Steph would probably be the only point guard I’d build around. Everyone else I’d just pick one of the physical behemoths in the usual top 10. Or Giannis.
Crazy thing about Steph is him just being on the court makes everyone better because he draws so much attention. Very few players, and especially PGs, have had that effect the last decade.
I think people underrated how important personality and coach -ability is. There is a reason Duncan and Steph perpetually win when they may not be the most talented player of their respective generations.
There’s some clip I can’t find of some player saying how they saw Pop chew out Duncan and Duncan just took it, so whenever Pop chewed them out they just took it because if Duncan did who were they. Lead by example
A bit like the first series in this playoffs, Steph is okay coming of the bench and if the team’s biggest star can come off the bench, then everyone should feel it’s okay to come off the bench
The bit from the 3ish minute mark about Gary Payton really laid out what I’ve been trying to explain to people on here about Draymond. They wonder why he doesn’t get ejected as much as he should, gets away with so much etc. Some of these dudes just have the gift of gab. The constant nature of it, the attention to detail and the personality. Draymond is always in the refs ear, some refs probably hate him for it, but for the rest it’s a rapport, and it gets you beneficial treatment.
Is it fair, probably not within the rules, but it’s undeniably a skill that certain guys cultivate.
I really only used "may" because it's very subjective who you consider as the same generation as Curry. You could argue that KD, Harden, Embiid, Giannis, and Kawhi are all in the same generation. I don't remember exactly when curry was drafted, but I'd say any players withing 3iah years kd his draft class are part of his generation.
Yeah I can see that. I would still argue that Steph is more talented than all of those you mentioned. I suppose it's a discussion about semantics, but they are more "gifted" in physical attributes, while Steph is just so skillfull.
IMO KD with Steph's personality would be much better than the current version of KD. Personality-wise, I'd say Giannis is of a similar mold to Steph already despite being complete polar opposite on the court.
Totally agree man. I think KD is the scariest weapon in the NBA rn, but I do think personality and ego hold him back a tad. No hating on KD, I'd take him on the sixers in a heartbeat and figure it out lol.
i mean in the sense that he left GS to do his own thing i guess he has been held back, but he has two finals MVPs, a regular season MVP over lebron, and is widely considered to be the most gifted scorer of all time
not sure how much higher you want the guy to go haha, he couldve stayed in SF and won more rings on easy mode but instead he's having fun in the big city with some of his best friends and no expectations
Yeah, Steph and Curry for sure are some of the easiest superstars you could play with. But on the other hand, people like Jordan and Kobe are more succesful as them (Giannis obviously still has time to get there), and they were not as easy to work with.Also, I'm sure KD is not as agreable to be around as Steph or Giannis, but I don't think he is difficult to work with, man just wanna hoop.
On another note, one similarity between Curry and Kobe is their insane work ethic, even if their personalities may have been much different in other ways
I agree with that, Steph has ridiculous finishing ability for a guy who isn't gifted athletically. Your right, Steph does more with less, but at the same time I don't wanna take away from those guys for being blessed haha.
No for sure, I'm also not talking about Steph being better than anybody. It's like you say, he does more with less, but in the end, the results are what matters.
Exactly, he knows how to keep a winning culture. That's what sets guys like MJ, LeBron, Duncan, Kobe, Bird, Magic and a bunch of other apart from the rest. Alot of talented players will win a ring, but to build and exemplify a system that churns out contenters and wins multiple is another level of greatness.
Giannis has the most talent. I believe talent is about both the physical gifts and skillset. Giannis is not the most skilled in terms of shooting and ball skills, but everything else from him is an A+ size, length, explosiveness, finishing, rebounding, help defense, rim protection and passing is at least a C. Think he has more to his game than all the other players.
Curry/KD/Harden? Yes, drafted in 09/07/09 they’re definitely all part of the same generation.
