Connect with us

NBA 2K18 Top 10 Point Guards

NBA 2K18

NBA 2K18 Top 10 Point Guards

2K has revealed the top 10 point guards in NBA 2K18, check them out below and let us know what you think!

All other NBA 2K18 player ratings that have been revealed so far, can be seen here.

116 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Discussion
  1. Rockie_Fresh88
    Wait Westbrook looks better here , or am I tripping ?

    If you are tripping I have the same condition as you Rockie...That looks much better than 17 version..
    Hard to argue with that top 10, except Curry is too high, but people have been overrating him for a while now. CP3 healthy should be higher, but 91 is pretty solid.
    OTMax
    Hard to argue with that top 10, except Curry is too high, but people have been overrating him for a while now. CP3 healthy should be higher, but 91 is pretty solid.

    Lol how is he too high? Explain that to me. If anything, he should be higher. Two time MVP and greatest shooter of all time is too high at a 94. Haha okay bud.
    GoDucks1224
    Lol how is he too high? Explain that to me. If anything, he should be higher. Two time MVP and greatest shooter of all time is too high at a 94. Haha okay bud.

    On the list, not necessarily the 94. Defensively he's far from great, yet people act like he's a two-way player.
    JazzMan
    Those are looking... pretty inflated.
    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

    Yes, inflated and there is no reason that John Wall & Kyrie Irving are tied. Wall is the superior playmaker, defender, rebounder and way more athletic. Wall should be as good or nearly as good as Paul, while Irving should be rated the same as Damian Lillard.
    Otherwise, this is a good list....
    from Bills Backer/Spurs Nation HQ
    Nah, Curry's rating is perfect. Great shooter, excellent finisher, above average Playmaker, average defensively (better than Russ), and he works well in 2K's rating system. Kyrie is ridiculously overrated
    OTMax
    On the list, not necessarily the 94. Defensively he's far from great, yet people act like he's a two-way player.

    I've never seen anyone call Curry a two-way player. Is he great defensively? No, but he's damn sure better than Russ on that side. Russ wouldn't even bother to contest shots
    OTMax
    On the list, not necessarily the 94. Defensively he's far from great, yet people act like he's a two-way player.

    Lol he graded out as a top 5 defender at the point guard position. Does he guard most of the elite points? No. Klay does. But he's hardly a liability. He's at worst a solid defender. He's the greatest shooter ever. He's got one of the best drive scoring percentages in the league. He's always top 5 in steals per game. He's a very good playmaker who creates a lot for guys just by being as good a shooter as he is, let alone his near 7 assists a game. He's fantastic on the pick and roll. He's very efficient, and consistently top 3 in eFG% and TS% at the guard positions. (I only specify because big men tend to have much higher shooting based on their proximity to the rim.) Yes he had a 'down year' when compared to his historically great second MVP season, but he also had to share the ball with another superstar. Curry is absolutely the best point guard in this league, and a top 5 player.
    Also, just for comparison sake Westbrook is by far a worse defender. And highly inefficient.
    Westbrook was crazy efficient last year for a 41.7 Usage % , Westbrook also put out an ok defensive rating last year who was one point lesser than Curry's who is on a way bettter defensive team.
    MoneyOvaHuds
    Westbrook was crazy efficient last year for a 41.7 Usage %

    Nah. Isaiah Thomas was crazy efficient on his 20 shots a game. Westbrook had a 47% eFG and 55 TS%. It was on par for most of his career. He only averaged 2 shots more per game this year than he did two years ago which was his previous career high.
    For reference, Isaiah had a 55 eFG% and 62 TS%. On 20 attempts per. Now that is crazy.
    Ow yeah, Westbrook is worse defensively I agree but I guess last year put him as the top dog at PG. I'd say Wall and CP3 as #1 and #2, then Westbrook since he can carry a team which Curry hasn't proven with the lack of quality role players around him that WB, Wall and CP3 have. Curry #4 and the rest is whatever.
    OTMax
    Ow yeah, Westbrook is worse defensively I agree but I guess last year put him as the top dog at PG. I'd say Wall and CP3 as #1 and #2, then Westbrook since he can carry a team which Curry hasn't proven with the lack of quality role players around him that WB, Wall and CP3 have. Curry #4 and the rest is whatever.

    Lol strongly disagree. But I'll drop it.
    GoDucks1224
    Nah. Isaiah Thomas was crazy efficient on his 20 shots a game. Westbrook had a 47% eFG and 55 TS%. It was on par for most of his career. He only averaged 2 shots more per game this year than he did two years ago which was his previous career high.

    Did you read what I said ? I said he was efficient for a 41.7 USAGE % . IT usage was 34.0 % last season also nobody didn't say he went efficient . IT is s better shooter than Russ
    MoneyOvaHuds
    Did you read what I said ? I said he was efficient for a 41.7 USAGE % . IT usage was 34.0 % last season also nobody didn't say he went efficient . IT is s better shooter than Russ

    You edited that in after. I'm not saying Westbrook isn't good lol. He's clearly number 2 in my eyes. I just think y'all hella underrate Curry for whatever reason. I mean I expect that from people on Facebook who say all he can do is shoot 3's. But. Whatever.
    GoDucks1224
    You edited that in after. I'm not saying Westbrook isn't good lol. He's clearly number 2 in my eyes. I just think y'all hella underrate Curry for whatever reason. I mean I expect that from people on Facebook who say all he can do is shoot 3's. But. Whatever.

    No I didn't you just didn't want to read that part . I been had the usage % part I added everything after that in my edit it's ok bro. And I didn't underrate Curry didn't say anything bad about him just saying he's playing with a clearly more talented team . Curry is a top 2 PG in the game at the end
    Impetuous65
    Ratings
    3pt 51
    mid 49
    close 65
    Off IQ 81
    Off rating 61.5
    on ball perimeter 68
    on ball post 51
    blow by 51
    Def IQ 71
    Def rating 60.25
    overall rating 60.87
    That's how I would do ratings, I would never give any of these dudes the 90 percentile. Because nothing they do is in the 90 percentile except for a few individuals shooting freethrows.

    Lol what world are you living in that you think point guards don't deserve good ratings?
    MoneyOvaHuds
    No I didn't you just didn't want to read that part . I been had the usage % part I added everything after that in my edit it's ok bro

    Lol. No, you didn't. I read your comment. Not sure why you're trying to troll, but okay. Have a good one.
    You clearly QUOTED my post with the word usage in wtf ... it's like still there . nevermind dude. Everyone who sees my post knows I never troll but I'm dropping it
    MoneyOvaHuds
    You clearly QUOTED my post with the word usage in wtf ... it's like still there . nevermind dude. Everyone who sees my post knows I never troll but I'm dropping it

