OPINION Top 10 NBA Players

[Shaquille Sunflower]

KD
Kawhi
Curry
Lebron
Harden
Giannis
AD
Embiid
PG
Jokic

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Niggas still overrating df outta Durant

If anything, I think Curry is being overrated. I like him and I believe he basically changed the way they play BBall in the league now, but I still think people attribute too much of his team success to him. Dude is going to his 5th Finals in a row, but hasn't been Finals MVP yet. How good would he really look if we plopped on an average NBA team as opposed to him being on possibly the greatest team of all time.

 

[Peace_79]

If anything, I think Curry is being overrated. I like him and I believe he basically changed the way they play BBall in the league now, but I still think people attribute too much of his team success to him. Dude is going to his 5th Finals in a row, but hasn't been Finals MVP yet. How good would he really look if we plopped on an average NBA team as opposed to him being on possibly the greatest team of all time.

^^ Casual shit.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

^^ Casual shit.

View attachment 135583

Since when are facts "Casual shit?" Again, tell me another player that was a candidate for best player in the league and has won multiple championships but has never gotten a Finals MVP.

 

[Peace_79]

Since when are facts "Casual shit?" Again, tell me another player that was a candidate for best player in the league and has won multiple championships but has never gotten a Finals MVP.

When you forgo a mountain of data and qualitative evidence to instead rely on a subjectively determined Award to substantiate your arguments.


Saying a player isn’t one of the best in the league and is overrated because they don’t have a FMVP is stupid for a number and reasons.

Spoiler

For 1 - how many players on this entire list have a FMVP as the unquestioned leader of their team?


I count one such player.


And it would be two such players if Steph wasn’t cheated out of a FMVP in 2015.

How does that FACT fit into your argument?





2 - 70% of the players on that list can’t even lead their team to the Finals, period ... to even have a chance at winning a championship ... or winning this coveted Media Award that you place such emphasis on





3 - Magic won 3 out of 9. Is he an overrated player?


Was he not one of the best in his era?


You do remember him choking in 84 and being called Tragic Johnson right?


Steph choked once in the Finals. The other 3 trips he was great to outstanding.


Was Kareem a bum when Magic one FMVP? Was he suddenly overrated???

You see how flawed that logic is...

You are literally ignoring over 500 games of production for the sake of 22 - or really 2 or 3 bad games - over a 4 year stretch.


2 or 3 bad games that happened to end up in 3 championships over 4 years as the best or one of the best players on a historically good team.


Oh that’s right but he can’t be one of the best in the league because he doesn’t have a FMVP.


He must be overrated.


CASUAL

 

[The Lonious Monk]

When you forgo a mountain of data and qualitative evidence to instead rely on a subjectively determined Award to substantiate your arguments.


Saying a player isn’t one of the best in the league and is overrated because they don’t have a FMVP is stupid for a number and reasons.

Spoiler

For 1 - how many players on this entire list have a FMVP as the unquestioned leader of their team?


I count one such player.


And it would be two such players if Steph wasn’t cheated out of a FMVP in 2015.

How does that FACT fit into your argument?





2 - 70% of the players on that list can’t even lead their team to the Finals, period ... to even have a chance at winning a championship ... or winning this coveted Media Award that you place such emphasis on





3 - Magic won 3 out of 9. Is he an overrated player?


Was he not one of the best in his era?


You do remember him choking in 84 and being called Tragic Johnson right?


Steph choked once in the Finals. The other 3 trips he was great to outstanding.


Was Kareem a bum when Magic one FMVP? Was he suddenly overrated???

You see how flawed that logic is...

You are literally ignoring over 500 games of production for the sake of 22 - or really 2 or 3 bad games - over a 4 year stretch.


2 or 3 bad games that happened to end up in 3 championships over 4 years as the best or one of the best players on the a historically good team.


Oh that’s right but he can’t be one of the best in the league because he doesn’t have a FMVP.


He must be overrated.


