was still a 20ppg scorer and elite shooter
Poole did get hot and was near a 20ppg scorer himself


It wasn't like the Warriors ripped up the league all season, they only won 53 games. But at the end of the year, they had a stacked roster. And the lineups they ended up facing in the West were ass.

Denver with no Murray or MPJ
Memphis with no Ja
Dallas with no Porzingis or Hardaway


Give me a fukking break with that shyt. Golden State was favored by a mile in all three of those matchups.







Your team averaged 92ppg in your 4 Finals losses. That doesn't have jack shyt to do with Curry.

Your team shot 37% with 18 turnovers, 40% with 15 turnovers, 41% with 18 turnovers, and 42% with 22 turnovers in your 4 Finals losses. That doesn't have jack shyt to do with Curry.

Your star player was 24 for 76 (31%) from 2pt range for the series. From TWO-POINT range. That isn't Curry.


Warriors (especially Wiggins and Draymond) played great defense but y'all also screwed the pooch. Curry had a terrific Finals but if y'all hadn't played like ass on offense it would have been a different series.
Wiggins made the all-star team because Kawhi and PG were injured. If he was a legit all-star, more teams would have tried to get him 2 years ago

The warriors beating the grizzlies doesnt mean their roster is stacked.
Dallas traded porzingis for bertans and Spender Dinwiddie (who were healthy). Why the fukk would "no porzingis" be a factor. And Tim Hardaway was having an AWFUL season before he got injured. He was a bad defender and before he got injured, he was shooting the ball like shyt

so wtf are you talking about, really?

Steph's presence makes the team better, and makes them more impactful when he shares the court with them. That is why the team looks stacked. You saw what Durant, Klay, and Draymond looked like when they didnt have steph in that stretch in the 2018-19 season. They went sub-.500 in the games steph didnt play.

And this is why Steph is better than KD.
 

Don Homer

Molto Bene
Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
30,629
Reputation
4,516
Daps
103,502
You destroyed your own argument again. Who gives a fukk about Coli threads, how about we look at the actual voting?





Players ranked Draymond as #3 frontcourt and Wiggins as #5
Media ranked Draymond as #4 frontcourt and Wiggins as #6

So both the players and the media CLEARLY have Draymond and Wiggins as All-Stars this year. In fact the players would have had Draymond starting!!!


The Warriors objectively had 3 all-stars this year, the only such team in the NBA, and neither the players nor the media had any doubt that all three deserved it. Then they had a 20ppg guy and an 18ppg guy as their 4th and 5th players, and were solid 8-deep.

Reality biting you in the ass.

genius, Wiggins wouldn't have made it if Kawhi and PG, the premiere SF's in the west, were healthy. Wiggins was the next best choice

The players/media wouldve have voted for PG and Kawhi if they were available.

imagine tryna discredit the warriors for drafting well. And just looking at PPG is a dumbass way to even asses roster talent. Klay had 20ppg but he looked incredibly inconsistent throughout the season. BECAUSE HE CAME BACK FROM MISSING 2 YEARS FROM LOWER BODY INJURIES. And Poole scored 18ppg but was an awful defender. And at times in the playoffs he would have terrible nights.

How do you consider yourself smart just by looking at PPG totals and saying the roster is stacked?

A team that is "stacked" would be projected to win more than 48 games coming into the season. That would be good for lower end of the playoff teams in the West.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,841
Reppin
the ether
Wiggins made the all-star team because Kawhi and PG were injured. If he was a legit all-star, more teams would have tried to get him 2 years ago

If no one was injured then the Warriors might not have made the 2nd round. :comeon:

Wiggins was an all-star out of the players who actually played this year. And those are the only ones who mattered.




The warriors beating the grizzlies doesnt mean their roster is stacked.
Dallas traded porzingis for bertans and Spender Dinwiddie (who were healthy). Why the fukk would "no porzingis" be a factor. And Tim Hardaway was having an AWFUL season before he got injured. He was a bad defender and before he got injured, he was shooting the ball like shyt

so wtf are you talking about, really?

You were all bragging about preseason projections, and I'm pointing out that those teams were nowhere near their preseason projections.

You lied and said the Warriors weren't projected to make the playoffs when they were projected about 48-49 wins, just 4 fewer than what they got. And all the teams above them either got injured or badly underperformed.

Steph didn't play any better this year than anyone expected him to. But Wiggins/Poole stepped up and a bunch of other teams fell out due to circumstances.