    Lol it wasn't there when I read the original comment. You said 'He was crazy efficient for his usage.' And didn't specify a number. By the time I hit quote, you obviously edited it. Regardless, I don't really care anymore. It wouldn't change my opinion. Westbrook isn't the best point guard in the league. He had a historic season, on a team that lost in the first round. Crazy. Good for him. But that doesn't make him the best in the league.
    You know why your comment is so trolly? Because you said 'you didn't want to read that part.' As if I'm in denial. That's a stupid comment to make.
    While I do think Curry is great, that whole team benefits from having great coaching. They skyrocketed to being the best team in the NBA once Kerr arrived. They get a ton of easy looks because of the offense they run so stats will be inflated compared to other teams.
    Where Curry benefits the most is that they hide him off the ball on defense and he is surrounded by 3 great help defenders at all times. His advanced defensive stats will also be inflated because those numbers rely highly on team defense. Those defensive switches negate so many teams offenses, especially the CP3 Clippers because they force you to play isolation basketball.
    I really believe you can plug in any of the top point guards in the league on that team to replace Curry and they would still be dominant and the favorites. 2016 Curry was crazy good but other than that I still think he gets too much credit for a team that was stacked even before Durant came.
    Sent from my SM-G950U using Operation Sports mobile app
    Crossover1
    While I do think Curry is great, that whole team benefits from having great coaching. They skyrocketed to being the best team in the NBA once Kerr arrived. They get a ton of easy looks because of the offense they run so stats will be inflated compared to other teams.
    Where Curry benefits the most is that they hide him off the ball on defense and he is surrounded by 3 great help defenders at all times. His advanced defensive stats will also be inflated because those numbers rely highly on team defense. Those defensive switches negate so many teams offenses, especially the CP3 Clippers because they force you to play isolation basketball.
    I really believe you can plug in any of the top point guards in the league on that team to replace Curry and they would still be dominant and the favorites. 2016 Curry was crazy good but other than that I still think he gets too much credit for a team that was stacked even before Durant came.
    Sent from my SM-G950U using Operation Sports mobile app

    I think you're vastly underrating him, and attributing far too much to Kerr. I love Kerr, but Mark Jackson could've lead this team to a ring if their development went the same way it did with Kerr. Their talent goes beyond a system. Curry isn't a product of a system.
    Curry didn't do much before Kerr indeed, so that tells me if he had been on the Wiz, Clippers or Thunder last year, he wouldn't have done better. In fact, probably worse. He's good, but vastly overrated.
    It's really hard to know who is/isn't overrated until we see all the individual ratings.
    Westbrook is going to be one of the top rated by default because he's one of the best playmakers so his passing ratings have to reflect that, he is the most athletic guard in the league, speed, quickness, etc inflate a point guards overall more so than any other positions. He rebounds at an elite level that no one else on this list does.
    The thing with Russ is, all his defensive abilities probably have good ratings and they should. He's great in the passing lanes, probably has a good steals rating, a higher block rating than any one on this list. On ball defense should be pretty good.
    His problem is he would leave help to get rebounds and push the break. That's going to be a tendency issue more than a ratings issue. There isn't really an attribute in 2K for something like that to negatively effect his overall.
    I always see this "he doesn't play defense" when talking about 2K overalls, like there is just one single attribute for defense and nothing else matters. You can be a player who takes plays off, like regular season LeBron for example, but still have a very high steal, block, on ball defense, and defense awareness rating. Which he should, thus making him a great defender in game..
    There is no ratings for coasting or taking a play off.
    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Impetuous65
    I'm talking ratings in general across the board. I think they are skewed way too high. If you shoot 40% from the perimeter you get a 40 rating period, not 94. It's simple you making 4 out 10 not 9 out of 10.

    Except that 40% from 3 is very good in terms of basketball and not actual percentages. In most settings 40% is a bad percentage. But in basketball, 40% from 3 is good. Having a 90+ rating doesn't mean they'll make 9/10. It means they'll make 4-5/10.
    Impetuous65
    I'm talking ratings in general across the board. I think they are skewed way too high. If you shoot 40% from the perimeter you get a 40 rating period, not 94. It's simple you making 4 out 10 not 9 out of 10.

    That's not how the rating system works my dude
    ojandpizza
    It's really hard to know who is/isn't overrated until we see all the individual ratings.
    Westbrook is going to be one of the top rated by default because he's one of the best playmakers so his passing ratings have to reflect that, he is the most athletic guard in the league, speed, quickness, etc inflate a point guards overall more so than any other positions. He rebounds at an elite level that no one else on this list does.
    The thing with Russ is, all his defensive abilities probably have good ratings and they should. He's great in the passing lanes, probably has a good steals rating, a higher block rating than any one on this list. On ball defense should be pretty good.
    His problem is he would leave help to get rebounds and push the break. That's going to be a tendency issue more than a ratings issue. There isn't really an attribute in 2K for something like that to negatively effect his overall.
    I always see this "he doesn't play defense" when talking about 2K overalls, like there is just one single attribute for defense and nothing else matters. You can be a player who takes plays off, like regular season LeBron for example, but still have a very high steal, block, on ball defense, and defense awareness rating. Which he should, thus making him a great defender in game..
    There is no ratings for coasting or taking a play off.
    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Actually, yes there is. Defensive consistency is an actual rating in the game and I'm sure all these guys have inflated "intangible" attributes (defensive/offensive consistency, intangible and pass perception, etc.) to boost their overall rating.
    And your dead wrong that he should be "alone" athletic and block rating wise (which has no effect on PG's overall) since Wall is there with him (and better a blocks).
    Like I said last year, Westbrook is a great talent, stat stuffer and exciting to watch, but I would take Wall, Curry or Paul over him. He is far too selfish (IMO), is an absolute turnover machine (5.4 TOPG!), has too many mental lapses on defense (what happened to the defense of 4 or 5 years ago), he is as inefficient as they come and hasn't proven he can adapt/change to suit the talent around him.
    He is the most physically gifted, but not the best overall PG in the NBA no matter what 2K, casual fans and Oscar Robertson (OMG, triple doubles) think.
    from Bills Backer/Spurs Nation HQ
    sva91
    looks better, but he seems a little too dark based on screenshot.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

    Yea seems 2k brought back the red tint in the skin colors that they had in 2k16 Made a lot of players skin look darker then it really is. But I will take that over what they had in 2k17.
    J_Posse
    Actually, yes there is. Defensive consistency is an actual rating in the game and I'm sure all these guys have inflated "intangible" attributes (defensive/offensive consistency, intangible and pass perception, etc.) to boost their overall rating.
    And your dead wrong that he should be "alone" athletic and block rating wise (which has no effect on PG's overall) since Wall is there with him (and better a blocks).
    Like I said last year, Westbrook is a great talent, stat stuffer and exciting to watch, but I would take Wall, Curry or Paul over him. He is far too selfish (IMO), has too many mental lapses on defense (what happened to the defense of 4 or 5 years ago), he is as inefficient as they come and hasn't proven he can adapt/change to suit the talent around him.
    He is the most physically gifted, but not the best overall PG in the NBA no matter what 2K, casual fans and Oscar Robertson (OMG, triple doubles) think.
    from Bills Backer/Spurs Nation HQ

    His pass perception is likely high to reflect his ability to read the passing lanes. The consistency ratings I'm sure could be lower than whatever 2K has them set at, but I'm not sure that will effect his rating all that much.
    2K's ratings are going to be a representation of someone controlling these guys. If I'm controlling someone like LeBron and wanted to make him attempt to block a lot of shots he should be a guy with a high enough rating to get me 4 or 5 blocks. He already has nights where he get's 3 or 4 in playoff games simply from playing more focused defense. Westbrook is going to be a guy who's treated similarly. He's going to have high enough ratings to where if you are controlling him he's good in a lot of those areas.
    Most of his weaknesses, taking off defensive plays, gambling, taking a bad shot, etc are things that can't be well represented in a video game rating system. Especially since we, as the user, have the choice to make him not do any of those things.
    Impetuous65
    I'm talking ratings in general across the board. I think they are skewed way too high. If you shoot 40% from the perimeter you get a 40 rating period, not 94. It's simple you making 4 out 10 not 9 out of 10.

