Forget about assist numbers, Lebron is a much better passer than Curry. Not because of how many assists, but because of the quality of passes. Curry is a good passer, but he works a lot more within the offense which is good. Curry can spot up a lot more and score than Lebron does. But Curry also has playmaking skills and amazing at creating just enough space to get off an incredibly accurate shot. Still, I'm not trying to discount Curry's passing because he plays more within a great system built largely around exploiting his shooting, but because Lebron is simply superior over Curry at finding open teammates So is me saying Curry is not a top 10 player of all time and the Warriors are not better than the Spurs dynasty really that controversial of a statement?
Well I don't think those analytics happen without the rule changes. I don't believe that it took 30-some years to realize the effective FG% from a 3 is better than a 2 point shot. The old NBA you could play the perimeter much tighter, and far more physically. Today, defenses are penalized on the interior forcing defenders to worry about the drive far more than they had to, opening up the perimeter game far more. Before the analytics, 3's were on their way up. The analytics movement accelerated a trend that was inevitable.
Lebron, CP3 and likely many other players are better passers than Curry. But the point isn't how you pass, but if you create shots or distort defenses to make your teammates better. Curry's a good passer, but it's his presence and movement that warps defenses,create space and attracts attention. This effect is far greater than if he was monopolizing the ball or if he improved as a passer. For example James Harden who you argue is a superior play-maker, from 2013 to 2020 with the Houston Rockets. 22 players have played over 1000 minutes with Harden. 10 of them have better or the same efg% with Harden off the court. Of the 12 that had better efg% with Harden on the court, the maximum increased was only 6% (1 player). https://www.pbpstats.com/on-off/nba...ular+Season&TeamId=1610612745&PlayerId=201935
Saying Curry isn't top-ten isn't hugely controversial, as there are more than 10 players with a strong case. Saying he's more like a top-fifty player, as you have, is hugely controversial as it suggests he's nowhere close to the top-ten. That would put you in a tiny minority, which is fine, but is the definition of extremely controversial. As to whether the Warriors are a "better dynasty" than the Spurs, or Bulls, or Showtime Lakers, or whomever, reasonable people can disagree.
Definitely not controversial or wrong to think Curry is not top 10. I wouldn't disagree too much with anyone that has Curry at 11,12,13 or even 16. But saying he is closer to a top 50 player than a top 10 player is definitely a hot take.
For a player that plays below the rim so much, this is a great player. Skillset fits NBA better than the Euro league huh.... Keed.
The rule changes are a mixed bag. People often say that the hand-check rule change makes it easier for perimeter players to score. That may be true to a certain extent. But that comes with the getting rid of illegal defense rule. Now teams can double team a player without the ball. Defenses have a lot more flexibility to do different schemes. Analytics created a bunch of spot up shooting specialists. These guys don't really care about the hand check rule because they don't do dribble penetration anyway. Yeah, sometimes it takes a long time for the game to realize something. Players like Dirk was a unicorn because big men were not supposed to shoot from outside. Now "stretch big" is almost a must for any successful offense. (This is one of the main reason why the Sengun Banchero fit is a concern. Other than the defensive problem, it's also the worry that Paolo might not develop in a good 3pt shooter.) You can't afford to have more than one non-shooter on the floor without creating spacing problem. Players now regardless of position work on their 3pt shot on order to stay relevant. These guys aren't affected by the hand check rule because they don't move that well to create shots anyway. But they are still valuable because defenses can't leave them open. To counter that, teams now have discovered the switch-everything is the best way to defend the perimeter oriented game. That further renders big men who can't switch on defense obsolete.
The illegal defenses had their impact on big men. The whole goal of the rule changes was to make it a more guard oriented league. Illegal defenses don't penalize point guards as much (as you pointed out they have the ball in their hands to initiate the offense anyway) but rather big men who could get deep position. Zone defenses make it much much harder to post up, and that is their primary net effect. Why did switching become an important part of top tier defenses? The reason is because big men couldn't camp out in the paint to protect the rim. Before you had a guy like Mutombo who couldn't switch at all but he was still a net positive because he could single handedly kill drives allowing perimeter players to guard the 3 point line much tighter. Once you had defensive 3 seconds it put them at a huge disadvantage because all of a sudden you could open up the paint for drives by pulling your big out of there and forcing the defensive big out as well. The rule changes are what made Dwight Howard obsolete well before the Warriors switch everything defensive scheme.
When I said he's top 50, I didn't mean 49 lol. First of all the top 50 players of all-time includes some crazy good players that aren't in the conversation for top 10. Guys like KG, Wade, Dirk, Malone, Stockton, Drexler - all perennial all-stars and hall of famers. Personally I'd put Curry around 15. Yes he does have a lot of gravity which does open up opportunities for his teammates - that's true of any superstar though whether or not they are a playmaker. You could then argue Hakeem was a great play maker because his gravity created a lot of open 3's for his teammates. Or Shaq, or Jordan, Kobe, etc etc. But guys like Lebron, Paul, Harden, Nash, Luka, Magic, etc - they just have a vision that is very special and I just don't think you can put Curry at that level. In any case, I've already said Curry is the greatest shooter in NBA history, and you could make the case he's a top 5 scorer in NBA history. On offensive, there's no doubt he is top 10. It's the other side that makes him drop in my opinion. All the top 10 players in the NBA were two way players - there were known as elite or near elite at defense with the exception of maybe Shaq.