Steph's presence makes the team better, and makes them more impactful when he shares the court with them. That is why the team looks stacked.

ThEn WhY dInD't ThEy LoOk StAcKeD lAsT yEaR?

Steph was far better last year, and the Warriors didn't even make the playoffs. If it's all Steph doing this and not his teammates, then why the fukk didn't he do it last season?

The difference between last year and this year ain't jack shyt to do with Steph improving. It was Klay coming back and Wiggins and Poole improving. Wiggins is still just 26 and was a #1 pick and consistent 20ppg guy in a shyt organization, he's shown improvement over the last 3 seasons. Poole is just 22 and showing the entire league who he is. There's this weird desperation from Curry stans to pretend that no one else has talent except for Curry even when his talent is quite one-dimensional and he relies on other players to take nearly every other role on the court.
 

ISO

Pass me the rock nikka
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
61,087
Reputation
8,207
Daps
194,678
Reppin
BX, NYC
I didn't assume anything. I'm saying we have literally no idea what role Steph will have individually for the next 5 years, so how can you claim you know for certain what his individual legacy would be solely based on his team accomplishments?

Two years from now the Warriors could have 3-4 all-stars without Steph. So I wouldn't assume anything based off of team performance alone. Even if Steph is a great, all-star level starter in 2 years, does it not make a difference whether the team is carried by him or carried by an ensemble cast?


Imagine if 2010-2014 had worked out differently for the Heat. Let's imagine that Wade and Bosh never get hurt, Wade continues in his 2009 form while Bosh makes a bit of a leap. Bron steps back to let them both shine and acts as the distributor and 3rd option, let's say he averages 20-8-8 and has a couple nice playoff games but nothing remarkable. The Heat win 4 straight titles.

Then he goes to the Cavs, Kyrie and Love never get hurt and Durant never goes to the Warriors, Bron continues to defer. Over the next 6 years the Cavs win 3 titles with Kyrie winning 2 Finals MVPs and Bron gets his first one.

Bron would have 7 rings. Would that leave Bron with a better all-time legacy than he has, just because he had more rings? Would he now be better than MJ?


That's why basing all-time future claims on "If they get this many rings then...." is stupid. Rings are a team accomplishment. If you don't know the circumstances, and you don't even know how they played, how can you be certain you know their legacy?
Clearly the poster who made the claim did so under the impression that Curry would still be the teams engine, best player, leading scorer, etc…

If Curry does that leads his team to 5 more championships which brings his total to 9 rings then yes he would become the greatest ever. The Warriors would also become the greatest dynasty.
 

ISO

Pass me the rock nikka
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
61,087
Reputation
8,207
Daps
194,678
Reppin
BX, NYC
bill russell has 11. is he the goat?
He used to be the most widely accepted G.O.A.T. before Jordan came along.

Steph would have won 9 in a more advanced league with more teams while breaking the game with his shooting.
 

Don Homer

Molto Bene
Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
30,629
Reputation
4,516
Daps
103,502
If no one was injured then the Warriors might not have made the 2nd round. :comeon:

Wiggins was an all-star out of the players who actually played this year. And those are the only ones who mattered.






You were all bragging about preseason projections, and I'm pointing out that those teams were nowhere near their preseason projections.

You lied and said the Warriors weren't projected to make the playoffs when they were projected about 48-49 wins, just 4 fewer than what they got. And all the teams above them either got injured or badly underperformed.

Steph didn't play any better this year than anyone expected him to. But Wiggins/Poole stepped up and a bunch of other teams fell out due to circumstances.






ThEn WhY dInD't ThEy LoOk StAcKeD lAsT yEaR?

Steph was far better last year, and the Warriors didn't even make the playoffs. If it's all Steph doing this and not his teammates, then why the fukk didn't he do it last season?