    The ratings aren't done on a 0 to 100 scale.
    Its 25 to 99.
    Someone with a 99 3 point shooting rating does not mean they are perfect from 3
    Even if you sim the stats someone with a 99 3 point shooting rating does not make them perfect from 3.
    OTMax
    Curry didn't do much before Kerr indeed, so that tells me if he had been on the Wiz, Clippers or Thunder last year, he wouldn't have done better. In fact, probably worse. He's good, but vastly overrated.

    Judging by this, you weren't paying attention to him until they skyrocketed...
    MarkWilliam
    24th Letter was right. Westbrooks Daffy Duck face in the All Time Teams trailer was just a bad temporary face....
    MVP looks sensational!
    Great stuff!

    It is going to be fun to see what the final version of the game looks like because literally every player that was an issue in one way or another has recieved an update of some kind whether it's the face, hair, facial hair etc. Seems from one trailer or screenshot to the next players are getting updated.
    CookNBA03
    Judging by this, you weren't paying attention to him until they skyrocketed...

    He didn't lead them the way some people now like to credit him for.
    That Westbrook scan is legit! I finally will like playing with the Thunder :lol: (same problem I had with the Raptors before with how awful Derozan and Lowry looked). Hopefully Giannis will eventually go in for an updated scan. Steve, we need that side by side...
    Off - topic: I'm not sure if anyone else notice but I really like that mesh texture on Westbrook's arm sleeve. Nice touch....
    from Bills Backer/Spurs Nation HQ
    GoDucks1224
    I think you're vastly underrating him, and attributing far too much to Kerr. I love Kerr, but Mark Jackson could've lead this team to a ring if their development went the same way it did with Kerr. Their talent goes beyond a system. Curry isn't a product of a system.

    Even if you think I am underestimating Curry, what about my other points you didn't address?
    Don't you think they can replace him with Westbrook, CP3, Kyrie, Wall, and Lillard - and still win it all?
    All those guys I mentioned have subpar defense except CP3 according to stats but you can still put them on a team surrounded by Draymond, Klay, Iguodala, and Durant, and they will be fine since the team does switching on defense majority of the time.
    Crossover1
    Even if you think I am underestimating Curry, what about my other points you didn't address?
    Don't you think they can replace him with Westbrook, CP3, Kyrie, Wall, and Lillard - and still win it all?

    Sure, with Durant. But when it was Steph, Klay, and Dray winning 73 games? No. They wouldn't have won 73 with any of those you mentioned. He's not a product of a system, and he isn't overrated. You clearly haven't watched him since the beginning. Even as an injury prone rookie/sophomore player in the NBA, he showed flashes of greatness and his development basically hinged on his ankles staying healthy. Once he stopped having ankle issues, he took off. He's arguably the second best ball handler in the league, only behind Kyrie. He's a fantastic playmaker. He's a solid defender. He's a decent rebounder for his position and height. He's the greatest shooter of all time by far and it isn't even close. He scores on drives incredibly efficiently and is typically in the top 5. He's always top or near it in eFG% and TS% for the guard positions. Even with the addition of Durant, he is still the leader of that team and the offense is focused around him. His pick and roll with Durant is the deadliest in the league. Insinuating he's a system product is just ignorant frankly. I don't like to use this word on this site because typically it really only applies to those Facebook trolls and casual fans, but honestly you just seem like you want to hate him. Like you've got an axe to grind or something. You and a few others in this thread. He's not just a 3 point shooter. The system didn't make him. He's an incredibly talented point guard and a top 5 NBA player. His value to the franchise is pretty immeasurable on and off the court.
    GoDucks1224
    Sure, with Durant. But when it was Steph, Klay, and Dray winning 73 games? No. They wouldn't have won 73 with any of those you mentioned. He's not a product of a system, and he isn't overrated. You clearly haven't watched him since the beginning. Even as an injury prone rookie/sophomore player in the NBA, he showed flashes of greatness and his development basically hinged on his ankles staying healthy. Once he stopped having ankle issues, he took off. He's arguably the second best ball handler in the league, only behind Kyrie. He's a fantastic playmaker. He's a solid defender. He's a decent rebounder for his position and height. He's the greatest shooter of all time by far and it isn't even close. He scores on drives incredibly efficiently and is typically in the top 5. He's always top or near it in eFG% and TS% for the guard positions. Even with the addition of Durant, he is still the leader of that team and the offense is focused around him. His pick and roll with Durant is the deadliest in the league. Insinuating he's a system product is just ignorant frankly. I don't like to use this word on this site because typically it really only applies to those Facebook trolls and casual fans, but honestly you just seem like you want to hate him. Like you've got something against him. You and a few others in this thread.

    Lol take it easy. I don't hate Steph and I actually think every team should model their system after Golden State's own because of their over-achievements. None of their players before Durant was a top draft prospect, and they all, somehow, managed to be better than most people ever expected of them.
    Plus, I already put that qualifier in my first post about 2016 Steph. He was so terrifying in the regular season that I waived the white flag when he went nuclear in February that year.
    Again, outside of that year I think he can be replaced by those guys I mentioned and the Warriors would still be favorites. I think that if Steph goes to the Blazers and replaced Lillard, he wouldn't have much more success. Steph would be forced to defend the good point guards way more than before which would then affect his offensive game, and teams would load up on him more without worry of those beautiful backdoor plays that Kerr has designed for that team. Those backdoor cuts for easy layups are what kills most teams imo.
    2Kray
    So did Harden get the +1 over Russ? .. Based on what Ronnie tweeted awhile back

    You may be right..... but his 95 may not be as good as Russ's 94 when he has to stand on the wing and let CP3 handle a bit..... :)
    Queue Rockets fans..... ;)
    (Don't bother using the PG debate - he'll play off ball more than CP3 haha).
    OTMax
    Curry didn't do much before Kerr indeed, so that tells me if he had been on the Wiz, Clippers or Thunder last year, he wouldn't have done better. In fact, probably worse. He's good, but vastly overrated.

    Curry lead his team to a victory over the #3 seed Nuggets *without* all-star David Lee, and nearly went 2-0 on the Spurs. He captained a team starting 3 rookies and a sophomore Klay Thompson who wasn't fantastic-- all while on a progressively worsening ankle, and were eventually eliminated when he, Bogut, Lee, Ezeli, and Barnes were claimed by injuries.
    This happened while the team was shacked by an offensively inept coach that somehow turned a team with the best 5-man passing squad and the two greatest shooters of all time into the worst passing team in the league with an average offense the next year. But this all happened in 2013 when Steph was barely on most folks' radar.
    Curry is likely capable of doing what Westbrook did for the Thunder or Harden did for the Rockets, just completely different stylistically.
    For the record, I believe Westbrook is strongly overrated by 2K-- it's extremely well documented on how poorly he played defense last year, and even stopped guarding his man on the perimeter (including players like Curry) to pad rebounding stats. His efficiency is pretty underwhelming-- he was essentially the Westbrook of old just doing more of the same thing. But I get that he gets an MVP/Casual boost. Just as Kobe (98) and many other all time greats get a boost when nearly none of them had a historical peak regular season like Curry did (and only gets a 96 for it).
    Ain't no way kyrie higher than John Wall. This man plays both sides of the ball, excellent distributor and a better leader
    Sent from my BLN-L24 using Tapatalk
    renome
    Damn.. graphics be confusing.. IF this is the final Russ build (especially facescan-wise), then I'm happy

    Considering the way this Russ is being received and the amazingly great way 2K listens..... I'd say this is the final Russ build.
    MarkWilliam
    Considering the way this Russ is being received and the amazingly great way 2K listens..... I'd say this is the final Russ build.

