best thing about this article is this. only 25 shots with a player really close to him, last year and some!!
It's cool when you directly contradict yourself. Which of those guys you named won championships with weak supporting casts? Jordan was considered "not a winner" until he got another Hall of Famer in Pippen and other good supporting players. Suddenly, he became one of the greatest winners ever. Coincidence, I'm sure.
Dude. No. I just can't get with that. For the past 20 games? Yeah. But last season's play? John Stockton prime numbers are insane. And it wasn't one season. You need to go back and look at Stockton's stats from 25 years old to 33 years old. That's not one great season, that's nearly a decade of greatness. Curry is the better shooter and flashier ball handler, that's it. Curry made his stamp on the league at 26. 1 year after Stockton started to dominate his position. So yeah, Curry may very well end up with the better run from 25 to 33 in the end, but none of us know. We know what Stockton did for a very long stretch, and i think it's extremely disrespectful to the game to say Curry has been at a higher level for anything other than the 20 games this season.
He's a better scorer, not just a better shooter. And a historically good scorer...he shoots in volume WITH super high efficiency. That's virtually unheard of. He's a better ball-handler, not just flashier and at least as good a passer. I definitely believe that last season and this, Curry's been at a higher level than Stockton was in any season. Stockton DOES have an incredible career, but again, we're not comparing on career value. That can wait til Curry's career is over.
Larry Bird is in the Top 3. I actually put both Bird and Magic over Stockton, because at 6'9 their height is an advantage, especially for Magic since short PGs had to guard him.
You see this is the kind of stuff i can't agree with. There are fans who respect and love the game and its history. Then there are fans who absolutely **** on the history of the game because they want to imagine someone like Bob Cousy playing today. That's just not how it works. You want to imagine some stud athlete with 70 years of influence and game to study in the modern world transported to the 60s and take a huge dump on everyone there, but at the same time you want to imagine that same 60s player transported to today with none of the advantages of today and be thrown out there and have to learn and adapt on his own? How about you take LeBron and raise him in the 40's, 50's. He sure as hell wouldn't be 260 lbs of muscle. He'd be smaller and his bodies full potential never unlocked and he'd dribble like a dork up and down because he'd be playing under same rules where palming/carrying calls were very strict. He'd also have a set stance with a push shot. He won't be sprinting lightning fast down the court in his flat footed converse all stars. I just hate seeing the history disrespected. Influence being undervalued. All a player can do is be great in his era against his competition. We can talk about Curry not being as great in past eras, but what matters is that he's destroying the competition in front of him. Cousy is the original flashy passer. Without guys to innovate, there just wouldn't be guys like Pistol, Magic, Penny, Kidd, Jwill, Curry etc. Without Elgin Baylor, there wouldn't have been Dr. J, Jordan, Kobe, LeBron. I'm not saying they wouldn't have been great players without the original influence, but that they'd be much different players that we know and love. You see highlights of Cousy and you see trash. I see beauty in the game. Video's like this put a big smile on my face because you see so many moves that many all time great's of the past and players of today still use. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/o-xa6546ixc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Championships aren't the only measure of success. In any case... Magic's Lakers won a title in his rookie season. And in game 7 of the finals, without Kareem, Magic had a stat line of 42 pts, 15 rebounds, 7 assists, and 3 steals. In 1979, the Celtics won 29 games. 1980 was Bird's rookie season. They won 61 games. In 1981, they won the title. Lebron won multiple MVPs and got to the finals with a weak supporting cast in Cleveland. That's pretty successful. Olajuwon had a weak supporting cast in 1994 when the Rockets won the title. During Shaq's effective years, every team for which he played reached the finals (Magic/Lakers/Heat). That's pretty successful. Was Pippen a natural Hall of Famer? Or was he a HOFer b/c he was a perfect complement to Jordan? Was he a HOF caliber player with the Rockets? What about with the Blazers?
Notice the chart says all last year through Nov 28th this year. Harden is in a slump this Nov. For all last year, he was 3.9 attemps/gm for pull-up threes, hitting 35.6 %. Obviously, not as good as Curry, but that is still a good clip to warrant shooting that many. Pull-ups are a great way to keep transition defense honest and make them come out to guard you, thus freeing the lane for easy transition layups.
With the exception of James, none of those players had a weak supporting cast. Olajuwon comes the closest, but he had a strong supporting cast in terms of defense, rebounding and shooters. It just wasn't star-studded...the production was spread across the roster. And James, of course, went to join two superstars to win his titles. I agree that it was impressive that he made the Finals at all with a weak supporting cast in Cleveland, but I never suggested Paul was as good as James. The whole "Jordan made Pippen great" thing is just a convenient narrative for those who wish to believe Jordan won championships all by himself. Pippen? Not really that good, just looked good because...Jordan. You mean when he was past his prime? Yeah, he was a past his prime Hall of Famer with those teams, especially with the Blazers. Pippen looked pretty Hall of Fame caliber in the season and a half Jordan was off playing baseball.
