Yes another Curry thread

[Dynasty]

Fixed. I don't follow the NBA that closely, but is Seth still in the league?

Yeah, he's with the Kings IIRC.

 

[huskypantz]

And Pete Rose is the greatest hitter of all time

Reading comprehension. I said nothing about Ray and "best shooter ever". Best career. Ray still has twice as many 3's as Curry and is #1, Curry's ranked #26 or so. Do you disagree with that?

 

[tentoes4rings]

Ray had the best 3-point shooting career ever. If his health holds up, Curry will easily eclipse Ray. But a lot of things can happen in the next decade plus. What if Bird didn't develop back problems? Dwight Howard is 30 but if you look at his stats it seems like he peaked 5 years ago. You never know.

I'm just trying to understand your logic with the bird argument. Bird shot 37% from 3 for his career, and he actually shot a higher % than that his last couple years, despite back problems. He had 649 makes over 13 seasons. Curry is at over 44% over his first 6.5 seasons, with over 1400 makes already! Bird was a great player but not even in Curry's league overall from 3. What this kid is doing is absolutely mind blowing.

 

[methodology]

Reading comprehension. I said nothing about Ray and "best shooter ever". Best career. Ray still has twice as many 3's as Curry and is #1, Curry's ranked #26 or so. Do you disagree with that?

You said quote "Ray had the best 3 point shooting career ever". That to me means you are saying he is the best 3 point shooter ever. That is not true. He was the most prolific 3 point shooter and made hte most 3s but that doesnt designate him as the best 3 point shooting career ever.

Pete Rose had the most hits in the MLB so I dont see how that isnt a good comparison. No one would ever in a million years say "Pete had the best hitting career ever".

There are many better 3 point shooters in NBA history who shot a lot better percentage from 3 than Ray. Ray just made the most 3s; he will always be mentioned among the elite but he dosnt stand at the top alone. Husky fans look at Ray as better than he might be because he donned a UConn uniform.

I prefer to look at stats and not be bias. Curry has shattered the most 3s made in a season for hte past 2 or 3 seasons and he is about to annihilate his previous records this year. There is no doubt in my mind and a majority of experts that Curry will ultimately break Rays record.

 

[tentoes4rings]

You said quote "Ray had the best 3 point shooting career ever". That to me means you are saying he is the best 3 point shooter ever. That is not true. He was the most prolific 3 point shooter and made hte most 3s but that doesnt designate him as the best 3 point shooting career ever.

Pete Rose had the most hits in the MLB so I dont see how that isnt a good comparison. No one would ever in a million years say "Pete had the best hitting career ever".

There are many better 3 point shooters in NBA history who shot a lot better percentage from 3 than Ray. Ray just made the most 3s; he will always be mentioned among the elite but he dosnt stand at the top alone. Husky fans look at Ray as better than he might be because he donned a UConn uniform.

I prefer to look at stats and not be bias. Curry has shattered the most 3s made in a season for hte past 2 or 3 seasons and he is about to annihilate his previous records this year. There is no doubt in my mind and a majority of experts that Curry will ultimately break Rays record.

I think Pantz would choose a mulligan on this thread right now. We all post our share of dumb, poorly thought out posts, so I'll give him a pass on this thread.

 

[intlzncster]

51 pts is 36 mins is pretty good, guy makes it look easy.

I'm aware of that. That was exactly my point. He's putting up such astronomical numbers, that a huge game doesn't even register with me anymore. When Kemba put up 52, I was like "holyy sh_t!!!!!". Curry does it in 36m, and I'm like, meh.

 

[intlzncster]

The best compliment I can give Curry is that he is unstoppable.

If he keeps this up along with 4-5 more rings, he will be in MJ category.

If they lure Durant in the offseason, and with the passing of the Duncan/Parker et al era, that should be doable.

 

[intlzncster]

I'm just trying to understand your logic with the bird argument. Bird shot 37% from 3 for his career, and he actually shot a higher % than that his last couple years, despite back problems. He had 649 makes over 13 seasons. Curry is at over 44% over his first 6.5 seasons, with over 1400 makes already! Bird was a great player but not even in Curry's league overall from 3. What this kid is doing is absolutely mind blowing.

I'm not saying Bird's a better 3pt shooter than Curry (he's not), but that was a different league back then. It was so, so much more physical. Curry's numbers would look different, and I'm certain his longevity (whatever it ends up at) would much shorter. Not taking away from Curry, just saying that comparing eras, including things like shooting percentages (harder to get off shots, more beat up, etc), is so damn difficult.

 

[polycom]

I'd argue the warriors get worse with Durant. I just don't see where Durant fits with that team on defense. Warriors are currently the #3 defensive team according to defensive efficiency. Warriors scoring more doesn't make them that much better in my opinion, they'd only get better if they were to become an even more dominate defensive team.