    Man, I really hope so... and much props to 2K if these changes are a direct result of listening to user feedback 👍👍
    Sent from my SM-A910F using Operation Sports mobile app
    2K kicked in more funding for the art team this year. They are not trying to be a butt of any jokes for the body models. They redid Westbrook and LeBron it looks like from previously released footage. I hope more updates will be coming throughout the year. I can't really complain about this list
    I can't really complain with the ratings
    OTMax
    On the list, not necessarily the 94. Defensively he's far from great, yet people act like he's a two-way player.

    if we're talking defense, that would put cp3 at 1. everyone else is pretty much known for their offensive prowess.
    MarkWilliam
    Can't help but wonder if the Clippers blue jerseys are fixed now.....

    I honestly doubt it... I think there's a reason the Clippers only had their white jerseys on in the clips from the AI blogs. But I hope.
    MarkWilliam
    Can't help but wonder if the Clippers blue jerseys are fixed now.....

    Hopefully by launch, LD forwarded the issue to the art team.
    I originally thought it was a licensing issue.
    Clippers fans ain't letting up tho :grin:.
    Curry is the best shooter of all time without question but Westbrook is better overall and it should be reflected in the ratings. Their  defensive rating was very similar last year, however, Westbrook was guarding elite point guards almost every time down the floor while Curry was typically guarding the non-ball handlers. Westbrook averaged a triple-double and I would never see Curry doing that even on a team with scrubs like Westbrook was last year. They have different games completely so comparing the two is difficult but Westbrook's game when you take into account every aspect of the game is better and 2K doesn't see that. Just my thoughts!
    2Kray
    Hopefully by launch, LD forwarded the issue to the art team

    In that case - I'd bank on it being fixed.
    In 2K17, the Bucks and Knicks courts were mentioned to the art team after release and it was fixed.
    Pure speculation, but I am a betting man :)
    Forget to add this as well:
    Compare Lebron and Durant. Lebron is rated higher even though Durant is a much better scorer. Why is it not the same when comparing Westbrook and Curry? 
    dutchy25
    Forget to add this as well:
    Compare Lebron and Durant. Lebron is rated higher even though Durant is a much better scorer. Why is it not the same when comparing Westbrook and Curry?*

    I see where you're coming from so I partially agree. Westbrook's inefficiency is the difference between him and Curry. LeBron is just as efficient as Durant while doing everything else on the court but it definitely helps to be surrounded by shooters. I would still give Westbrook the edge.
    J_Posse

    Like I said last year, Westbrook is a great talent, stat stuffer and exciting to watch, but I would take Wall, Curry or Paul over him. He is far too selfish (IMO), is an absolute turnover machine (5.4 TOPG!), has too many mental lapses on defense (what happened to the defense of 4 or 5 years ago), he is as inefficient as they come and hasn't proven he can adapt/change to suit the talent around him.
    He is the most physically gifted, but not the best overall PG in the NBA no matter what 2K, casual fans and Oscar Robertson (OMG, triple doubles) think.
    from Bills Backer/Spurs Nation HQ

    When you're the primary ballhandler and have the highest usage percentage in the league, you're bound to have a lot of turnovers. But if you look at his ratio, he was just about even with Curry (1.92 vs 2.2). Taking into account the talent around each of them, and Westbrook did a lot more for his team than Curry did for his.
    And he adapted pretty well I would say, after losing a former MVP and scoring champion. He carried his team to the 6th seed. He only averaged 6 more shot attempts per game, and had the best 3P% of his career last season.
    GoDucks1224
    Sure, with Durant. But when it was Steph, Klay, and Dray winning 73 games? No. They wouldn't have won 73 with any of those you mentioned. He's not a product of a system, and he isn't overrated. You clearly haven't watched him since the beginning. Even as an injury prone rookie/sophomore player in the NBA, he showed flashes of greatness and his development basically hinged on his ankles staying healthy. Once he stopped having ankle issues, he took off. He's arguably the second best ball handler in the league, only behind Kyrie. He's a fantastic playmaker. He's a solid defender. He's a decent rebounder for his position and height. He's the greatest shooter of all time by far and it isn't even close. He scores on drives incredibly efficiently and is typically in the top 5. He's always top or near it in eFG% and TS% for the guard positions. Even with the addition of Durant, he is still the leader of that team and the offense is focused around him. His pick and roll with Durant is the deadliest in the league. Insinuating he's a system product is just ignorant frankly. I don't like to use this word on this site because typically it really only applies to those Facebook trolls and casual fans, but honestly you just seem like you want to hate him. Like you've got an axe to grind or something. You and a few others in this thread. He's not just a 3 point shooter. The system didn't make him. He's an incredibly talented point guard and a top 5 NBA player. His value to the franchise is pretty immeasurable on and off the court.

    You are really overrating Curry and underrating Westbrook. Bottom line, if you swapped those players, one team would still win the Finals, and the other wouldn't even make the playoffs. There's a reason the Warriors still walked through the playoffs in 2016 when he was hurt.
    He's not a solid on-ball defender, which is why he generally doesn't guard good ball handlers. He is good at playing the passing lanes, but even that is bolstered by the team defense allowing him to overplay them at times.
    He's a great player no doubt, but he is not a top 3 PG in the league. Paul, Wall, and Westbrook are all better two way players, and are responsible for a lot more of the workload on their respective teams.
    El_Poopador
    You are really overrating Curry and underrating Westbrook. Bottom line, if you swapped those players, one team would still win the Finals, and the other wouldn't even make the playoffs. There's a reason the Warriors still walked through the playoffs in 2016 when he was hurt.
    He's not a solid on-ball defender, which is why he generally doesn't guard good ball handlers. He is good at playing the passing lanes, but even that is bolstered by the team defense allowing him to overplay them at times.
    He's a great player no doubt, but he is not a top 3 PG in the league. Paul, Wall, and Westbrook are all better two way players, and are responsible for a lot more of the workload on their respective teams.