You don't feel it's fair to consider Cousy out of context with his time, yet you disparage the Warriors as "wouldn't be successful in any other era." That's a bit of a double-standard (and, IMO, inaccurate, but that's a separate debate). If Cousy should be evaluated in the context of his era, shouldn't Curry and the Warriors?
Stockton never tried to be a scorer though. Stockton was a great shooter himself and was great at getting to the basket. Who know's how his stats would be if he didn't play with Karl Malone and needed to shoot more. But, again. You talk of Steph as if he's been a high volume, high efficiency scorer his whole career. It's only been 20 games of that level...Curry's not even joined the 50-40-90 club. He very well might this season, but...20 games in an 82 game season. Larry Bird averaged 30, 9 and 6 while being in the 50, 40, 90 club. You saying he's at least as good a passer is all i need to hear though. I don't want to make an assumption of your age, but you either don't remember or just don't know or only remember older 35-40 year old Stockton. Stockton had surgical precision passing skills, Curry..again..flash. But the assists per, and the ast% show enough that Curry isn't "as good" as a passer as Stockton.
How if the Warriors have the advantage of time? It's still the modern era too. Not like i'm talking about the Warriors losing to Bob Petit's Hawks. I'm talking Bird's Celtics, Magic and Kareems Lakers, Bad Boy Pistons type of matchups. The Warriors wouldn't do as good playing their CURRENT style of play and small ball in a league with really hard fouls, hand checking and dominant big men.
The whole LeBron went to the Finals by himself thing is overplayed. The whole Jordan wasn't a winner thing is also.. 1st. LeBron beat a 41 win Wizards in the 1st round, another 41 win Nets in the 2nd round and the Pistons without 4X Defensive Player of the Year Ben Wallace and Larry Brown who were both a huge reason why they won the ship 3 years prior. They still made the ECF with McDyess though, but that EC was awful and really has been the majority of LeBron's career-hence why he's beaten only 7 50 win teams in his entire playoff career which include this past seasons Hawks with no star power, and the Bulls who are always injured. 2 more are Western Conference teams, the Mavs and the Spurs. That leaves 3 50 win EC teams LeBron beat in over a decade. Keep in mind he also failed to make the playoffs his first 3 years. In nearly the same amount of time, Jordan and the Bulls beat 20 50 win teams. His teammates in 07 were much better than what Jordan had his first 3 years. Jordan wasn't a winner right? He just had to face Larry Bird twice in the first round and the #1 defense Bucks with Cummings, Moncrief and Pressy before he had to face the bad boy Pistons 3 straight years. Those pistons were 1 game away from being 3X Champs those 3 straight years Jordan played them. They met again a 4th straight year, and the Bulls finally beat the hell out of them. The pistons key players were under 30 years old still, yet now everyone says they were too old. They still had their HOF coach. Isiah was hurt that year, but he played every game in the playoffs. They were swept. Not in the first round. The ECF. They were good enough for the ECF in a top heavy league still, but they were too weak and old to play Jordan's Bulls anymore? Jordan won an NCAA title with a clutch play. Every team that beat Jordan in the NBA was in or won the NBA title except the Bucks during Jordans rookie year. Those Bucks lost to Moses, Dr J, Mo Cheeks, Barkley. But, Jordan wasn't a winner and Scottie Pippen was traded for on draft day knowing full well he was already a HOF player with his 13ppg, 5rpg, 3.7apg average his first 3 years in the league. Yep.
Just as Cousy would adapt his game based on the circumstances, it's unreasonable to think the Warriors wouldn't base their play on the existing rules of the time.
He was a high volume/super high efficiency scorer last season too. He just took a lot of fourth quarters off due to blowouts. I've also been very clear that I'm confining my appraisal to the last season and this.
Crazy Steph stat of the day Steph Curry is 4-of-10 on 30+ ft shots. CLE, HOU, LAC, LAL, ATL, BOS, BRK, CHA, DAL, DEN, MIL, NOP, ORL, PHX, SAS, UTA and WAS are 4-of-119. https://twitter.com/tomhaberstroh/status/672452543734247424
What? You're taking away everything that makes the Warriors a great team today and make them play a different style to adapt? So what are they going to do? C: Bogut/Thompson PF:Ezeli/MO SF:Green/Barnes SG:Klay/Iggy PG:Curry/Livingston ? You're also comparing that to Bob Cousy, a man who was born and raised in the 50's and 60s being transported 60+ years into the future and forced to adapt to the modern world and game?
That's nuts. I feel like T-Mac could have rivaled that if he took as many. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZE6QPGemMQs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
We were talking about passing, not shooting. Curry is not an all time great passer. Paul may be as good as Stockton, Kidd, and Nash, but no way at Magic's level. Isiah and Payton weren't known as great passers like those three guys either. BTW, Magic was not nearly as good a shooter as guys like Curry, Nash, and even Stockton. But his passing was like... well, magic.