CASUAL

Bruh, you doing too much. Curry is clearly one of the best players in the league. I never said otherwise. I said I feel like he is overrated and I say that because you got people saying he is the best player in the league or hands down better than some of these other players that are carrying teams solo.

I also didn't say that him never being the FMVP is the sole reason he is overrated. I said that I feel like people conflate too much of the GS team success with his personal success. And it's funny you talk about lapses in logic but miss the big one in your own. You brought up Kareem but neglected to mention that he actually had a FMVP in 1985, so even if I was arguing that the FMVP was the be all and end all, that wasn't even a good counter. It would have supported my point more than yours.

 

[Peace_79]

I said I feel like he is overrated and I say that because you got people saying he is the best player in the league.

People have several players in the conversation for best in the world.


AD, Harden, Giannis, Kawhi etc.


What have they done that Steph hasn’t done?


Do you consider each of them overrated, too?

or hands down better than some of these other players that are carrying teams solo.

Ahh another factor.


It feels like you are loosely defining the bolded and significantly overrating it’s influence.



Give me an example of what it even means to “carry an entire team - solo”


Let’s make it fun - don’t use Lebron.


What makes you discredit Steph from doing so compared to another player on this list of current Top 10, not named Lebron.

I also didn't say that him never being the FMVP is the sole reason he is overrated. I said that I feel like people conflate too much of the GS team success with his personal success.

This is where more Casual shit comes into play.


So because someone says that Steph is the engine to that team’s success - which is obvious given the eye test, the analysis of former players and NBA experts across the country, and every objective standard imaginable - that person is conflating ...


That’s casual shit bruh... unless you can find me ANY other plausible rationale for your position outside of - “Finals MVPs!!!!”


I’ll wait here

You brought up Kareem but neglected to mention that he actually had a FMVP in 1985, so even if I was arguing that the FMVP was the be all and end all, that wasn't even a good counter. It would have supported my point more than yours.

I was illustrating how fickle and silly that argument is.


Steph is half way through his career and in the middle of his prime.

In 1984 Kareem was nearing the end of a very long career.


Steph should have already won a FMVP in 15’, and he has a a good chance of winning one this year.


So if a few votes go the other way in 15’ is he magically not overrated anymore.

Those few votes from the media would have been pretty miraculous in defining the value of a player.


He could be starting down 2 FMVP trophies in 5 trips.



For reference, Magic has just 3 trophies in 9 trips.


Yet People consider him Top 5, Top 2, Top 1 All Time Player.



Here’s a hint - he was playing with another All Time Player in a league with other great teams and great players - that doesn’t make him “overrated”.

• Btw. How many times has Magic “carried a team”?

• Curious - At any point in time was he among the best players in the league?

To your point about Kareem - Lets take 1984 start of the playoffs that season.


Freeze that moment in time.

Kareem would be going on 4 trips to the Finals with the Lakers, 0 FMVPs.


Consider his impact, his stats, his perennial trips to the Finals, his Regular season MVP trophies, his level of play up to that point in time ...


Now consider how history has proven how otherworldly great of a player he was...


How absurd would it have been to question whether he was one of the best players in the world or call him “overrated” for someone raising that as a possibility -


Based largely on the fact that the media had not voted for him to receive an award.


It’s a weak argument that is devoid of context, nuance, or in many ways blunt reality.

If you don’t think Steph is the best In the league - I agree with you. You can make arguments to move him up or down the Top 5.

But don’t talk to me about Finals MVPs like they hold this enormous weight against someone - ignoring the fact that some of the others on the list haven’t even been to the Finals.

You can do better than that

 

[The Lonious Monk]

People have several players in the conversation for best in the world.
AD, Harden, Giannis, Kawhi etc.
What have they done that Steph hasn’t done?
Do you consider each of them overrated, too?

Kawhi for one is leading a far inferior team to the playoffs. It's not like I'm saying Curry doesn't deserve to be in the discussion, but like I said, some think he's hands down the best or that its an insult to him to even consider some of these guys on his level. While I think Curry is good, I just don't think he would look as good if he was in the same situation as some of those other guys.