    What? Wall is better than Curry now lmao? Curry is the best point guard in the league period. Your opinion isn't supported by any Composite measure of player impact.
    He's been top 3 in the league last 4 years in RPM/RPM wins.
    He's had the best +/- in the league over a THREE year period, and the Warriors statistically go from a historically good team to average when he's off the court.
    Back to Back MVP, First Unanimous MVP.
    Wall doesn't even play defense anymore which just further illuminates this nonsense. Beal's been guarding the PG's just like Klay majority of the time and Wall is a far inferior help/off-ball defender than Curry and slacks off most of the time now.
    No one other than LeBron even compares to the effect Curry has with his gravity, and any actual measure of team performance shows this.
    The amount Curry increases his teammates TS% when he's on the floor compared to off is easily 1st in the league and Wall's impact isn't even in the same universe.
    https://imgur.com/a/sFgpm
    In fact the only player that even significantly scores more efficiently with wall on the floor is Porter, and Curry literally increases SIX different teammates TS% more than that.
    The disrespect for the back to back mvp, leading his team to 67/73/67 wins, and a team that goes from historically good on the court to average without him.
    Even last year Warriors were 20.6 points per 100 possessions better with Curry on the floor which is just utterly ridiculous, with Durant on the court they were only 6 points per 100 possessions better and they both played with bench units roughly equally.
    No one is saying he's a bad PG. It's just that he's getting too much credit for a team that is stacked and he doesn't have as much responsibility as his counterparts.
    They won easily when Curry wasn't even playing in 2016 playoffs. You think if Wall, Westbrook, or CP3 goes missing from their teams that they will still win easily?
    Curry apologists love to use advanced statistics to defend him but fail to acknowledge that he has the best roster and one of the best coaching in the NBA.
    They have a great offensive system that give tons of open looks and will boost percentages across the board tremendously.
    Klay Thompson is a perfect example of this. He gets backdoor cuts for easy layups (pretty much everyone on the team gets a good amount of these) which makes his finishing around the rim seem elite because of his excellent percentage.
    Any top 5 PG can replace Curry on that team and they wouldn't miss a beat. They wouldn't affect the game with spacing like Steph does but they can do other things just as good or even better.
    Sent from my SM-G950U using Operation Sports mobile app
    ifeanyi18
    What? Wall is better than Curry now lmao? Curry is the best point guard in the league period. Your opinion isn't supported by any Composite measure of player impact.
    He's been top 3 in the league last 4 years in RPM/RPM wins.
    He's had the best +/- in the league over a THREE year period, and the Warriors statistically go from a historically good team to average when he's off the court.
    Back to Back MVP, First Unanimous MVP.
    Wall doesn't even play defense anymore which just further illuminates this nonsense. Beal's been guarding the PG's just like Klay majority of the time and Wall is a far inferior help/off-ball defender than Curry and slacks off most of the time now.
    No one other than LeBron even compares to the effect Curry has with his gravity, and any actual measure of team performance shows this.
    The amount Curry increases his teammates TS% when he's on the floor compared to off is easily 1st in the league and Wall's impact isn't even in the same universe.
    https://imgur.com/a/sFgpm
    In fact the only player that even significantly scores more efficiently with wall on the floor is Porter, and Curry literally increases SIX different teammates TS% more than that.
    The disrespect for the back to back mvp, leading his team to 67/73/67 wins, and a team that goes from historically good on the court to average without him.
    Even last year Warriors were 20.6 points per 100 possessions better with Curry on the floor which is just utterly ridiculous, with Durant on the court they were only 6 points per 100 possessions better and they both played with bench units roughly equally.

    Curry is absolutely not the best PG in the league. MVP doesn't mean anything in terms of player comparison the same as number of rings doesn't mean anything. MVP voting is subjective, and in many cases, doesn't actually go to the most valuable player (as the name implies it should).
    When I compare players, on top of looking at the numbers, I also look at their individual impact in terms of how they play compared to their team around them. Could player A have the same impact if he was on player B's team?
    If you put swap Curry with Wall, Paul, Westbrook, etc., I would argue that those teams would not have the same success as they do currently. But if you put any of those players on the Warriors in place of Curry, they would easily still be Finals favorites. Case in point, when Curry went down in the 2015-2016 playoffs, his team had no trouble winning without him.
    Curry is a great offensive player, but he's not as good on defense as you're trying to make him sound. And he doesn't get his teammates involved as much as the rest of the elite PGs in the league. Wall, for example, averaged 2 points less per game this past season while shooting only ~1.5% less from the field, but he also averaged 4 more assists and only one more turnover. Now imagine if Wall had the talent around him that Curry has.
    And because of how good their team defense is, Curry doesn't have to work as hard on that end of the floor, making things easier for him on the offensive end. When he's forced to work hard on defense, his offense suffers.
    Again, I'm not saying Curry isn't a great player; he absolutely is. But to say he's the best PG in the league? Absolutely not.
    Wouldn't bother me if Curry was the top rated point guard, wouldn't bother me if his overall was up there around the 95-97 territory. As long as his individual ratings are close to what they should be it doesn't bother me what the formula computes his overall to be.
    What bothers me is that in years past they have had to overrate many aspects of his game to get his overall to be that high. A couple years ago when he was up around the 97-98 range all year he was listed as he best defender on the GS roster, passing stats comparable to guys like Magic. That is what I don't like.
    That year when I adjusted his ratings he was more around the 92 range. But a 92 doesn't look like the unanimous MVP so 2K had to bump up every attribute to where he wasn't even Steph Curry anymore, rather than just tweak the formula to value his shooting abilities more.
    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Crossover1
    No one is saying he's a bad PG. It's just that he's getting too much credit for a team that is stacked and he doesn't have as much responsibility as his counterparts.
    They won easily when Curry wasn't even playing in 2016 playoffs. You think if Wall, Westbrook, or CP3 goes missing from their teams that they will still win easily?
    Curry apologists love to use advanced statistics to defend him but fail to acknowledge that he has the best roster and one of the best coaching in the NBA.
    They have a great offensive system that give tons of open looks and will boost percentages across the board tremendously.
    Klay Thompson is a perfect example of this. He gets backdoor cuts for easy layups (pretty much everyone on the team gets a good amount of these) which makes his finishing around the rim seem elite because of his excellent percentage.
    Any top 5 PG can replace Curry on that team and they wouldn't miss a beat. They wouldn't affect the game with spacing like Steph does but they can do other things just as good or even better.
    Sent from my SM-G950U using Operation Sports mobile app

    Won easily? As in when they went 2-2 against a 44 win blazers team? They were statistically an average team when he wasn't on the court and a 73 win team when he was on.
    You don't have any actual evidence supporting these dumb hypotheticals. I can just as easily say Thunder last year would've won 55 games with Curry, the same you're saying Warriors wouldn't miss a beat replacing him. That's asinine.
    Lol this thread is just loaded with Cavs fans and Thunder fans bashing Curry. I'm out. Y'all enjoy your self patting on the back. I'm just glad you guys don't work for 2K.
    El_Poopador
    Curry is absolutely not the best PG in the league. MVP doesn't mean anything in terms of player comparison the same as number of rings doesn't mean anything. MVP voting is subjective, and in many cases, doesn't actually go to the most valuable player (as the name implies it should).
    When I compare players, on top of looking at the numbers, I also look at their individual impact in terms of how they play compared to their team around them. Could player A have the same impact if he was on player B's team?
    If you put swap Curry with Wall, Paul, Westbrook, etc., I would argue that those teams would not have the same success as they do currently. But if you put any of those players on the Warriors in place of Curry, they would easily still be Finals favorites. Case in point, when Curry went down in the 2015-2016 playoffs, his team had no trouble winning without him.
    Curry is a great offensive player, but he's not as good on defense as you're trying to make him sound. And he doesn't get his teammates involved as much as the rest of the elite PGs in the league. Wall, for example, averaged 2 points less per game this past season while shooting only ~1.5% less from the field, but he also averaged 4 more assists and only one more turnover. Now imagine if Wall had the talent around him that Curry has.
    And because of how good their team defense is, Curry doesn't have to work as hard on that end of the floor, making things easier for him on the offensive end. When he's forced to work hard on defense, his offense suffers.
    Again, I'm not saying Curry isn't a great player; he absolutely is. But to say he's the best PG in the league? Absolutely not.

