They double teamed him plenty, getting the ball out of his hands. If you mean they didn't double him constantly, like most teams, I agree with that. Their general defensive philosophy was to switch, but that doesn't work all the time--the Warriors hunted mismatches on the switches and that required help on Curry plenty of times. The idea that they never doubled him is crazy.
Obviously throughout the course of the game they probably jumped the pick when he had the ball etc. but not to the extent you were saying to free up KD. KD just torched us no matter what we were doing. We had no answer for him, he was the best player on the court. I don't know how you don't think that watching those games. Kevin Durant averages 30+ points in the finals and dwarfs all of currys numbers. And he did that on OKC too without Curry so I don't get your argument.
Because you're ignoring the argument. You're quoting individual numbers, when I said Curry has always been more valuable than Durant due to his effect on everyone else (in addition to his own great numbers). Curry's gravity is almost unanimously considered to be the greatest in NBA history and it manifests itself in his monstrous on/off numbers. Since 2014-15, only LeBron James has been in his neighborhood. On those Warriors, Curry's on/off numbers were much, much higher than Durant's. The Warriors outscored teams much more with just Curry on the floor than with just Durant on the floor. Durant will always "look" more dominant and he is, in fact, a far better one-on-one player than Curry. That's why I said he'd crush in a one-on-one league perhaps to the point of being the best player in history. But the NBA is a five-on-five league, so ignoring Curry's effect on his teammates, getting them much better looks, is being willfully ignorant.
I dunno what validated your claim. KDs BPM is higher than Currys and was also higher than Currys the two years they won the championship. I get he has gravity, he's easily the best shooter ever and the greatest complimentary player a team could have, but he couldn't even take his team to the playoffs. They were so bad without his other super stars propping him up.
2016-17: Curry: +17.2 / Durant: +8.7 2017-18: Curry: +12.6 / Durant: +2.0 2018-19: Curry: +16.1 / Durant: +16.4 So for one year, Durant was on par with Curry, but over the whole period of them playing on the same team, Curry was much more valuable. "Complimentary player." Yeah, clearly you have no axe to grind here. He's going to be a unanimous top-twenty player, many will have him top-ten ever, he's won multiple MVPs and is considered with LeBron James as the defining player of this generation, but you're pretending he's a complimentary player. Hard to take you seriously when you go to that extent of absurdity. Also, your "bUT hE CAn'T caRRy a TeAM" is aging like milk this year. But I guess he has "all his superstars propping him up" again.
Why cuz the media props up him like he's some god? Let's be real here, how is he the only unanimous MVP in league history? I get it man, media and fans love his game its fun to watch. Great team basketball blah blah. But how can you be the only top 20 or top 10 player to never win finals MVP? If they win it all this year he can change my mind. I'm just saying right now he's the greatest complementary player I've ever seen. Doesn't mean he can't be an alpha, he's just never proven it for a whole season. He chokes in playoffs as much as Harden. Last time they had the greatest record ever they lost in the finals. So don't get ahead of yourself. I dunno what the difference between your stat and BPM, but when I look at that. Durants was higher and also higher for his career. I really hope to see a Nets vs Warriors finals. If he wins that he gets all the credit in the world. Rockets fans can't even complain about KD going to Warriors.
He's been the alpha on the Warriors every year of his prime. Only an idiot would say he wasn't before Durant got there and even when Durant was there, he was the alpha--that's specifically why Durant left. He knew it would never be his team and he wanted to be the alpha for a title winner, not riding Curry's coattails to titles. So Durant himself didn't see Durant as the alpha on those Warriors teams. Argue it with him. But yes, it's obvious you're too embittered over the Rockets/Warriors rivalry, considering you keep calling him a complimentary player and claiming he's just a media-driven phenomenon. I'll leave you to it.
I don't hate Steph at all. He could easily be top 20, he's got a lot of chances to win again. I will respect him if he does. but right now when I looked at his career and compare it someone like CP3. I don't understand how anyone can say he's soo much better. I think CP3 is the greatest point guard in nba history. He will never get that credit cuz he's never won and it's all about situations and luck. Some players are blessed like Curry who gets to play every team without a star on his way to championships. Some players are cursed like CP3 who always seems to get hurt at the wrong time. Or someone on their team gets hurt at the wrong time. CP3 never ceases to amaze me in how he can carry any shitty team to the playoffs and compete. I really hope he wins a ring in PHX. That dude earned it. All advanced stats say he's the greatest. Also you are misreading what I'm saying. Obviously Steph has been the alpha on the Warriors teams since before KD got there and now. But to me they only won as him being the second best player which is why I says he's been the best complementary. He's had some pretty awful finals without KD otherwise they woulda given him one of those MVPs.
So you weren't aware that the Warriors won a title before Durant got there? Even IF that were true (that he was the second best player), that's still a silly claim. Regardless of who you had as second-best between Shaq and Kobe on the 2000-2002 Lakers, the other wasn't a "complimentary player" just for being second best. Between Curry and Durant, you have two of the greatest players ever--two unquestioned top-twenty players of all-time--saying either one was "complimentary" is silly. I think Durant was the second-best (considering both had amazing individual stats, but Curry had the greater team effect) but that doesn't mean I think Durant was "a great complimentary player." He was also a dominant superstar--Golden State just had two of them. He hasn't actually had awful Finals. In fact, most people thought it was pretty ridiculous that Iguodala got Finals MVP over Curry simply because he made LeBron James work for his numbers. You claim Curry is narrative-driven, but you seem to be the narrative-driven one, with takes like "His Finals must have been terrible, otherwise he'd have gotten a Finals MVP." As for Chris Paul--I wouldn't dispute that he's one of the several greatest point guards ever. I don't think Curry is "so much better" than Paul. But, like with Durant, I think Curry has a greater overall effect on his team outscoring the other team. That said, I don't think there's a huge disparity between Magic, Curry and Paul at the top of the all-time point guard list.