Ahh another factor.
It feels like you are loosely defining the bolded and significantly overrating it’s influence.
Give me an example of what it even means to “carry a team solo”?
Let’s make it fun - don’t use Lebron.
What makes you discredit Steph from doing so compared to another player on this list of current Top 10, not named Lebron.

I think "carry a team solo" was a bad way to put it. What I'm trying to say is that he's not really in a position where he has to be "the guy" night in and night out. Even before KD got there, his team was good enough to win even when he disappeared. You named AD, Harden, Giannis, and Kawhi. I wouldn't say they are doing anything solo. They get help, but it's exactly that...help. If those dudes don't show up, the teams don't do shit. If Curry doesn't show up, the team suffers, but it's good enough to gut it out. Now I'm not knocking Curry for that, but at the same time, you can't turn around constantly use the GS team success to elevate Curry when we know how good the team is outside of Curry.

This is where more Casual shit comes into play.
So because someone says that Steph is the engine to that team’s success - which is obvious given the eye test, the analysis of former players and NBA experts across the country, and every objective standard imaginable - that person is conflating ...
That’s casual shit bruh... unless you can find me ANY other plausible rationale for your position outside of - “Finals MVPs!!!!”

Stop trying to use the "casual" accusation to sidestep discussion. That's weak. So some say Curry is the engine to the team's success. Some say its Draymond. I mean you've had just as many people come out and say he's been the difference maker as people have said Curry. Hell, some people have said that Draymond's play is what has allowed Curry to go off the way he has. You can make a real argument for that. Not everyone in the league has a Draymond on their team. When Kawhi goes off, its on his own merit, he truly drives his team. Curry at best is the best piece on a team that's built to drive itself. Once again, if your main reason for claiming Curry is the best is that his team is so successful, you're overrating him in my opinion.

I’ll wait here
I was illustrating how fickle and silly that argument is.
Steph is half way through his career and in the middle of his prime.
In 1984 Kareem was nearing the end of a very long career.
Steph should have already won a FMVP in 15’, and he has a a good chance of winning one this year.
So if a few votes go the other way in 15’ is he magically not overrated anymore.
Those few votes from the media would have been pretty miraculous in defining the value of a player.
He could be starting down 2 FMVP trophies in 5 trips.
For reference, Magic has just 3 trophies in 9 trips.
Yet People consider him Top 5, Top 2, Top 1 All Time Player.
Here’s a hint - he was playing with another All Time Player in a league with other great teams and great players - that doesn’t make him “overrated”.

• Btw. How many times has Magic “carried a team”?

• Curious - At any point in time was he among the best players in the league?
• To your point about Kareem - Lets take 1984 start of the playoffs that season.

Freeze that moment in time.
Kareem would be going on 4 trips to the Finals with the Lakers, 0 FMVPs.
Consider his impact, his stats, his perennial trips to the Finals, his Regular season MVP trophies, his level of play up to that point in time ...
Now consider how history has proven how otherworldly great of a player he was...
How absurd would it have been to question whether he was one of the best players in the world or call him “overrated” for someone raising that as a possibility -
Based largely on the fact that the media had not voted for him to receive an award.
It’s a weak argument that is devoid of context, nuance, or in many ways blunt reality.
If you don’t think Steph is the best In the league - I agree with you. You can make arguments to move him up or down the Top 5.

But don’t talk to me about Finals MVPs like they hold this enormous weight.