The difference between last year and this year ain't jack shyt to do with Steph improving. It was Klay coming back and Wiggins and Poole improving. Wiggins is still just 26 and was a #1 pick and consistent 20ppg guy in a shyt organization, he's shown improvement over the last 3 seasons. Poole is just 22 and showing the entire league who he is. There's this weird desperation from Curry stans to pretend that no one else has talent except for Curry even when his talent is quite one-dimensional and he relies on other players to take nearly every other role on the court.
1. "if" statements. using hypotheticals to justify your point :mjlol:
Jamal murray coming off an ACL injury after missing the entire season and MPJ coming off a bad back injury wouldnt make them better than the warriors.
2. OK "out of the ones who mattered". Lets look into the starting Small Forwards who were in the west this season: Mikal Bridges, Dillon Brooks (who ended up missing 4-6 weeks from an ankle injury anyway), Wiggins, Royce Oneaele, Jaden McDaniels/Jared Vanderbilt, and Anthony Edwards. Ant-man is the only one closest to being an all-star. So ofc Wiggins got it.
3. Steph elevated the play of everyone last year. The difference was Wiseman was playing (and he's fukking awful - Steph actually made him look better than he was, which is an awful sign for warriors fans), mulder is pretty much out the league (currently hangning onto a 2way contract with Miami), Bazemore looked better last year playing next to steph, which is why Lakers fans thought they were getting someone (he showed that he wasnt even good enough to break the rotation for a trash ass lakers team about 15 games in the season), Brad Wannamaker is out the league, Nico Mannion is out the league, Eric Paschall JUST signed a deal last week to go to Minnesota on a 1 year deal (so he will be gone soon), and Kelly Oubre had an astonishingly low BBIQ, which is why he was a bench player for Charlotte this past season as a free agent wing (and also why PHX looed MUCH better without him the second he left the team). Nearly everyone on the 2021 is either fringe NBA talent or G-League talent, which means they still arent NBA ready. All the 2022 Warriors had were decent players, but playing with Steph made them look much better. There's a reason GSW was the only team to keep GP2. There was a reason GSW was the only team to take Otto Porter Jr and Bjelica. Those guys were decent players but no1 wanted them. They took vet minimum deals.
4. No one is saying guys around steph arent talented, we are saying that the roster wasnt STACKED. the 2015 Warriors were more stacked. The 2016/17 Warriors were stacked. There's a reason why people were saying this was the least talented roster Steph curry had that won a chip. Theres a reason why Steve Kerr and Bob myers (the fukking GM of the team) didn't think this roster was a championship roster after the regular season ended. They were good, but not STACKED.

Steph Curry makes every player around him better. KD has NEVER done that. Steph even made KD better. That's why KD finally made it over the mountaintop playing with steph, and it's why he cant get there without him.

And that is why Steph has proven himself to be better and more valuable than KD. Steph literally prolongs the careers of players whowould otherwise be out the league There's a reason no1 is looking to empty their roster for KD. Those trade talks died real quick. What was suppsed to be a "KD Sweepstakes" turned out to be a fukking BUST.

I guarantee you if Steph asked for a traded, teams wouldbe ALL OVER THAT. Why? Because Steph established himself as the better player with this chip
 
Last edited:

WaveMolecules

Superstar
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
14,681
Reputation
3,066
Daps
45,261
Reppin
Queens
He used to be the most widely accepted G.O.A.T. before Jordan came along.

Steph would have won 9 in a more advanced league with more teams while breaking the game with his shooting.
KAJ was the goat before Jordan.


So the answer is no?

Curry won’t be the goat regardless of rings
 

jaydawg08

Superstar
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
8,526
Reputation
875
Daps
20,948
KAJ was never considered goat
This. It's a very recent thing with KAJ being considered the goat.

Oscar was the guy who alot of older dudes would place high on their list and he basically fell all the way off by recent journalists
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,841
Reppin
the ether
He used to be the most widely accepted G.O.A.T. before Jordan came along.
Before Jordan came along it was Russell who was most widely considered goat


I grew up before MJ was considered GOAT and I don't remember this Russell hype at all.

On the streets in the late 80s / early 90s young people called Magic the GOAT over Bird except for the occasional outlier who reached back for Wilt, Oscar, or Kareem. I'm sure there were people saying Russell too but they would have been old heads.


lol - did some research and managed to find this old-ass internet argument from 1986. It's just two guys but one says Kareem, the other says Wilt. Russell gets a mention too. Of course this is before Magic won his 3 MVPs or his 4th and 5th titles.




Here's a reddit thread with a guy born in 1970 who says there was no consensus at all. He says Sports Illustrated in the 1980s used to argue between Magic and Larry, and that Wilt, Russell, and Kareem all got mentioned as the all-time best big but he would have had Kareem by a nose.





Another one of a guy watching '91 footage of Magic announcing AIDS and all the news coverage saying he was the greatest basketball player of all time:





Another saying it was debated between Magic and Bird, with Kareem, Wilt, or Russell all getting lesser consideration:

 
Top