 

[intlzncster]

https://public.tableau.com/profile/thomas.valtin.erwin#!/vizhome/StephCurryThrees/Dashboard1

Here's a graph depicting Steph Curry's 3's made so far this season vs. other historically great seasons.

Its actually unbelievable.

It makes me believe that Curry is on PEDs. PEDs that make you hit long range shots. Only explanation.

 

[intlzncster]

I'd argue the warriors get worse with Durant. I just don't see where Durant fits with that team on defense. Warriors are currently the #3 defensive team according to defensive efficiency. Warriors scoring more doesn't make them that much better in my opinion, they'd only get better if they were to become an even more dominate defensive team.

While I get what you are saying, that's a tough sell that the Warriors become worse with Durant. Anyway, we couldn't really judge until we see it in action.

 

[polycom]

It was so, so much more physical.

The league was more physical but Steph is basically taking pull up 3's from a step or two inside of half court you aren't being guarded that far out...not to mention that they set much better screens since the league was more physical, Curry could potentially get more open looks than Ray allen considering that he's quicker and a much better ball handler.

 

[tentoes4rings]

If they lure Durant in the offseason, that should be very doable.

Do they even need him though? If they can keep Curry, Thompson and Green together for another 8-10 years and surround them with the right role players they have a solid shot. I love Iguodala, hopefully they can keep him for the next 3 years or so through his age 35 season. Thompson and Green are signed through 2019, Steph through next year. Assuming he stays, it's not unrealistic that they can get 2 or 3 more over the next 4 years.

 

[intlzncster]

The league was more physical but Steph is basically taking pull up 3's from a step or two inside of half court you aren't being guarded that far out...not to mention that they set much better screens since the league was more physical, Curry could potentially get more open looks than Ray allen considering that he's quicker and a much better ball handler.

Yeah, but you are discounting the fact that if he went into the paint (where he does a lot of damage), he'd get beat up quick. That makes you more tired, more quickly, during a game and wears you down throughout a season as well. Both things make you miss more shots. To top it off, guys guarding you tighter on the perimeter as well. Perhaps more reluctance to drive, given increased tiredness and body wear and tear, allows guys to play up on you, with less fear of being beat. There's a whole ton of things going on here.

 

[intlzncster]

Do they even need him though? If they can keep Curry, Thompson and Green together for another 8-10 years and surround them with the right role players they have a solid shot. I love Iguodala, hopefully they can keep him for the next 3 years or so through his age 35 season. Thompson and Green are signed through 2019, Steph through next year. Assuming he stays, it's not unrealistic that they can get 2 or 3 more over the next 4 years.

Maybe not. I can't answer that. I'm definitely not an expert on the NBA. And I understand they are a very, very good team right now, and there are always chemistry concerns to be taken into account. But it's just a tough sell for me to believe that you add a top 5 NBA player and become a worse team. Especially one who has his head screwed on straight, ego in check, like Durant (as opposed to say a Howard, Cousins, or a young Carmelo).

 

[tentoes4rings]

While I get what you are saying, that's a tough sell that the Warriors become worse with Durant. Anyway, we couldn't really judge until we see it in action.

Steph is a free agent after next season though as well. He'll obviously get a max contract, so between Green, Thompson and Steph, you're talking about over 50m per year. Unless Steph wants to take a Tom Brady type hometown discount, the chances of them getting another max contract guy are very slim.

 

[superjohn]

Maybe not. I can't answer that. I'm definitely not an expert on the NBA. And I understand they are a very, very good team right now, and there are always chemistry concerns to be taken into account. But it's just a tough sell for me to believe that you add a top 5 NBA player and become a worse team. Especially one who has his head screwed on straight, ego in check, like Durant (as opposed to say a Howard, Cousins, or a young Carmelo).

I think they would be a worse team with him. They are more than a very good team now, they are historically good. Curry, Klay, Draymond, Barnes and Iggy have basically the best plus minus ever. Chemistry is king in basketball and all these pieces fit perfectly, Durant while a star player will change that chemistry. I guess the worry is that Barnes will be offered some ridiculous max type deal from another team in the offseason that the Warriors won't match. Another reason they might want to make the deal is to just keep Durant from getting in the hands of one of their competitors. The problem with Durant on the Warriors is he's taking shots from Curry and Klay. If the Warriors just keep what they have I think they have a dynasty on their hands.

 

[huskypantz]

You said quote "Ray had the best 3 point shooting career ever". That to me means you are saying he is the best 3 point shooter ever.