    Hypotheticals don't really matter. What matters is results. Also FG% is not a measure of efficiency, and the fact you're using that sort of makes this a pointless argument lol.
    John Wall's TS% was 54.1
    Curry's was 62.4%
    The difference between Wall and Curry's efficiency(8.3%) is larger than the efficiency between the Warriors Top 5 offense of all time last year (TS% of 59.7) and the worst team in the league last year(TS% of 52.1) - a 7.6 difference.
    That is so astronomically different, and almost nothing Wall could do could even come close to making up for that. And even aside from their scoring, Curry makes his teammates better far better than Wall does.
    And what matters again is IMPACT. Wall's extra assists don't even come close to making his teammates better as compared to Curry's gravity with teams doubling him 25+ feet away from the basket.
    I shared this graphic before, which shows various players effect on teammates' TS%.
    https://imgur.com/a/sFgpm
    Curry is #1 in the league.
    Wall isn't even in the same world in that regard. His teammates barely are more effective when he's on the court as opposed to when he's off the court. Where as Curry in most cases is increasing his teammates efficiency 6-14% in most cases.
    More overall impact composite stats
    Curry: 2016-2017 RPM: 7.41
    Wall: 2016-2017 RPM: 2.26
    Curry: 2016-2017 BPM: 7.3
    Wall: 2016-2017 BPM: 4.1
    I'm sorry but objectively Curry and Wall aren't even close in terms of on the court impact, and every non-bias objective means shows that.
    ifeanyi18
    Hypotheticals don't really matter. What matters is results. Also FG% is not a measure of efficiency, and the fact you're using that sort of makes this a pointless argument lol.
    John Wall's TS% was 54.1
    Curry's was 62.4%
    The difference between Wall and Curry's efficiency(8.3%) is larger than the efficiency between the Warriors Top 5 offense of all time last year (TS% of 59.7) and the worst team in the league last year(TS% of 52.1) - a 7.6 difference.
    That is so astronomically different, and almost nothing Wall could do could even come close to making up for that. And even aside from their scoring, Curry makes his teammates better far better than Wall does.
    And what matters again is IMPACT. Wall's extra assists don't even come close to making his teammates better as compared to Curry's gravity with teams doubling him 25+ feet away from the basket.
    I shared this graphic before, which shows various players effect on teammates' TS%.
    https://imgur.com/a/sFgpm
    Curry is #1 in the league.
    Wall isn't even in the same world in that regard. His teammates barely are more effective when he's on the court as opposed to when he's off the court. Where as Curry in most cases is increasing his teammates efficiency 6-14% in most cases.
    More overall impact composite stats
    Curry: 2016-2017 RPM: 7.41
    Wall: 2016-2017 RPM: 2.26
    Curry: 2016-2017 BPM: 7.3
    Wall: 2016-2017 BPM: 4.1
    I'm sorry but objectively Curry and Wall aren't even close in terms of on the court impact, and every non-bias objective means shows that.

    I appreciate all the effort you're putting in, but advanced metrics don't seem to mean anything to them. They seem very much anti-Curry on principle, nothing will change. He's clearly the best point guard in the league, and they'd rate him around an 89. Not worth arguing with.
    GoDucks1224
    I appreciate all the effort you're putting in, but advanced metrics don't seem to mean anything to them. They seem very much anti-Curry on principle, nothing will change. He's clearly the best point guard in the league, and they'd rate him around an 89. Not worth arguing with.

    Yeah, I think i'm done. Curry is objectively the best/most impactful point guard in the league. I usually don't even care when I see like Westbrook commented as better because at least you can make an argument for him depending on the circumstance and I personally think CP3 is really underrated and on that same tier as well.
    But when I saw Wall being thrown around as better, sort of had to jump in because of just how crazy that is lol.
    ifeanyi18
    Won easily? As in when they went 2-2 against a 44 win blazers team? They were statistically an average team when he wasn't on the court and a 73 win team when he was on.
    You don't have any actual evidence supporting these dumb hypotheticals. I can just as easily say Thunder last year would've won 55 games with Curry, the same you're saying Warriors wouldn't miss a beat replacing him. That's asinine.

    2-2? Portland won game 3 alone that year. Same thing in the Houston series.
    You really believe that the other guys, outside of Kyrie because of LeBron, could go missing and their teams will still win a series without their services?
    Did you just become a fan?
    GoDucks1224
    Lol this thread is just loaded with Cavs fans and Thunder fans bashing Curry. I'm out. Y'all enjoy your self patting on the back. I'm just glad you guys don't work for 2K.

    Lol this thread is just loaded with Warriors fans overrating Curry. I'm out. Y'all enjoy your self patting on the back. I'm just glad you guys don't work for 2K.
    See how easy that was? You are adding nothing to the discussion just because others have a different POV. It's okay to have different opinions.
    ifeanyi18
    Hypotheticals don't really matter. What matters is results. Also FG% is not a measure of efficiency, and the fact you're using that sort of makes this a pointless argument lol.
    John Wall's TS% was 54.1
    Curry's was 62.4%
    The difference between Wall and Curry's efficiency(8.3%) is larger than the efficiency between the Warriors Top 5 offense of all time last year (TS% of 59.7) and the worst team in the league last year(TS% of 52.1) - a 7.6 difference.
    That is so astronomically different, and almost nothing Wall could do could even come close to making up for that. And even aside from their scoring, Curry makes his teammates better far better than Wall does.
    And what matters again is IMPACT. Wall's extra assists don't even come close to making his teammates better as compared to Curry's gravity with teams doubling him 25+ feet away from the basket.
    I shared this graphic before, which shows various players effect on teammates' TS%.
    https://imgur.com/a/sFgpm
    Curry is #1 in the league.
    Wall isn't even in the same world in that regard. His teammates barely are more effective when he's on the court as opposed to when he's off the court. Where as Curry in most cases is increasing his teammates efficiency 6-14% in most cases.
    More overall impact composite stats
    Curry: 2016-2017 RPM: 7.41
    Wall: 2016-2017 RPM: 2.26
    Curry: 2016-2017 BPM: 7.3
    Wall: 2016-2017 BPM: 4.1
    I'm sorry but objectively Curry and Wall aren't even close in terms of on the court impact, and every non-bias objective means shows that.

    The game isn't played on paper. Placing a wall of statistics isn't going to convince me that John Wall has by far an inferior supporting cast and very average coaching to put him in the best position to succeed.
    There are a ton of variables that come into play when using statistics. The structure of the team has a huge impact on them as well.
    Crossover1
    See how easy that was? You are adding nothing to the discussion just because others have a different POV. It's okay to have different opinions.

    Sure is. Except when your opinion is objectively wrong and you won't concede because your fandom won't allow it. Your bias against Curry is clear. You even just insinuated that ifeyani is a bandwagoner because you disagree with the assessment of the Portland series. You've been presented advanced metrics, standard metrics, and the film is widely available to you. You disregard all of that because of your feelings about Curry. Am I a Warriors fan? Yes. Am I a Curry fan? Yes. But I can objectively look at numbers (which have no bias) and comparison of game tape, and make a clear comparison. You seem highly incapable of doing so.
    GoDucks1224
    You even just insinuated that ifeyani is a bandwagoner because you disagree with the assessment of the Portland series.

    Lol he didn't "disagree with the assessment of the Portland series." There was no assessment; ifeanyi18 said Portland won two games when they only won one. That's not a disagreement; it's just factually untrue.
    El_Poopador
    Lol he didn't "disagree with the assessment of the Portland series." There was no assessment; ifeyani said Portland won two games when they only won one. That's not a disagreement; it's just factually untrue.