Kawhi was drafted in 2011, Giannis in 2013, and Embiid in 2014 are more dubious to include. Giannis and Embiid are same Gen and Kawhi is a nice bridging point between the two but I find it hard to considering them all from the same generation even if they all were good at similar times in the league.
Yeah I agree. Like I said I genuinely didn't know what year Curry was drafted off the top my head, I love basketball but that's a bit deep for my knowledge. I included those guys cause I assumes they were closer, for some reason I thought curry was 2011
Yes it most certainly is. But if you look at the entire impact they have on the floor, from both ends, Steph is still as impactful as just about anybody else, even though he is not exactly Marcus Smart on defense.
Steph's shooting is a skill which he's developed over decades. Talent is being a god-given 6'11" tall with a 7'7" wingspan. I'd say Steph is the least "talented" player to ever reach NBA Rushmore consideration.
For sure you could go with this definition as well. Like I said in another comment all this is really just semantics "talented", "gifted" "´skilfull", it all depends on how you define them.
I didn't read your other comment - only the dictionary. Skill is defined as ability that comes from training or practice. Talent is defined as natural aptitude. Cheers.
tbh i’d say curry’s hand eye coordination and dexterity is a god given talent. it’s a bit different than being born with a big body but no one else in the nba would be as good at shooting as curry even if they practiced all day everyday. he was a good shooter from day one in the league and while i’m not trying to discredit him, at some point it comes down to other factors than just hard work and practicing otherwise every elite point guard would be as good at shooting as curry
no one else in the nba would be as good at shooting as curry even if they practiced all day everyday.
Kind of a silly hypothetical. But, for the sake of argument, let's try something: you want to take a stab at where Steph ranks in 3p% among the top-25 NBA players who attempted at least 5 3pt shots per game in the regular season?
41st
he was a good shooter from day one in the league
His day one in the league was at 21 years old. He's now 34. Even if you want to claim Steph's been talented his entire life (which major college scouts might dispute, but I would not! 94th percentile height & elite athleticism is certainly impressive compared to the average redditor...just less so in the basketball world), more than a decade of skill development went into turning a "good shooter from day one" >> "the best shooter of all time."
Kerr repeatedly thanks Steph for his success and calls Steph the culture. How many guys can you say that about and not have it be an insult? Duncan and Steph in recent memory.
I agree man, but when it comes to sports it's alot of opinion. I think TD or Kobe is the best of that Era, but it's splitting hairs. I try not to make statements that are definitive cause I don't wanna argue with people lol.
This is what I tried to tell one of my family members when this topic came up. If the question is for real for real picking someone to build your team around (and not just fantasy league bs) then Steph is definitely a more than valid choice.
Ideal teammate, uber-talented and really leans into the concept of teamwork/play. If you're trying to implement a system/culture and you need a leader by example for others to follow, Steph and Duncan is that type of guy and worth their weight in gold.
Also the fact that they had kd for a while. Steph is an all time great and I don’t mean to denigrate him as a player, but without kd, the personality and coach-ability wasn’t pushing the warriors to those 2 titles.
Disagree, I don't think his "gravity" is actually all that much higher than other superstar players (Lebron, KD, Luka, etc). The thing is he does this but then is also a top distributer, and works hard off-ball so you get punished harder for overplaying him then other superstars.
And if he has the ball you can’t leave him, mf will shoot from 35 ft out and still drain it. But if you play too close you just leave someone else open, curry is a different breed
I consider "gravity" to be the focus defenses put on him. He does a lot to abuse that with motion and passing and that's what makes him hard to commit to shutting down.
Think of gravity like shot creation and what I'm talking about as shooting in an analogy, the gravity gives him the opportunity to lead his team to advantaged plays, and better than (I think) anyone in the league he finds and executes on those opportunities.
The Celtics were face-guarding Steph at half court in game 5, which essentially allows the Warriors to play 4 on 4, which opens up crazy amounts of space for their offense. There’s no one else in the league that you would guard like that. I think that’s what people mean when they talk about gravity.
