Curry would be the top ten players all time after this year run. He would win another MVP, another NBA title with the 73 wins in the regular season, and a final MVP too, so no one can match this.
By the late 90's, offenses were struggling so much, they had to change the rules. Many stars of the 80's and 90's were averaging 37/mpg well into their mid-30s. In 1995, 20+ players averaged 37.4/mpg This season, only 5 players are averaging 36.2/mpg Nutrition has improved, obviously, but saying older players were inferior due to "worse food", "old methods" is irrelevant considering minutes played. The problem with conversations like this is there's no middle ground. It is possible for 1) Curry to be the GOAT shooter, while 2) recognizing he's doing it in an easier Era for perimeter players There's room for both those statements to be true.
Steph is what Chris Jackson was supposed to be, but never lived up to. Never had the right attitude or work ethic that Curry has.
Very similar styles, Steve Kerr and Phil both recognise they have similar styles and talent. Abdul-Rauf would do better in this era and would hit threes like crazy, but no, he would not be as good as Curry. Curry is him on steroids with better vision and range.
And defensively Abdul-Rauf was pretty bad, which is why Pack got the nod for a while. Also he was streaky despite his perfect form but Phil Jackson is in no way hating. Just suggesting for the new generation who say they never witnessed a similar player to get to know a guy who actually was. NBA draft and others had compared Curry to him as well.
The comparison is still stupid, because while the style was somewhat similar, they're at completely different levels. It's like comparing Michael Jordan to Michael Finley just because they were both athletic shooting guards who could dunk. What makes Curry special isn't simply his style. It's the fact that he's so good at what he's doing that there's a big difference between him and the next best guy. Nobody would care if he played the same style but with 50% TS.
Chris Jackson (Abdul-Raul) could've been a really good point guard, but I never him being as great as Curry is right now. Let's not exaggerate. His shooting ability is nowhere near Curry's is. Their athleticism and agility is comparable, but let's not diminish Curry. He's a fantastic, dead-eye shooter.
Chris Jackson never shot better than .400 3pt% in any season. Curry never shot WORSE than .400. Nuff said.
First off, people are quick to dismiss an obvious troll attempt by Phill. The Zen master himself, managed the biggest egos this game has ever seen through sheer manipulation at some point, in his own words. He isn't an idiot, but I don't think he's a good GM either (as someone earlier tried to point out.) He'd trade everybody on his team for Curry---and more if he could.
Yes it is stupid. The fact that you have to say "look at his LSU stats" almost negates the comparison. You're comparing a "never was" to potentially the greatest shooter in the history of the game.
No it's not. He's not comparing them as their numbers, he's saying to people who say they've never seen anything like Curry to check out a guy who's game and way they shoot, cross over and such is similar. People make way too big a deal out of this.
Define shootout. Bird was a career ~38% three point shooter. Not saying Curry would destroy him, but this is another case of 'different eras'.
The amount isn't as important as the percentage. If we are talking 3-pt shootout, then yeah, Curry would win easily. But mano-a-mano shootout could be a different story. Still silly due to the different eras thing.
I'd take Curry too, but Curry didn't win this year. Bird went into the contest and asked who was going to be 2nd? Bird had strong mind games and he won 3 of them in a row