You can do better than that

I really don't know what any of that has to do with what I'm saying to be honest. You keep on acting like I said that Curry is overrated because he doesn't have any FMVPs. That's not at all what I said. I said I think he's overrated because people team to conflate the team's success with his personal greatness. The FMVP was only meant to show how good the rest of his team is. As good as he might be, others are capable of putting on performances to the extent that they are given an award like that, which means you can't just say "Hey, Curry is the best player in the league because his team has gone to the Finals 5 years in a row." It's a bad argument the same as people always talking about how Brady is hands down the best NFL player ever because of the success of the Patriots as if he didn't always have arguably the best coach ever or that their defense wasn't arguably more important to their early Superbowls than he was. Can anyone honestly say that you couldn't have put Peyton Manning or Drew Brees on the Patriots and still got a lot of Superbowls? No. Can anyone honestly say that you couldn't put some of those other top tier NBA players on the Warriors and still go to the finals 5 years in the row? No. So you can't just give Curry the nod because of the success of his team.

 

[Peace_79]

Kawhi for one is leading a far inferior team to the playoffs. It's not like I'm saying Curry doesn't deserve to be in the discussion, but like I said, some think he's hands down the best or that its an insult to him to even consider some of these guys on his level. While I think Curry is good, I just don't think he would look as good if he was in the same situation as some of those other guys.




I think "carry a team solo" was a bad way to put it. What I'm trying to say is that he's not really in a position where he has to be "the guy" night in and night out. Even before KD got there, his team was good enough to win even when he disappeared. You named AD, Harden, Giannis, and Kawhi. I wouldn't say they are doing anything solo. They get help, but it's exactly that...help. If those dudes don't show up, the teams don't do shit. If Curry doesn't show up, the team suffers, but it's good enough to gut it out. Now I'm not knocking Curry for that, but at the same time, you can't turn around constantly use the GS team success to elevate Curry when we know how good the team is outside of Curry.



Stop trying to use the "casual" accusation to sidestep discussion. That's weak. So some say Curry is the engine to the team's success. Some say its Draymond. I mean you've had just as many people come out and say he's been the difference maker as people have said Curry. Hell, some people have said that Draymond's play is what has allowed Curry to go off the way he has. You can make a real argument for that. Not everyone in the league has a Draymond on their team. When Kawhi goes off, its on his own merit, he truly drives his team. Curry at best is the best piece on a team that's built to drive itself. Once again, if your main reason for claiming Curry is the best is that his team is so successful, you're overrating him in my opinion.




I really don't know what any of that has to do with what I'm saying to be honest. You keep on acting like I said that Curry is overrated because he doesn't have any FMVPs. That's not at all what I said. I said I think he's overrated because people team to conflate the team's success with his personal greatness. The FMVP was only meant to show how good the rest of his team is. As good as he might be, others are capable of putting on performances to the extent that they are given an award like that, which means you can't just say "Hey, Curry is the best player in the league because his team has gone to the Finals 5 years in a row." It's a bad argument the same as people always talking about how Brady is hands down the best NFL player ever because of the success of the Patriots as if he didn't always have arguably the best coach ever or that their defense wasn't arguably more important to their early Superbowls than he was. Can anyone honestly say that you couldn't have put Peyton Manning or Drew Brees on the Patriots and still got a lot of Superbowls? No. Can anyone honestly say that you couldn't put some of those other top tier NBA players on the Warriors and still go to the finals 5 years in the row? No. So you can't just give Curry the nod because of the success of his team.

#1 - I haven’t seen or heard anyone talk about Curry like that. Like he is MJ, far and away the best player in the league.

Most people underrate him - I see a lot of people place Harden, Dame and Westbrook over him. And mostly because of the FMVP argument that you are now distancing yourself from.

Also, I believe the Raptors roster 1-12 is better than the Warriors roster.

Spoiler

They have two DPOYs and exceptional size, length, speed and athleticism. Very very good on defense and solid offensive players as well.

Leonard
Lowry
Gasol
Siakam
Ibaka
Van Fleet
Powell

What gives the Warriors the edge - what has given them the overwhelming edge for 5 straight years - is top heavy talent and experience, namely Steph and KD - those same guys that you disparage and claim if it weren’t for Draymond Green and Kevon Looney, they wouldn’t look so good.



I’ve realized it’s not that you are choosing to use weak arguments, its that your entire premise is inaccurate. IMO


You believe because Klay and Draymond have All Star selections to their names, they are Top Tier HOF players that provide Curry with so much help.