Agree with you about the impact of illegal defenses rules on big men. But those rules were changed/implemented in the late 90's to 2001. The increase in switching and forcing big men to defend on the perimeter was due to the increase in 3 point shooting and more specifically "off the dribble unassisted 3 point shooting" revolutionized by Curry in 2014. 3-point shooting have been trending upwards since the mid 1990's with the 94-94 Rockets, 04-07 Suns, 09 Magic & 13-14 Spurs as prime examples. However those teams didn't force bigs out of the paint, because the vast majority of threes were catch and shoot, driven either by post up or penetration. Curry starting in 2014 ushered in a new type of shot/offense (pace/space) and made popular a shot that was once a rarity, off the dribble, unassisted, pull-up threes. Teams suddenly couldn't simply play drop and go under or over on the high screen. This dramatic increase in unassisted threes and pull-up threes forced teams to suddenly either switch, show, hedge or trap these action. By 2018 every team was shooting threes off the high screen, but the Rockets and Harden took in to another level. The Rockets/Harden/Cp3 in 18 and 19 not only ran more high screens/pnr than any other team, they hunted mismatches and shot significantly more unassisted threes more than any other team. It resulted in historic ISO numbers for Harden and CP3 as teams were still giving big minutes to lumbering big men incapable of guarding the perimeter. Today teams are still struggling on how to defend spread offense and the high screens. The major changes have been, the limited usage of bigs who cant defend, more switching and an increase demand for versatile defenders.
I think Hakeem was a great playmaker/shot creator, especially in 93. The entire offense was built around him drawing in the defense. Shaq is even more so. His presence in the paint warped entire defenses. Shaq would've been in the GOAT conversation if he simply shot 15% better at the line or was more dedicated to his fitness/defense. Jordan is likewise one of the best playmakers ever. He could've easily avg'd a ton of assists if he simply dominated the ball more, but he didn't need to is the point. I don't know about vision but I agree Curry isn't an elite passer, due to his propensity for lazy passes & height (cannot make the same passes as Magic, Lebron, Luka etc). Cp3, Nash, Stockton could make those passes because of their superior skill in that dept. My argument is that being an elite passer isn't important for Curry, since like Shaq, he warps defenses and create plays for his teammates through movement and simply being on the court. The objective of great passers is to create better shots & make their teammates better. Curry does that at an elite all time level. Agree with your last point on Curry's defensive impact. He's the only player under 6"6 on these all-time lists and he plays the least important defensive position. While he's a very good team defender, he's an average individual defender/athlete and is a mismatch against much bigger, stronger more explosive players.
First of all, it was Steve Nash who became king of the pull of three before Curry was even in the league. Nash, Kobe, Durant, even guys like Monta Ellis, Joe Johnson, Dirk, and Paul Pearce as utilized the pull up 3 as part of their standard arsenal. Curry just took it to video game ridiculous level. But all of that - these pull up jump shots - are made possible because a player is moving downhill towards the basket and they have to move back to respect the drive. They didn't have to do that as much when they could hand check and use that to stay in front of guys, and when they had rim protection camping in the paint. The change in rules enabled the birth of the pull up 3's to flourish, and Curry is the one who realized its full potential. But he was hardly the first pioneer. The 3 point line came about in 1980, and it wasn't a big factor in the first 10 years of its existence. It takes time for change to happen.
For a 6'2" guy, who isn't particularly strong, athletic, with great hops, and doesn't fill the stat sheet - for a guy like that to be ranked the 15th best ever is a testament to how much his amazing shooting impacts the game around him. He creates space for others by his very presence. But that does not make him a "playmaker"
Steve Nash shot highs of approximately 4 threes a game from 2006 to 2008. Of these, only around 2 were of the unassisted pull-up/off the high screen variety. Teams didn't have to change their entire defensive principles to adjust to 2 shots a game. In 2014-15 Curry attempted 8 a game, then in 2015-16 attempted 11 a game with nearly half of them being the unassisted variety. By 2017-18 every team was trending upwards in not only three point shots but unassisted pull up/ off the high screen three point shots. Handchecking rules were changed in the early 2000's and would have little impact on a defender going around a screen to contest a 3 point shot off the high pnr.
I appreciate your digging up the stats - I'm not even sure how you find this stuff. My point isn't that defenses changed because of Nash's 2 shots a game, my point is only that Curry wasn't the first one to be known for it. It was considered a patented item in Nash's arsenal - and he did force teams to change around him a great deal - not for the pull of 3 but because of his ability to make jumpers AND pass the ball so well. In fact Nash is the Curry before Curry. People forget that Steve Kerr was with the Suns GM, blowing up the Sun's fast paced offense by trading for Shaq and forcing Mike D out. Kerry mucked that team up and he knows it, he then took all he learned and brought it to Golden State as a coach, using Curry as his Nash.
Basketball ref, pbp and nba.com are the best free resources. In the right system, Nash was amazing and one of the best driver of an offense ever. He would be even more impactful today (assuming he shot more). My larger point wasn't about specifically pull up threes or who did it first or patented it, but rather unassisted threes and what caused NBA defenses to start switching. Curry started the revolution in 14-16 and Harden took it to another level in 2018 and 19. It was this increase in shooting threes out of the high pick and the 4 out offenses that caused defenses to change, not the rules.
Of course it does. Why wouldn't it? He's literally making plays for his teammates. Frankly, it feels like you want to move him down the GOAT list and are looking for reasons to do so.
I disagree with you strongly here. Switching eveything didn't come about to slow Curry down, it came about because Kerr started Green at center and realized he could switch Green onto any player, so the Warriors started the whole switch everything at that point. Golden State was more revolutionary from a defensive perspective that people give them credit for. Kerr is an amazing coach. Will go down as one of the greats.