    The second part. He's saying if the Warriors lost Klay or Draymond instead, it wouldn't make a difference from losing Curry. Undervaluing the impact Curry has on the team. If we lost Klay during that series and still had Curry, it's a sweep. Curry is the biggest difference maker on the team.
    But seriously, I need to stop banging my head against a wall with you guys. I'm done. For real lol. I know you're both biased against the Warriors. Crossover was harping on Klay being too highly rated in another thread so. This is pointless.
    ifeanyi18
    Hypotheticals don't really matter. What matters is results. Also FG% is not a measure of efficiency, and the fact you're using that sort of makes this a pointless argument lol.
    John Wall's TS% was 54.1
    Curry's was 62.4%
    The difference between Wall and Curry's efficiency(8.3%) is larger than the efficiency between the Warriors Top 5 offense of all time last year (TS% of 59.7) and the worst team in the league last year(TS% of 52.1) - a 7.6 difference.
    That is so astronomically different, and almost nothing Wall could do could even come close to making up for that. And even aside from their scoring, Curry makes his teammates better far better than Wall does.
    And what matters again is IMPACT. Wall's extra assists don't even come close to making his teammates better as compared to Curry's gravity with teams doubling him 25+ feet away from the basket.
    I shared this graphic before, which shows various players effect on teammates' TS%.
    https://imgur.com/a/sFgpm
    Curry is #1 in the league.
    Wall isn't even in the same world in that regard. His teammates barely are more effective when he's on the court as opposed to when he's off the court. Where as Curry in most cases is increasing his teammates efficiency 6-14% in most cases.
    More overall impact composite stats
    Curry: 2016-2017 RPM: 7.41
    Wall: 2016-2017 RPM: 2.26
    Curry: 2016-2017 BPM: 7.3
    Wall: 2016-2017 BPM: 4.1
    I'm sorry but objectively Curry and Wall aren't even close in terms of on the court impact, and every non-bias objective means shows that.

    You say FG% doesn't matter, but then you base your entire argument on TS%. That measures offense only, specifically shooting percentages. Numbers don't tell the whole story, and you really can't use nothing but numbers unless both players are playing under the same conditions (ie have the same teammates).
    But if you really want to talk efficiency, look at PER. 23.2 vs 24.6. They are nearly the same in overall efficiency, in spite of Curry having a much better supporting cast.
    In any case, I am not arguing specifically for Wall. My argument is that you are vastly overrating Curry, and he is not the best PG in the NBA.
    His teammates can shoot 99% better when he's on the floor. That doesn't mean that he's actually doing anything to make them better. Defenders have to play the team differently, so his teammates get better looks. His backup is Shaun Livingston, a tall, inside guard. If Livingston could knock down the three, I would be willing to bet the TS% would not see nearly as much of a dropoff when Curry's off the floor.
    And again, no one here is arguing that Curry isn't a great PG or great player; he is. We've all agreed on that. The only argument is that he is not the best PG in the league.
    GoDucks1224
    The second part. He's saying if the Warriors lost Klay or Draymond instead, it wouldn't make a difference from losing Curry. Undervaluing the impact Curry has on the team. If we lost Klay during that series and still had Curry, it's a sweep. Curry is the biggest difference maker on the team.
    But seriously, I need to stop banging my head against a wall with you guys. I'm done. For real lol. I know you're both biased against the Warriors. Crossover was harping on Klay being too highly rated in another thread so. This is pointless.

    I said Butler was better. How is that saying Klay is rated too highly? Seriously, don't put words in my mouth. Keep ignoring the good that I say about the Warriors to suit your narrative about me hating them. This is hilarious to me.
    Sent from my SM-G950U using Operation Sports mobile app
    GoDucks1224
    The second part. He's saying if the Warriors lost Klay or Draymond instead, it wouldn't make a difference from losing Curry. Undervaluing the impact Curry has on the team. If we lost Klay during that series and still had Curry, it's a sweep. Curry is the biggest difference maker on the team.
    But seriously, I need to stop banging my head against a wall with you guys. I'm done. For real lol. I know you're both biased against the Warriors. Crossover was harping on Klay being too highly rated in another thread so. This is pointless.

    Lol did you even watch that series? Klay went beast mode the entire time. He averaged 31 PPG and shot like 50% from the field and 50% from deep.
    And what about the entire narrative that the only reason they lost the Finals was because Draymond missed game 5? One would think that the first ever unanimous MVP could lead his team a win on his home court to clinch the title, no? But he performed considerably worse than Klay in that game.
    In any case, I may not be a Warriors fan, but I am capable of looking at players objectively. He's a great PG, just not the best. Notice I never said Kyrie was better than Curry, because he's not. But with you being a Warriors fan, you are looking at him through rose-colored glasses.
    El_Poopador
    Lol did you even watch that series? Klay went beast mode the entire time. He averaged 31 PPG and shot like 50% from the field and 50% from deep.
    And what about the entire narrative that the only reason they lost the Finals was because Draymond missed game 5? One would think that the first ever unanimous MVP could lead his team a win on his home court to clinch the title, no? But he performed considerably worse than Klay in that game.
    In any case, I may not be a Warriors fan, but I am capable of looking at players objectively. He's a great PG, just not the best. Notice I never said Kyrie was better than Curry, because he's not. But with you being a Warriors fan, you are looking at him through rose-colored glasses.

    Hell, I'm one of the biggest Kyrie fans here and I won't say he's better than Steph. Still doesn't change the fact that I think his team deserves much more credit than Curry fans tend to believe.
    This debate is pointless, regardless your opinion that Curry isn't the best PG in the league isn't supported by the best people making decisions nor by any actual composite measure of impact.
    http://www.nba.com/gmsurvey/2016
    In NBA GM survey of who the best PG in the league is: 63.3% of GM's said Stephen Curry.
    You guys just really don't understand how to measure player impact. Raw numbers tell such a minimal part of the story.
    ifeanyi18
    This debate is pointless, regardless your opinion that Curry isn't the best PG in the league isn't supported by the best people making decisions nor by any actual composite measure of impact.
    http://www.nba.com/gmsurvey/2016
    In NBA GM survey of who the best PG in the league is: 63.3% of GM's said Stephen Curry.
    You guys just really don't understand how to measure player impact. Raw numbers tell such a minimal part of the story.

    Notice it did not say 100%? Because even GMs disagree. It doesn't make anyone right or wrong. It's just opinions at the end of the day. You guys have a hard time understanding that.
    GoDucks1224
    Lol how is he too high? Explain that to me. If anything, he should be higher. Two time MVP and greatest shooter of all time is too high at a 94. Haha okay bud.

    i wouldn't say he's too high but if he's a 94 westbrook should be atleast a 96, so i get what he meant saying curry is too high just because he's not on westbrook level
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    ifeanyi18
    This debate is pointless, regardless your opinion that Curry isn't the best PG in the league isn't supported by the best people making decisions nor by any actual composite measure of impact.
    http://www.nba.com/gmsurvey/2016
    In NBA GM survey of who the best PG in the league is: 63.3% of GM's said Stephen Curry.
    You guys just really don't understand how to measure player impact. Raw numbers tell such a minimal part of the story.

