Do you Agree? - Bomani Jones implies Steph Curry no superstar, 'best system player' ever

The Lakers was .500 when LeBron played, which would have been about 7 games out of the playoffs. I wouldn't call that "in the mix."

Other than last year's Lakers, his only track record with underwhelming casts was his fist few years with the Cavs. We all know that it happened to be the East's lowest time.

Anyway, back to Curry and the pre-Durant Warriors. I hate the Warriors. But Rockets fans want it both ways. On the one hand, they say that the Warriors won because they had a stacked team. On the other hand, they say that their players were overrated, Curry, Klay, Draymond, etc. So how could they have a bunch of overrated players and be a stacked team at the same time?

 

If you want to argue it's not vague, can you quantify their chances of winning a championship and also quantify the net contributions of their teammates? What's the bar defined at for when one becomes a superstar?

 

That's actually not the argument at all.

Nobody is questioning his playstyle.

 

Look at the stats. Curry's shooting is FAR superior to Lillard's. Lillard has never shot over 40% from the 3pt line. Except for this season (where he played 5 games), Curry has never shot under 40% from the 3pt line.

It's not close.

 

Kobe missed only 16 games,
you can add 10 more wins to Lakers balance and regular season standings and they still don't make the playoffs.
https://www.google.com/search?q=lak...ome..69i57.14949j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

It seems to me injury had nothing to do with Lakers not making the playoffs that year but rather with Kobe's inability to carry the team singlehandedly the way the 'true' superstars do (eg the way Harden does it).

 

I am not questioning him being a superstar I am questioning him being on a team means automatically that the team is a contender.

I don't think he would be nearly as effective if teams could gang up on him every night and he would have about as much success as Dillard.

 

The Lakers record was 31-35 before Kobe got hurt. They wouldn't be good even if Kobe was healthy.

 

Dillard has never had the supporting cast to get the looks that Curry has had in the last 5 years.

Dillard is a far superior finisher at the basket than Curry, just shooting a better percentage from 3 does not mean everything, yes he is a better shooter.

 

Curry was an elite 3pt shooter before Klay Thompson/Draymond Green/Durant joined the Warriors. It has nothing to do with the supporting cast.

And I disagree that Lillard is a far superior finisher. Can you provide any stats to support this claim?

 

What does him being a elite 3 pt shooter have to do with anything?

I have not claimed otherwise.

Anybody that actually watches basketball can see Lillard is a better finisher than Curry, Lillard does it much more double the number in the last full season.

 

You said "Dillard has never had the supporting cast to get the looks that Curry has had in the last 5 years."

That implies that Curry's 3pt percentage results from the looks his supporting cast provides.

I watch plenty of basketball, and I think Curry and Lillard are both elite finishers. However, I wouldn't make the claim that Lillard is a "far superior" finisher without having some sort of supporting data.

FWIW, Curry's 2pt% is around the low/mid 50's% while Lillard's is about 50%.

 

Automatically elevating a team, regardless of its construction, to be a contender is not a useful criterion because virtually no person was capable of this historically. So, what he meant must have been something not quite literally that -- but then that's why it is vague.

 

Dillard took 500 shots at the rim in the last full season while Curry only took 253.

What does 2 point percentage prove?

Why are you cherry picking stats that are not relevant?

 

Ok, Lillard took 500 shots at the rim and Curry took 253. That in itself doesn't prove that Lillard is a better finisher. It only proves that he took more attempts.

 

You are arguing semantics but both Harden and Lebron have done this consistently.

I don't think it's very vague, it's something that is discussed all the time.

 

If you say so.

 

In 2020, Lillard's fg% from 0-3 feet was 60.7%. Curry's in 2019 was 64.9%.

 

PJ Tucker is having success as a small ball C with us. I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain how Draymond Green would work on our team. You think he's a product of the GS system and I'm fine agreeing to disagree.

And the team was so good that another all-star, all-nba type player stepped up in his place. Go see what Iggy did in Games 3-5 (stats wise), which don't even highlight his defensive impact (which Curry had none).

Oh...so now you are clarifying simply around the rim? No one is a offensive liability parked next to the rim with LeBron getting you wide open buckets.

False. Green hits enough 3's to keep defenses honest and allow him to play as a small ball 5.

A superstar should be a floor-raiser. Sounds like you are finally coming around. If I can't just drop you on a squad and have some type of success no matter who is around you or if the system isn't a perfect fit or if the coach isn't great then you aren't a superstar. If I have to have all these if's and variables in place then you aren't a superstar. Guess what....superstars typically have to be floor-raisers. Kinda shows you how fortunate Curry has been in his career.

Now go look up Bogut's corresponding minutes and you will see the complete picture.

Iggy got the Finals MVP because his play on both sides of the ball swung the series. Going small with him is what swung the series.

Care to mention defense?

I'm not sure. There are other instances of players winning finals MVP when their main contribution was theor defensive impact (Kawhi), which you keep conveniently leaving out when comparing what Iggy and Curry brought to the table that series.

Defenses ignore Harden? On what planet.

I meant to type Klay/Green. The former seems to be kinda ok at hitting catch and shoot jumpers and the latter can get parked in the corner and hit enough to keep defenses honest, just like he did in helping a team win a title.

Nope, and he has seasons in OKC as support.

 

You mean aside from him going to the Finals in 2007?

You can be great and overrated. AD is great. AD is overrated. Kobe is historically great. Folks putting Kobe in the GOAT convo overrate him. Curry is great. Curry is overrated (the knocks Bomani noted are true).

 

Assume you are correct about that season you still have the next 2.5 seasons where Kobe did exactly that (2.5 because LA had one of the best records in basketball in 08 prior to the Gasol trade). And you are ignoring the fact that that season was an underwhelming one for LA because Kobe was still expected to succeed even with underwhelming casts.