Well then that's your problem. A career requires longevity and performance over an extended period of time. Is Curry a better pure shooter? Yes. Is he a better all-around player? Yes. Barring injuries, will he blow away all of the records? Yes. But Ray has twice the threes that Curry has - so has he accomplished more as a three point shooter if you compare the two careers today? I say yes.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

You said quote "Ray had the best 3 point shooting career ever". That to me means you are saying he is the best 3 point shooter ever. That is not true. He was the most prolific 3 point shooter and made hte most 3s but that doesnt designate him as the best 3 point shooting career ever.

Pete Rose had the most hits in the MLB so I dont see how that isnt a good comparison. No one would ever in a million years say "Pete had the best hitting career ever".

There are many better 3 point shooters in NBA history who shot a lot better percentage from 3 than Ray. Ray just made the most 3s; he will always be mentioned among the elite but he dosnt stand at the top alone. Husky fans look at Ray as better than he might be because he donned a UConn uniform.

I prefer to look at stats and not be bias. Curry has shattered the most 3s made in a season for hte past 2 or 3 seasons and he is about to annihilate his previous records this year. There is no doubt in my mind and a majority of experts that Curry will ultimately break Rays record.

. . . if his career stays on its current trajectory and isn't unexpectedly shortened.

 

[huskypantz]

I think Pantz would choose a mulligan on this thread right now. We all post our share of dumb, poorly thought out posts, so I'll give him a pass on this thread.

Hell no, read my last post and tell me your argument.

 

[tentoes4rings]

Hell no, read my last post and tell me your argument.

Okay, I can make somewhat of a case on the Ray argument but the Bird one was just plain asinine. The Bird mention was what I was sure you'd take a mulligan on.

 

[mauconnfan]

Oh damn this wasn't about me?

 

[huskypantz]

Okay, I can make somewhat of a case on the Ray argument but the Bird one was just plain asinine. The Bird mention was what I was sure you'd take a mulligan on.

What about Bird? He had a great career but it could have been even better if not for back problems. The correlation is that you can't guarantee that Curry is going to play a generally healthy 15-17 year career. If he does, he might end up being the best player ever.

 

[methodology]

Well then that's your problem. A career requires longevity and performance over an extended period of time. Is Curry a better pure shooter? Yes. Is he a better all-around player? Yes. Barring injuries, will he blow away all of the records? Yes. But Ray has twice the threes that Curry has - so has he accomplished more as a three point shooter if you compare the two careers today? I say yes.

On Curry's current pace he will only need to play 5 more seasons to break Allen's career 3 pointers made record. It took Ray 19 seasons to accomplish that.... It will only take Steph 12 seasons

If Ray went to Kentucky would you still be backing him up instead of acknowledging Curry as the greatest 3 point shooter to live even if he were to retire tomorrow.

 

[auror]

Unless someone wants to argue (and I'll listen) that the upgrade from Barnes' O to Durant's O is on the whole less than going from Durant's D to Barnes' D, I'd cool the "Warriors would be better not getting Durant" take. The chemistry talk is overrated. Super teams DO work in basketball, just look at the teams this year (Heat, Cavs, Spurs, etc.)

 

[Huskyforlife]

Unless someone wants to argue (and I'll listen) that the upgrade from Barnes' O to Durant's O is on the whole less than going from Durant's D to Barnes' D, I'd cool the "Warriors would be better not getting Durant" take. The chemistry talk is overrated. Super teams DO work in basketball, just look at the teams this year (Heat, Cavs, Spurs, etc.)

Normally you'd be correct. But this is different. The Warriors play perfect basketball . Adding another Iso scorer would screw with their offensive chemistry. If they win the title this year, why fix something that ain't broken?

 

[Huskyforlife]

Not to mention they need to save money for currys eventual mega deal

 

[intlzncster]

Normally you'd be correct. But this is different. The Warriors play perfect basketball . Adding another Iso scorer would screw with their offensive chemistry. If they win the title this year, why fix something that ain't broken?

But does Durant have to be just an ISO scorer? Or is that just how he is used given OK's system?

 

[tzznandrew]

Here's a question: who says Durant is only an iso scorer? He's a great shooter who is versatile and multitalented. He's not a ball-stopper like Anthony.

I think it is unlikely he goes there. And I also think it is unlikely the team's regular season record would get any better. But it can't hurt to have him, since this Warriors team was pushed hard in the Finals by a team of LeBron and nobodies. Now, maybe that was Finals jitters. Clearly the Warriors were the better team. But when the game slows down, it's much better to have a Durant than a Barnes.

EDIT: Dammit @intlzncster you beat me to it.

 

[tentoes4rings]

What about Bird? He had a great career but it could have been even better if not for back problems. The correlation is that you can't guarantee that Curry is going to play a generally healthy 15-17 year career. If he does, he might end up being the best player ever.

Oh, I thought you were saying Bird could have been the best three point shooter if not for the back problems. I think he's still tremendously well regarded, even with the shortened career. He's one of the two best small forwards in history, either way.