Have you ever considered how much acclaim they would receive without Steph’s gravity on the court and leadership in the locker room?

Spoiler

Shooting ability, ball handling, creation for others, off ball movement etc?

Steph can do that anywhere.

Draymond can’t do what he does without historic levels of spacing on the floor.

If you trap Klay every time down as the best shooter on a team without Steph- what are his options?

Playmaking?
Beating two guys off the dribble?
Step back jump shots?


Oh ok ...

Steph gets all the traps and defensive attention every night, especially in the playoffs - and his team has still won games at a historic pace.

Do you know how hard it is to go to 5 straight Finals???

You think if you swap Steph with Giannis, Harden, AD, even Kawhi or KD - that just automatically happens?


They don’t do what Steph does.

They don’t have the same impact in terms of spacing and offensive efficiency.

Of course Dray and Klay are good players. There are multiple good to great players on every Championship team.

But Draymond and Klay are often heralded as these incredible talents; in effect to disparage Steph and KD ... while good to great players on other Championship teams aren’t even mentioned at all.

I could list 3 dozen of them that are never talked about ... that you probably haven’t heard of ... but the Top Tier HOFame players on their teams are causally listed as some of the Top Players in NBA history- forget just being among the best players in the league during there era.


Why?

Because having a good team doesn’t disqualify their greatness.

Those teams were good BECAUSE of them.


To claim that the Warriors are more valuable to Steph than Steph is to the Warriors is ridiculous.


You can’t use any traditional or advanced stats, Team Win Loss records, or logical arguments that go beyond accolades in a vacuum; to substantiate your position.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Again, I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't think Klay is HOF level at all. In fact, I'm one of the people that is perfectly fine with him not being chosen to an all NBA team. I think the people claiming he was snubbed are overrating him for the same reasons that I believe Curry is overrated. I also don't know if Draymond is HOF level talent, but you're being ridiculous if you're downplaying his contributions to the team especially with how pivotal he's been to the team's success since Durant went down.

Again, my only point is that Curry is on a team, where as great as he is, he doesn't have to always be great for the team to be successful. That's a luxury a lot of other great players in the league don't have, so you can't use team success as your primary reasoning for why Curry should be considered top dog in the league or even on par with Durant and Lebron. I'm not sure why you're taking all these detours around the point I'm actually making.

 

[Mister]

@The Lonious Monk since you seem to have a problem with where Curry is being ranked, where's your list?

 

[The Lonious Monk]

I don't have a problem with where people are placing him. If you think he's 1 because he's the greatest shooter ever and no one can stop him when he's in the zone, that's fine. I may not agree, but I don't really have anything to say about that. However, if you say he's 1 and then try to use his team success as the reason that he's above someone like Kawhi, I think that's bad reasoning.

I honestly couldn't give you a fair list though because I don't watch enough of the NBA. I watch the good teams and there are only about 4 or 5 of those honestly, so there are probably a lot of good players on mediocre to bad teams that I can't fairly comment on.

 

[Peace_79]

I also don't know if Draymond is HOF level talent, but you're being ridiculous if you're downplaying his contributions to the team especially with how pivotal he's been to the team's success since Durant went down.

Ahh

But see I am not discounting Draymond CONTRIBUTIONS to the team’s success at all.


But I am also NOT disparaging Steph Curry’s greatness to do so - like you are doing.


See the difference.

Again, my only point is that Curry is on a team, where as great as he is, he doesn't have to always be great for the team to be successful.

That's a luxury a lot of other great players in the league don't have.

This is objectively and categorically false.

And it’s why I referred to you as a casual fan.


You cannot provide any data, statistics, or logical arguments, whatsoever, in defense of this position.


Is that direct enough for you ?

 

[Peace_79]

I honestly couldn't give you a fair list though because I don't watch enough of the NBA.

But your not a Casual ...