I know he won one without KD. I think it was game 2 that skews it for everyone. He was awful in that game. Not something you expect from a top 20 player. But it's more about situations. If Kyrie or Dwight or any of the teams they played that year in the playoffs were healthy it might have been a different outcome. I just think differently about rings and greatness that's all. For example most people think Jordan is the greater player of all time. If that's the case can't Malone be the second best player ever even though he never won a ring? I mean if you are losing to the best player every year can't you still be great? But he's no where near the top 20 on most lists and that's just strange to me. Second all time leading scorer. Obviously I don't think he's the second best, it's just an example.
And if Curry hadn't gotten hurt, twice, in the 2015-16 playoffs and if Bogut and Iguodala hadn't gotten hurt in the Finals, they probably win the one in the 73[win season. You can play this game with pretty much every season and champion. Either in who they played that had injuries or who they never had to face due to injuries. Nowhere near the top-20? I've commonly seen him in the top-20. It seemed like he was commonly called the greatest power forward of all-time until Tim Duncan eclipsed him. But I don't see how losing to Jordan a couple of times gives him any kind of argument as the second-best player (and I know you're not calling him that). Ewing lost to Jordan a few times. I think championships are a nice piece for legacy, but I generally don't use titles to determine greatness. I think if Michael Jordan had played out his career on the Kings, he probably doesn't win any titles--but he'd still be exactly as good as a basketball player. How good your teammates are doesn't determine how good you are, IMO. You need a great team to win a title, regardless of how good you are individually.
Karl Malone played in the NBA for 20 seasons. He only lost to Jordan twice. 18 other times, he lost to not-the-greatest-of-all-time.
I’m walking in half way into an argument but… Curry is the most important member of that squad along with draymond. We actually had a chance to beat the KD version warriors bc KD ball stopped and even harden did a good job guarding him. If you let them play real warriors ball with curry klay flying off picks there was no way we were gonna beat that team. Looks can be deceiving, KD hurt their offense, every time he posted up in the midrange and we got a chance to get our D set up it gave us a slight advantage. There’s a reason KD never won anything before he latched on to the warriors and will never win anything after either. He’s a better Kobe, can only score. Harden curry lebron they make every player on the team better. You can say KD dropped 30 a game all you want, the fact is the warriors won without him and posted the best season in nba history without him. If he really made them better they would have won 75 games and destroyed the rockets instead they won less games and would have lost to us if not for Cp3s hamstring. Facts
Yeah. Reason 1 is before GS he had to play LeBron with 2 HOF players next to him, as opposed to Delladova. Reason 2 is his Achilles injury in his last GS season. Last year was year 1, and Kyrie got hurt. Yes, they won without him when they faced a injured team in every round of the playoffs and LeBron minus Love and Kyrie. In their historic season they had to face LeBron with help and they lost, which is why they had to get more (aka Durant). Once KD went down they lost again.
Yeah that's why GSW won 73 games without KD... and is once again the best team in the league without KD That's why they "had to get KD" lol that's the dumbest thing I've ever read... yeah GSW were begging to have KD after being 1 game away from winning back to back championship. What maybe you meant to say was that's why "KD had to join GSW" cuz that team broke him and he gave up trying to win a championship with himself as the best player. Let's not try to change history.
So the Warriors 1st title in 2015 was only because they were lucky and faced injured teams, but the next season when Curry was injured in the playoffs and Draymond was suspended 1 game and lost game 7 is evidence they couldn't win without more talent, despite achieving the best record in nba history. Sounds a lot like the bitter people who says the Rockets titles in 94 and 95 were due to not having to face MJ.
And after the Cavs figured that 73 win team out that 73 win team said we need more and went superstar recruiting. They pretty much were begging. Your memory deceives you.
If the Cavs faced an injured team in every single playoff round, and GS down its 2nd and 3rd option (as in not on the floor at all) then I’d rock with your comparison. You can also spare us the Curry was hurt excuse. We didn’t hear it until he started playing poorly. Dray was on the court in 2 of the final 3 losses, including G7. GS winning when they faced injured teams along the way, losing in the Finals when they didn’t, winning after obtaining KD and losing when he went down is all fact, not similar to your Jordan/Rockets hypotheticals.
I'm not the one making excuses for GS winning or losing. Fact of the matter is GSW won in 2015 and lost in 2016. Detractors can say it was due to injured teams they won and supporters can say it was due to Curry suffering an MCL injury & missing 2 weeks during the playoffs or Dray getting suspended that they lost. Just as the detractors of the rockets titles say they won when Jordan didn't play a full season and lost whenever he did (thats also a fact and not a hypothetical and its just as silly). People can detract from the warriors all they want, but at least apply it with some level of consistency.
