I think we all know that if the NBA moved the 3 pt line back, your argument would be "the NBA moved the 3pt line back specifically to help Curry! He has the furthest range in the league so he benefits the most! Curry wouldn't be anything if it weren't for the NBA propping him up!" Kobe led the Lakers to the 6th seed. Nash leading the Suns to the 3rd best record in the West (with more wins than the Cavs) without Stoudemire is far more impressive. 1?
Isn’t it the old heads like snaquille oneal and Barkley constantly b****ing about 7 footers chucking too many 3’s. The fans and nba media members all claim they are sick and tired of teams chucking 50 threes a night. Wouldn’t moving the 3 point line back solve that problem. You’d have less players attempting 3’s after seeing an obundance of air balls. Also getting rid of screens would help defenders be able to play different coverages. As for kobe not winning mvp in 2006. Thx for making my point. Westbrick led a talented thunder team to the 7th seed and still won mvp. Replace harden with curry and curry wins the 2017 mvp with hardens stats. The goalpost and award criteria is always moved when it’s time give harden his flowers. That’s what I’m arguing, hardens award cabinet would have a lot more stuff if the voters didn’t have an axe to grind with him
Good NBA players use the rules to their advantage. Great NBA players get the rules changed to stop them. Legends get the rules changed to make their game easier.
You consistently complain that rule changes benefit Curry. Moving the line back would benefit him tremendously because it would make him even more valuable. I think most NBA fans appreciate the reduction in foul-baiting calls, but you complain that these rules were implemented to nerf Harden. Also, making screens illegal is one of the most shortsighted things I've ever read. You probably shouldn't repeat that to anyone. You don't have a point. Westbrook won because he averaged a triple double (while leading the league in scoring) when everyone thought it was impossible. The voters realized their mistake later on (by not awarding him another MVP despite averaging another triple double). I do believe that Harden deserved the MVP more than Westbrook b/c of the Thunders' record, but I can understand the rationale for Westbrook. Maybe Harden would've had a better case if he didn't shoot so poorly that year (44% from the field; 35% from the 3pt line).
Harden does have a stigma about him due to attitude (pouting/giving up), defense, and off-court image. The first two are basketball related, hence can still be considered a fair bias, because those traits are anti-winning. Ppl favored Westbrook's all-out attitude, which makes them lose sight on his actual anti-winning basketball traits.
Harden deserves an MVP award, but it's Westbrook's award that got stolen from Harden. And yet, @HardenVolumeOne aims all his bitterness at Curry. Very odd.
Wow! Nerf some rules for Curry??? Why? If you extend the 3 point line, Curry would just be happier. Making screens illegal? Did Steve Nash won any NBA championship? In 2015, Rockets got 11 wins less than GS. What you said is a serious unproven allegation.
I also wonder why he's got 0. 2015: 26.0 pts, 6.3 ast, 5.2 reb 2016: 22.6 pts, 3.7 ast, 4.9 reb 2017: 26.8 pts, 5.4 ast, 8.2 reb 2018: 27.5 pts, 6.8 ast, 6.0 reb 2019: 30.5 pts, 6.0 ast, 5.2 reb https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/five-steph-currys-most-impressive-nba-finals-performances
Yeah, tell that to the Cavs, who gave KD uncontested dunks in order to double Curry at the three point line in transition multiple times. Durant was and is a superior one-on-one player. In a one-on-one league, he'd smoke Curry and might be the greatest player in NBA history. In a five-on-five league, where a player's effect on the other nine players on the court matters, Curry has always been more valuable than Durant. Well, always since Curry took off in 2014-15.
Crazy talk. I didnt see the Rockets double Curry a single time. Durant killed us. Durant also took all the clutch shots. Not because Curry was doubled but because he could. not to mention the Rockets entire offensive strategy was to attack steph Curry.
Then you didn't watch the games. That's a shame, they were entertaining even if disappointing in the end. Yeah and the stats suggest that that wasn't particularly effective. The Rockets' offense was less efficient when they isolated against Steph than their normal offense.
I watched everyone of those games. The Rockets instilled the switch everything philosophy just to combat the warriors. And went small. At no point in time did they double him, their whole strategy was to force the warriors away from team ball and into iso game. And Harden is the best ISO scorer so they felt they could win that way.