 

[Playmaker88]

So peace had time today

 

[Peace_79]

So peace had time today

Yup.

FOH with that bullshit bruh

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Ahh

But see I am not discounting Draymond CONTRIBUTIONS to the team’s success at all.


But I am also NOT disparaging Steph Curry’s greatness to do so - like you are doing.


See the difference.

I said I believe people overrate him. That's not a knock on him. That's a knock on the people assessing him. I didn't say he was a bad player. I said I didn't think he was the best player in the league. I didn't say other people couldn't believe he was the best. I just said that claiming he was the best and using team success as the main argument was weak. So are you saying that if I disagree with you on how good or highly rated he is, I'm disparaging him? Is it not possible just for us to disagree with how good he is or where he should be rated?

This is objectively and categorically false.

And it’s why I referred to you as a casual fan.


You cannot provide any data, statistics, or logical arguments, whatsoever, in defense of this position.


Is that direct enough for you ?

My nigga, you keep calling me a casual as a way of pushing these weak ass arguments of yours. How can you say what I said was categorically false when we have literally seen the team win whole playoff series against Houston and Portland in 2016 and San Antonio in 2018 with Curry not even suited up for most of the games.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryst01/gamelog-playoffs/

Tell me how many playoff series Toronto would win without Kawhi playing for the whole series? How far would would Portland have gone without Lillard playing every game?

But your not a Casual ...


View attachment 135914

So I have to watch every game played in the NBA to be hardcore like you? Well, I'll pass on that. Call me casual if you want, but it still doesn't make your argument any better. How about you stop misrepresenting what I'm saying and trying to call names and just argue the facts.

 

[Peace_79]

What is the purpose if playing professional basketball if it is not team success?

Every award given is meant to reward contributions toward team success.

We rank all time players based in large part to their team’s success.

If a player is a catalyst for their team’s ... success, why wouldn’t that be a “main argument” for how good said player is.

How much they impact winning

Otherwise - what is all of that talent good for?

 

[Peace_79]

I said I believe people overrate him. That's not a knock on him. That's a knock on the people assessing him. I didn't say he was a bad player. I said I didn't think he was the best player in the league. I didn't say other people couldn't believe he was the best. I just said that claiming he was the best and using team success as the main argument was weak. So are you saying that if I disagree with you on how good or highly rated he is, I'm disparaging him? Is it not possible just for us to disagree with how good he is or where he should be rated?




My nigga, you keep calling me a casual as a way of pushing these weak ass arguments of yours. How can you say what I said was categorically false when we have literally seen the team win whole playoff series against Houston and Portland in 2016 and San Antonio in 2018 with Curry not even suited up for most of the games.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryst01/gamelog-playoffs/

Tell me how many playoff series Toronto would win without Kawhi playing for the whole series? How far would would Portland have gone without Lillard playing every game?



So I have to watch every game played in the NBA to be hardcore like you? Well, I'll pass on that. Call me casual if you want, but it still doesn't make your argument any better. How about you stop misrepresenting what I'm saying and trying to call names and just argue the facts.

So you define “success” as winning a few games in a 1st or 2nd Rd playoff series?


When discussing the Warriors, when people say “success” they generally mean winning a championships ... not winning a few games in the 1st or 2nd round.


Most Championship caliber teams could do that. Hell - Even Top Tier teams can

- The Raps this year are 13-3 without Kawhi.

They beat the Warriors in oakland without Kawhi

Dude missed a significant chunk of time and they got the 2nd best record in the entire League


- Could the Blazers win a few games in the first Rd without Dame? Of course.

CJ - a non All Star - has outplayed Dame multiple times in these playoffs.



A few games in the 1st and 2nd round???
What are we even talking about?


How many CHAMPIONSHIPS are the Warriors winning without Steph???

This is what I’m talking about you using arguments to disparage Steph.

We dont do this with most other great players in NBA history.


Did you know the Bulls were a call away from the Conference Finals the year after Jordan retired.

Jordan.