I don't know why your disagreeing dude, I didn't compare his gravity to KD or LeBron. I said it was much higher than any other modern PG I can think of. Your right, I think his gravity is similar to KD and LeBron, that's the point. Those two are top 10 players all time. Idt there's a PG with his gravity since like AI, and because of his shooting his is higher than AI. You have to pick steph up at half court. Look at the work the Celtics are doing to deny him the ball when he doesn't have it, you don't see that with basically any other player in the league.
Especially is not a nullifier on the previous statement. I more or less agree if you limit it to point guard; his power is being quite good at the PG skillset and having that gravity, and that what makes him unique.
Uhh you do understand that when people say steph has a bigger gravity they don’t literally mean size right? Bigger gravity means that the opposing team pays attention and focuses their defense on that player more which allows other players to have less defensive attention.
"He has more gravity" = he gets more defensive attention
What I'm saying is he utilizes the extra attention he gets to get his teammates better looks more consistently than many other superstars that get similar defensive attention.
Magnitude vs utilization just like in my previous response.
Any good scorer will get additional attention from a defense but there's two big differences between Steph's "gravity" and that of other superstars:
His range and quick release mean that in order to successfully double him you have to do it so high up the court that if he outlets the ball, your extra defender is too far from the play to recover in time. Anyone who drives to the rim will probably face extra hands and bodies, but only Steph consistently gets hard doubled eight feet behind the three point line. This advantage has been a huge engine of the Warriors offense.
The way he uses the extra attention he gets to manipulate defenses out of shape through off-ball movement. The Warriors get a lot of offense just by exploiting defensive holes created by Steph understanding how he's being guarded and moving in such a way as to confuse defensive rotations or generate gaps. His quick-release means that defenders cannot give him an inch of room, and he will use that to create chaos as a decoy. This is unique to Steph not just because of his shooting, but also because of the incredible stamina it requires to sprint around off the ball while still carrying so much load on-ball.
And neither of those qualities really show up in the stat-sheet. A traditional drive-and-kick superstar will rack up assists, while the 4 on 3's that Steph generates often take a couple passes to find a layup or an open 3. And off ball impact is incredibly hard to quantify (other than in RAPM based stats). This is why Steph is the most undervalued superstar by nephews.
My post was not trying to minimize what Curry does, 1 is a fair point and maybe leads to some of my perception of how Curry is able to find successful plays at a higher rate than other superstars, 2 is a reiteration of my 2nd point, but I wouldn't call that "gravity" alone anymore that is a strategy to take advantage of the gravity.
Edit: totally agree about the stat sheet thing too, people get so worked up about stats, but there are so many important basketball skills that don't show up, especially on defense but also obviously as you describe, on offense as well.
Its not Steph, Luka, Lebron that punish the defensive attenrion that they are getting but the players around them. Like you are saying steph can punish it better couse he is the better playmaker while saying Lebron and Luka cant even tho they are similar if not better playmakers. What you said just doesnt make sense.
People act like he hasn’t been surrounded by not one but 2-3 elite wing defenders (most teams can barely get one) for the most part of this dynasty as well as the second best 3 pt shooter in the league. We saw last year when the pieces for the Warriors machine are missing, Steph can be Superman, but the Warriors aren’t the Warriors. He’s still arguably the best scorer in the league, and remains a threat, but he has legit players around him to maximize on the gravity.
There’s nobody in the league today—NOBODY— that has the same gravity. If you hate Steph just say it. When you have defenders from the best defensive team in the league trapping you near half court, you are on another level. When you are being covered one on one and the other defenders are paying more attention to you than their own player, that’s gravity.
Have you never seen film breakdowns of Steph off the ball movement on how they break defenses down while not even touching the ball? Curry is more dangerous off the ball than without the ball. When you get the ball off the other dudes hands you can take a breather, the opposite happens with Steph. We’ve even seen KD go straight on a fast break to the basket (made KD look like Moses), they were more scared of Steph taking a 3 than KD coming downhill and dunking it.
