yeah, the backpicks all-time top 40 is my favorite basketball thing of at least the past 5 years. so in-depth, so well thought out. but yeah he was already trying to move curry way up the all-time list and seemingly ready to make him a top 10 kind of guy with a few more good seasons. and dunc'd on, even before they went to the pay model, i almost had to stop listening to them b/c they were so pro-warriors (while pretending they weren't) and very anti-harden and anti-lebron. in 2016 when they put steph 1st and lebron 6th, only for lebron to dominate the finals, that was pretty funny but i could at least see the steph 1st thought process during that regular season. but when they were still putting steph 2nd in 2019? probably need to rethink that.
i like his work (a lot) but i think he overrates scalability for great players. i just can't think of many teams where adding another truly great player would have them held back due to lack of scalability. lebron/wade might be the most identical players ever, both of whom don't have tons of scalability due to shooting, and yet their pairing was still extremely scary while wade was still healthy because the combined talent, even with a poor fit, just meant so much. it was still 25/5/5 from two guys, each of who could give the other a break from carrying the team. i can't remember if he brought it up or whoever did, but someone was talking about how durant might have fit the warriors better than lebron because of scalability. even ignoring the fact that lebron passing to curry and klay would break the nba, a 73 win team might be the talent level you have to reach before you really start worrying about scalability, and it's basically the only example in nba history. i just think great players tend to make their teams better no matter what. role players and fringe all-stars i find much more interesting from this respect. a guy who gets you 20+ points on mediocre efficiency and a 3&D role player have much different fits on a team. a team full of the 20 ppg guys would run a team full of 3&D guys off the court, and there's no doubt some teams need scoring at any cost, but a championship team probably doesn't need a mediocre scorer because they probably already have 2 guys who do it just as well and they would rather have the 3&D guy. figuring out scalability in the medium and lower end of the talent pool seems to matter much more to me.
Swap AD with Giannis on the Bucks and they are still the best team in East but they also actually win more than a playoff game or two.
Disagree my guy, Giannis is a shot creator and is a number option defenses game plan against. AD is a number 2 with no playmaking duties as well having Lebron as his number one. Just imagine if we had Giannis on our team as the number 2. We sweep those bum Lakers in 4.
We sweep if Giannis was Harden's #2 as well and not because Giannis is a playmaker. Giannis would just be Capela with ability to pass. AD is as big/long but much much more skilled. Harden w/AD is a much more dominant team than Harden w/Giannis IMO.
Giannis is a better playmaker than AD imo. I mean yea but Giannis is also just way way better than Capela. Giannis is what we hoped Westbrook would actually be times a million. I mean...that is debatable. Giannis cant shoot the mid range but Giannis is just so much more dominant getting to the hoop and getting open shots for 3 point shooters. I disagree. Solely for the fact that Giannis is just straight up better than AD. AD only made it of the playoffs twice when he was the guy. Giannis has led two 60 plus(or at least on pace) and is a two time MVP. I also think Giannis is just more mobile than AD as well. My opinion though.
Think of it this way, Rockets are better 3ball shooting team with AD than Giannis. Rockets are also better mid range shooting team with AD than Giannis. Rockets are better FT shooting team with AD than Giannis. Rockets are more disruptive defensively (blocks & steals) with AD than Giannis. Giannis is only better than AD in pace. And playmaking. But when it comes to playmaking, rather have that role remain with Harden. That said, would take either over Russ at this point.
Are we though? Think less about Giannis getting his own 3 point shot. And more about How many more open threes the Rockets will get with Giannis. Like so much more than AD will ever provide imo. Probably but that I dont mind. Uhhhhh...that's debatable. I think at best that is a wash. I mean, it would remain largely with Harden but it is really nice to have another dude who could be an MVP when Harden is off the floor. I would love to test the theory by getting either one though.