They won not only a few games without Mike ... they won 55 games without him, 2 less than when MJ was playing the previous year.


Then they went on to go 7 games with the eventual Eastern Conference Champions.


And Mike had, count them, ONE other All Star on that team. And this was the lesser team of the Bulls Dynasty.


No Rodman. No Kukoch.

By everyone’s standards - even yours - Jordan’s supporting cast was far inferior to Golden State’s supporting cast


So how the hell did they win so many games without him???


- Was Jordan overrated?
- Did they not “need him to be successful”?

GTFOH man

 

[The Lonious Monk]

So you define “success” as winning a few games in a 1st or 2nd Rd playoff series?


When discussing the Warriors, when people say “success” they generally mean winning a championships ... not winning a few games in the 1st or 2nd round.


Most Championship caliber teams could do that. Hell - Even Top Tier teams can

- The Raps this year are 13-3 without Kawhi.

They beat the Warriors in oakland without Kawhi

Dude missed a significant chunk of time and they got the 2nd best record in the entire League


- Could the Blazers win a few games in the first Rd without Dame? Of course.

CJ - a non All Star - has outplayed Dame multiple times in these playoffs.



A few games in the 1st and 2nd round???
What are we even talking about?


How many CHAMPIONSHIPS are the Warriors winning without Steph???

This is what I’m talking about you using arguments to disparage Steph.

We dont do this with most other great players in NBA history.


Did you know the Bulls were a call away from the Conference Finals the year after Jordan retired.

Jordan.

They won not only a few games without Mike ... they won 55 games without him, 2 less than when MJ was playing the previous year.


Then they went on to go 7 games with the eventual Eastern Conference Champions.


And Mike had, count them, ONE other All Star on that team. And this was the lesser team of the Bulls Dynasty.


No Rodman. No Kukoch.

By everyone’s standards - even yours - Jordan’s supporting cast was far inferior to Golden State’s supporting cast


So how the hell did they win so many games without him???


- Was Jordan overrated?
- Did they not “need him to be successful”?

GTFOH man

lol Bruh, are you really Ayesha Curry in disguise or what? You keep writing these long impassioned posts with all these mental gymnastics that don't even make sense. You better be literally riding Curry's dick to justify figuratively riding it this hard. All I said was that the people who try to use the team's success to boost Curry's personal greatness are overrating him a little. That's it. I didn't say he sucked. I didn't say he wasn't pivotal in the team's success. I didn't say it was blasphemy for people to suggest he was one of or even the best in the NBA. I didn't say any of that shit, so you making these long ass arguments refuting those statements that you made up is a waste your time.

Yes, I pointed out that he hasn't won any FMVPs, but that was never my main argument, it was just something showing that he's always had teammates that could step up and arguably be more important to his team's success than him. I did say that his team could still win games and even playoff series without him playing well. That's proven fact. Bringing up MJ is stupid. Yes, there was a point where the Bulls team could win in the playoffs without him, but that point came AFTER MJ had already taken teams to the playoffs singlehandedly. It came after he had basically won playoff series with little help. It came after MJ had already established himself as a dominant player outside of a strong team dynamic, something Curry has not yet done.

Curry missed almost two series in the first championship run and the team still won the championship. You think MJ could have missed two series in that first or second championship run for the Bulls and they would have still been championships. Hell, we know for a fact that if MJ wasn't playing well that his teams couldn't win championships because when he wasn't there or wasn't fully back, THEY DIDN'T FUCKING WIN THE CHAMPIONSHIP. You can't say that if Durant was up and Curry was down that they wouldn't win the Championship this season. You can't say that if Curry wasn't playing well the last two seasons that they wouldn't have won those championships. For goodness sake, last year in one game, Curry scored 11 pts on fucking 18% shooting and the team still won the game. You think the Raptors will win a game against GS if Kawhi takes a night off like that? FOH Believe what you want at this point. I'm not entertaining these ridiculous arguments you're making against points that I never made or points that really can't even be refuted.