I def think it's fully up for debate. But it's the stuff that isn't quantifiable that makes the debate for me. If you take Haliburton off the Pacers or Brunson off the Knicks; I think both teams collapse. But I think the Knicks go full dumpster fire whereas the Pacers would have a bit more going for them. I wouldn't be mad at heads saying the opposite.
Also I think Brunson's game management is better than Haliburton's by a small, but legitimate margin. They're both high IQ guys. Hali's playmaking is superior. But in terms of controlling tempo and managing momentum, I give Brunson a slight edge. I rate Brunson as the better scorer too. Put him in isolation and i trust him to get the bucket moreso than Haliburton. The key to all that is I think there's a really good chance Haliburton overtakes Brunson at both within the next season or two. Hali's got ELITE potential with already excellent talent. Brunson is excellent, but he'd have to maintain his January production and efficiency to claim elite status. I don't think it's sustainable.
I think if you took Hali off the Pacers they'd had a fire sale and would be one of the worst teams in the league
...
I don't see Tyrese surpassing Jalen as a half court scorer/isolation player. What Brunson does is just special his quickness and shiftiness, his handle, his floater game, his touch, his post game (the best ever I've seen from a PG), his footwork, his strength, his craftiness and creativity. The thing is Tyrese is no slouch either even if he doesn't match up as an isolation scorer, and has all these other things working for him like being a high volume rangy efficient three point shooter (elite pull-up and catch and shoot) and arguably the best playmaker this season league leader in assists (excellent ball mover, screen bender, transition igniter) and he is longer and more versatile on defense. In my opinion both are elite.