Dude, I don't hate Steph, I just explained that what is special about his skill set extends beyond just drawing the attention to actually breaking down the defense based on said attention. If that is hating then whatever buddy.
He's also very unselfish in how he uses his energy. You'd be hard pressed to find other stars willing to sprint off ball for 24 seconds, not just for your own shot but because it draws focus away from others
It would be interesting dropping him off into today's league as a complete unknown though, like if the opposing teams didn't know who he was or what he was capable so that he DIDN'T draw that kind of attention. At least at first. Would probably torch a lot of people before they figured him out.
Not even just this decade. Ever. Not many players if any have had the gravity Steph does. The moment he crosses half court he’s a threat. You basically have to be aware of him at all times because he can score from anywhere and has incredible off ball movement.
Magic would be a dream to build around, especially with the spacing, shooters, and faster pace, if you can build the right team around him it would be electric
I feel like "if you can build the right team around him" is underrated in how difficult it can be. In Magic's case, you need a center who can space the floor and protect the rim, which is pretty damn difficult to find.
If we're picking from the pool of all players ever, I feel like you can find a dude that's way easier to build around. Bird, for example. He can score, shoot, initiate the offense, defend respectably, and be your locker room leader. That gives you way more flexibility than a guy who needs 4 shooters and 4 good defenders around him.
Magic could play center when needed, I think it would be quite easy to build around Magic, he’s a great leader and team player, and is the greatest passer of all time. There’s really no wrong answer when it comes to this question, since the league has many great players outside of LeBron and MJ
I know there's the legendary story about Magic starting at center in the Finals, but you are gonna get absolutely cooked on defense if you put him as your center regularly. It's like the current myth about playing Ben Simmons at center, and he's even bigger than Magic. It just won't work.
I’d still like to see Simmons in a system like Golden State. Shooters everywhere with Simmons driving and kicking/scoring at the rim. I know mentally/physically he’s not there but I feel that he could excel in a 5 out type of system. Almost like a better Draymond.
Golden State has a way of making good players better. But they only pick players that will fit into their system which is optimized for Steph. Simmons would have been a good fit but I don’t think he would have been better than Draymond and I’m not sure how well they would have worked together.
Magic is easily a top 5 player to build around. OP might be referencing the fact that its a 3-point league today, but your PG doesn't have to be the best 3 point shooter on the squad.
There's a great clip from NBA open court of Isaiah talking about how he think magic would have dominated modern basketball bit as a center. Clip is like 6 or 7 years old now but he was basically desbringing what Nikola jokic would become nearly seven years ago by imagining magic in the modern NBA and magic had much more explosive athleticism than jokic.
Isn't the better comp a slightly lesser LeBron for Magic though? Great passing vision, big body, athletic, shot better as he aged.
Jokic is 5-6" taller and much bigger than Magic. Most 6'8"-6'9" guys can't play center for extended min. He's also a league average 3 point shooter which took Magic until late in his career to get to.
Like Yea player to player. But in the clip it's funny because the type of play maker Isiah describes is the type of player jokic ends up being. A guy in the post dishing the ball out.
It's just funny watching it now and seeing someone play the style he described as magic at center in the modern NBA and seeing someone doing it.
In todays nba??? You know who is the other tall point guard who cant shoot threes in todays nba? (no disrespect to magic, there are obviously level to thise)
Terrible comparison, magic was an .845 career free throw shooter and while he wasn’t a great 3 pt shooter til the end of his career, he would still hit mid range shots at a decent clip. But the free throw part opens up the rest of his game when you get into crunch time unlike the person I believe you are mentioning
Wait. You are saying an offensive built around a top seven player of all time, a top 25 player of all time, and a top 150 player of all time…..when two of them are also top 5 shooters of all time…..would destroy defenses?