    And you are still making subjective arguments. But if you consider all around skill sets, do you honestly believe that Curry is good enough to carry a team? If you swap Curry with any other PG, would their team improve? And would the Warriors become worse overall?
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    El_Poopador
    And you are still making subjective arguments. But if you consider all around skill sets, do you honestly believe that Curry is good enough to carry a team? If you swap Curry with any other PG, would their team improve? And would the Warriors become worse overall?
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

    This here, confirms your anti-Curry bias more than anything else you've said. Can't see past the whine and gold colored glasses eh?
    Wine*
    El_Poopador
    How so? All I did was ask a question.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

    What do you think Curry did in 2014? Klay hadn't become the threat he was yet, and Draymond was just a defense first bench player. You think David Lee carried the team? They made the playoffs because of Steph.
    God. I never thought a discussion on THIS forum would be so laced with blatant bias. Facebook comments sections, sure. But here? Feels gross. This is why I wanted to dip out. But it's so hard not to respond when you're being so disrespectful of a great player. It's so frustrating.
    GoDucks1224
    What do you think Curry did in 2014? Klay hadn't become the threat he was yet, and Draymond was just a defense first bench player. You think David Lee carried the team? They made the playoffs because of Steph.
    God. I never thought a discussion on THIS forum would be so laced with blatant bias. Facebook comments sections, sure. But here? Feels gross. This is why I wanted to dip out. But it's so hard not to respond when you're being so disrespectful of a great player.

    It's still the same team. It doesn't answer the question.
    And I'm not being disrespectful at all. I've said numerous times that he's a great player. I just don't believe that he is the best PG in the NBA.
    You're the one showing bias by refusing to admit that your team's player may not be the best.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    El_Poopador
    It's still the same team. It doesn't answer the question.
    And I'm not being disrespectful at all. I've said numerous times that he's a great player. I just don't believe that he is the best PG in the NBA.
    You're the one showing bias by refusing to admit that your team's player may not be the best.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

    Lol yeah I'm not going through this again.
    El_Poopador
    And you are still making subjective arguments. But if you consider all around skill sets, do you honestly believe that Curry is good enough to carry a team? If you swap Curry with any other PG, would their team improve? And would the Warriors become worse overall?
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

    I provided you with quite a number of "Objective" evidence designed to measure player impact to illuminate how much more impactful Curry is than Wall/how impact he is overall which you pretty much just reasoned/excused away since it doesn't already fit your opinion lol
    Then I provided further support showing how an overwhelming 2/3rds of NBA GM's believe Curry is the best PG in the NBA, which would hopefully make you reconsider that you're missing very important elements in the comparison of players.
    What does "good enough to carry a team" mean? He led two consecutive teams to 67 wins, then 73 wins, a ring and game 7 down to the wire the next series while also winning regular season MVPs that year as the best player on the team before KD even came. All statistical evidence shows how drastically worse Warriors are when Curry is off the court compared to when he is on the court, compared to literally ANY player in the NBA with the exception of LeBron. Even this year Warriors were 14 points per 100 possessions better with Curry on the court as opposed to off, compared to Durant being on/off. If that isn't "carrying" a team, then what is your definition? Being able to take a bunch of scrubs to 40 something wins?
    If that's the case then yes, there is nothing more valuable for impacting your teammates success than opposing defenses having to trap you 25 feet from the basket creating 4 on 3 situations offensively for the rest of the team, which is evident by the graphic I showed you on his impact on teammates' efficiency being the best in the league. These are advantages no ball dominant PG that needs the ball in his hand like pretty much every other PG can create, which is SUPPORTED once again by evidence. In addition to the fact that even with the ball out of his hands, his gravity continues to make his teammates lifes easier as defenses are stressed/stretched to make sure he doesn't even get a sliver of space for a three pointer, causing confusion and miscommunication on switches etc. leading to easy backdoor cuts.
    And in the hypothetical situation that he was less able to carry mediocre talent to 44+ wins than say a player like Westbrook. Why would I care or in what way would that make him less valuable? I would much rather have a player who has demonstrated you can build a historically great team around his skillset then someone who may or may not give a team of scrubs a better floor.
    ifeanyi18
    I provided you with quite a number of "Objective" evidence designed to measure player impact to illuminate how much more impactful Curry is than Wall/how impact he is overall which you pretty much just reasoned/excused away since it doesn't already fit your opinion lol
    Then I provided further support showing how an overwhelming 2/3rds of NBA GM's believe Curry is the best PG in the NBA, which would hopefully make you reconsider that you're missing very important elements in the comparison of players.
    What does "good enough to carry a team" mean? He led two consecutive teams to 67 wins, then 73 wins, a ring and game 7 down to the wire the next series while also winning regular season MVPs that year as the best player on the team. All statistical evidence shows how drastically worse Warriors are when Curry is off the court compared to when he is on the court, compared to literally ANY player in the NBA with the exception of LeBron. If that isn't "carrying" a team, then what is your definition? Being able to take a bunch of scrubs to 40 something wins?
    If that's the case then yes, there is nothing more valuable for impacting your teammates success than opposing defenses having to trap you 25 feet from the basket creating 4 on 3 situations offensively for the rest of the team, which is evident by the graphic I showed you on his impact on teammates' efficiency being the best in the league. These are advantages no ball dominant PG that needs the ball in his hand like pretty much every other PG can create, which is SUPPORTED once again by evidence. In addition to the fact that even with the ball out of his hands, his gravity continues to make his teammates lifes easier as defenses are stressed/stretched to make sure he doesn't even get a sliver of space for a three pointer, causing confusion and miscommunication on switches etc. leading to easy backdoor cuts.
    And in the hypothetical situation he was less able to carry mediocre talent to 44+ wins than say a player like Westbrook. Why would I care or in what way would that make him less valuable? I would much rather have a player who has demonstrated you can build a historically great team around his skillset then someone who may or may not give a team of scrubs a better floor.

    You are still only referring to offensive capability. Him being a great shooter does not mean he is the best PG, but it does open his teammates up for better opportunities.
    And again, I'm not arguing that Wall specifically is better. My entire argument is that Curry is not the best PG in the NBA.
    And yes, in the hypothetical situation you described, if you cannot say he would do just as well, then you proved my point. We are talking about players' individual skill sets, meaning you have to compare apples to apples. Curry performing well on a great team is not the same as Westbrook performing well on a lesser team. Unless you can say that he can do just as well as any other PG on their team, then you cannot objectively say he is better.
    This is especially true when you're talking about ratings in a video game, considering you can swap players at any time.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    El_Poopador
    You are still only referring to offensive capability. Him being a great shooter does not mean he is the best PG, but it does open his teammates up for better opportunities.
    And again, I'm not arguing that Wall specifically is better. My entire argument is that Curry is not the best PG in the NBA.
    And yes, in the hypothetical situation you described, if you cannot say he would do just as well, then you proved my point. We are talking about players' individual skill sets, meaning you have to compare apples to apples. Curry performing well on a great team is not the same as Westbrook performing well on a lesser team. Unless you can say that he can do just as well as any other PG on their team, then you cannot objectively say he is better.
    This is especially true when you're talking about ratings in a video game, considering you can swap players at any time.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

    If I roll my eyes any harder they'll be in the back of my skull. Just admit that you hate the Warriors and personally dislike Curry. It would make this whole thing so much less smash your head into a wall frustrating. Instead you continue to deny anything you're presented with because it doesn't fit your rhetoric and then claim that we're the biased ones. He's a Bucks fan by the way.
    GoDucks1224
    If I roll my eyes any harder they'll be in the back of my skull. Just admit that you hate the Warriors and personally dislike Curry. It would make this whole thing so much less smash your head into a wall frustrating. Instead you continue to deny anything you're presented with because it doesn't fit your rhetoric and then claim that we're the biased ones. He's a Bucks fan by the way.

    What have I said that's not accurate?
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    Crossover1
    Completely avoiding our points, then claiming we are haters because we have a different opinion? The extreme bias is real.

    The irony is thick here.
Continue Reading

More in NBA 2K18

Trending


Related

To Top