Not to mention, even offensively they weren't "just a jump-shooting team"...they've also been willing to drive into the paint for points if teams sell out to chase them off the three-point line. This year's playoffs were a good demonstration of how they'll score however they need to, to win. They absolutely destroyed Dallas and even Memphis inside.
People do say that, but if the Warriors were an all-time great team with an historic offense, does that mean the 2018 Rockets were even better? Chris Paul doesn't go down and those Rockets are NBA champions. By the way, the best record in the NBA history lost to a Cleveland team that was far from one of the greatest teams in league history. I don't think either of those teams were one of the all time great teams. What I do think has happened is that the Warriors and those Rockets adjusted to the modern rules faster than other teams and thus had a huge advantage over the rest of the NBA which was much slower to adopt. The Warriors were an exploitative team - meaning a team that was better at exploiting rule changes than any other team. Morey Rockets were similar. So if you want to call that greatness, sure. But to me it isn't. I don't think we've seen that team emerge yet in the NBA. I think there's a lot of parity going on right now as teams still adjust and the game changes as it still adopting to 3 point shooting being so dominant. Does anyone think the 65 win Rockets were better than the Hakeem years? The Warriors are very good, but when they meet certain teams, they have shown they can be bullied.
In terms of career achievement and legacy, I got: Tier 1: Jordan, Russell, Lebron, KAJ Tier 2: Magic, Bird, Duncan Tier 3: Curry, Shaq, Kobe, Wilt Tier 4: Hakeem, West, Oscar, Moses
I do not care about legacy as much. I only know this because I watched. Curry revolutionized long range shots and movement off ball. Hakeem revolutionized the game with his incredible footwork and shot blocking.
Defensive 3 seconds Allowing Zone defenses Limiting hand-checking Those 3 rule changes shifted the NBA away from inside play and towards the perimeter. It took over a decade for the league to adjust to all the fallout, but the Warriors were an early leader.
There's definitely an argument that Hakeem was better than Curry in terms of ability/talent/performance as an individual player. But in terms of career achievement, accolades and legacy, Curry's 8 year run from 2015-2022 is tough to beat.
Disagree. Those changed made it a guard's game, but not necessarily a 3pt shooter's game. Additionally, the Warriors' sustained success is b/c of Curry, and you're diminishing his impact. Do you really think it's that easy to find guards who are elite shooters & playmakers? Do you think teams aren't constantly trying to acquire them?
Curry is a good playmaker, but he's not elite. That's not to take away from him or minimize him. I'm not saying he's not a superstar, he is, I'm just saying the guy is more top 50 than top 10. Shooting is his elite skill, and frankly, he's the best shooter in NBA history. But he's not elite at anything else. He can make his own shot, but he's not going to be the guy that gets you double digit assists on a consistent basis. He doesn't have the court vision of a Chris Paul or even a James Harden. Not even close. You have the greatest shooter and frankly, the currently the best player at getting his own shot off in traffic. That's what makes him special. His defense is average at best, his playmaking is average for a point guard as he's a shooting guard in a tiny body. He's quick for sure, but not the quickest. He's not the most explosive and athletic guy on the court. He is very very smart and driven. I don't think I am diminishing him at all by saying any of this. You can build a team around Curry yes, but again, the bar is top 10 players and greatest dynasties he and the warriors are not there yet.
When it comes to Curry, assists don't tell you the whole story. He consistently creates defensive breakdowns through his off-ball movement which his teammates capitalize on. In other words, he makes plays for his teammates. Does it matter that he doesn't have the ball? Curry is an elite playmaker. If you disagree, who would be the playmaker? Draymond Green, who makes the pass while literally standing stationary 20 feet from the basket?
He is not elite elite as a scorer but his range makes up a lot of distance. I think it's an angle or point of view issue. I think he is probably going to end up close to KD but with more hardware while KD had more talent and physical talent. He is also what makes NBA so interesting that someone who does not dunk all the time can be great winning ships. Some of his qualities are so camouflaged that is deceptive enough. A top 10 leader of Alltime, such underrated sniper.
The fact that he attracts a lot of double teams even outside the 3 point area says a lot for this guy. He may not be your traditional PG but he can hurt you even just by moving and weaving through the traffic. 4 wins in 10 years also says a lot already. How many teams can brag like GSW?
The Rockets team that year was a historic team IMO as well. But a good shooting team they were not. They had some decent shooters.
I think people are confusing Curry not racking up a ton of assists with him not being a great passer or play-maker. His assist numbers are held down by the system he plays in--he doesn't play in a D'Antoni system, where Nash or Harden are the hub that either makes every assist or shot. Kerr's system distributes the ball-handling, passing and shooting to diversify the attack, make it harder to defend and keep everyone feeling involved. If he had chosen to just go with a "spam Curry pick-and-rolls all day every day and surround him with shooters" system and told Curry to either score or hit an open shooter every time down, his numbers would be bonkers. Curry isn't merely an elite shooter--he's an elite ball-handler, an elite passer, a great finisher in the paint, an excellent rebounder for his position and he's built himself into a good defender. That's already an all-time great player. Then when you add in his defense-distorting gravity (the kind of gravity that causes a 119 O-Rating with Curry on the floor vs. 88 O-Rating with Curry off the floor in a game--Game 5--in which he shot miserably), you end up with a top-ten player. Not only is he individually great, his effect on the rest of his team is massive--that's the only ticket to top-ten status. That's why Wilt Chamberlain, who used to be considered a decent pick for GOAT due to his ridiculous individual stats, has dropped in status as the years go by--because better and better team impact stats have shown that his amazing numbers didn't necessarily lead to great team offenses or great team defenses.
If you want to redefine what a playmaker is, sure, that could work. Curry is amazing at creating space and breaking down defenses, but his passing and court vision isn't elite - those are usually what people associate with an elite playmaker. The warriors are very good, and so is curry. They won 4 rings which is real. But they had a lot of luck and things go right for them as well.
Whose redefining anything? A playmaker makes plays. Most players need the ball to do that. Curry doesn't. Why don't you think Curry's court vision and passing are elite? You can very easily go on youtube and find countless examples of his court vision and passing. Sure, it's a highlight reel, but can a player without elite court vision/passing make these passes?
The shift happened not so much of the rule changes but the analytics that showed how the 3pt shot was much more efficient than the 2pt shot other than layups and dunks. And the Warriors had two of the best 3pt shooters in history. Yes, they exploited it by having a system that maximized the shooting, and playing good defense. But they couldn't have done it without the great shooting. BTW, the 73-win Warriors wasn't just lucky to break the record. They were blowing teams out. None of their top players needed to average more than 35 mpg because so often they could sit out a large part of the 4th quarter. They lost in the Finals because of LeBron's greatness.
Assists alone isn't a great measure of playmaking/shot creation but rather a reflection on who has the ball more and role. It's why players like Westbrook, Rondo, Draymond often finished with higher assists totals than Curry & Lebron. Since 2013, ALL 23 players that have played over 650+ minutes with Steph Curry have had higher EFG% with him on the court vs off the court. Of the 15 Players who have played more than 1000 minutes with Curry, 13 has had at least a 5% to 11% increase in their EFG%. The lone exceptions are D.Lee who only improved from 50% to 52% and Oubre (48% to 50%). I have not found this incredible feat with any other player and only Lebron and CP3 have similarly elevated the % of their teammates. https://www.pbpstats.com/on-off/nba/player?Season=2021-22,2020-21,2019-20,2018-19,2017-18,2016-17,2015-16,2014-15,2013-14&SeasonType=Regular+Season&TeamId=1610612744&PlayerId=201939