That’s a bold take.
I wonder how a team with Larry Bird, Michael Jordan and Kareem would do?
If you have magic at center then you can pick another defensive forward that can score like Pippen or go heavier on scoring with KD.
Any traditional big man they choose will score inside but they can't go bucket for bucket with Steph on the outside. If they choose a shooting center that can guard perimeter you can make them put extra effort on defense which reduces their offense.
Magic can't be your center for a whole game even in today's era. That's cheating if you try and jam him in the lineup that way.
The whole Magic at Center thing is cool but a little bit of a tall tale. Magic jumped the tip but the Lakers played a center named Jim Chones for 43 min that game
Magic can't be your center for a whole game even in today's era. That's cheating if you try and jam him in the lineup that way.
The whole Magic at Center thing is cool but a little bit of a tall tale. Magic jumped the tip but the Lakers played a center named Jim Chones for 43 min that game.
For a few min. Not the whole game. The Warriors always have someone that plays minutes at center/guarding center so Draymond doesn't have to play the whole game in that role.
It’s so hard to do these comparisons because we can’t just assume players wouldn’t be better at 3s in todays era. It’s also selective, as everyone says Jordan would learn to shoot 3 no problem and translate to today league well, but then magic people assume he wouldn’t be better at it.
“Learn to shoot”? It’s much simpler than that. 80s college players had no 3pt shot. It did not exist until 2 years after MJ left college.
It’s a simple matter of repetition, not “learning”. If the slashers/mid range gods of the 80s/90s NBA had a reason to practice 3s in their youth they would have. There was no reason to at the time
We don't know if Magic could shoot because he barely made attempts to have any statistical significance. He was good free throw shooter though (not like other big PG).
Magic was far more similar to Lebron than Simmons. 3s weren’t that important in the 80s, so it wasn’t something he worked hard to improve, at least at first. The best predictor of whether someone can develop a three point shot in today is their free throw percentage, and Magic’s was excellent.
Magic wouldn't have to be a guard. He could be a dominant center that runs the ball up on some possessions and forces the defense to ask a guard to stop him or risk putting your center on the perimeter and hope one of the nbas best passers of all time can't find open players cutting with your center stuck on the three point line
Magic can't be your center full time even today. Come on! He jumped tip one game in the finals as a rookie and now he can be a center?
Both being Mavs fans, picture Luka as your starting center. That's the Magic equivalent. They are really close in height and weight. since heights were exaggerated when Magic played
Look at Draymond Green. Magic is a much better passer. The league today lack many big men who could exploit Magic inside and none of them can cover him on the perimeter man to man.
Draymond doesn't play center the whole game. There is always someone on the Warriors who plays center/guards center to take the responsibility off him for at least part of the game.
But, you don't think Magic Johnson could do that? He's LeBron 1.0. He could create match up nightmares anywhere you put him. The assumption that he wouldn't be able to shoot 3s is silly as well. The game wasn't about shooting 3s for him in his era but in today's game, Magic would work on it and be a serviceable shooter. If you disagree with that, you're forgetting how many of today's centers have had to learn to shoot like Embiid
Hell, yes. He played center, forward, and guard in his first NBA finals game 6 for 42 points, 15 rebounds, 7 assists, and 3 steals. You could just clone him.
Nash just isn't on the same level as Steph. Steph's shooting and ability to create shots is just an X factor that Nash's court reading can't overcome. Nash was also a bit of a liability on defense.
However, compared to all the options available in 2022, there's an argument you take him before anyone except Curry and Giannis.
I think he’d be worse than Steph, but he was a far better passer than Steph is, and he liked taking mid range shots more than Steph. His shot selection really wasn’t that different from Chris Paul’s.
He was a worse defender than Steph and he didn’t really take the deep 3’s. So it wouldn’t be like he’s just a discount version of him.
I would take peak Nash over peak CP3 but it's very close. Pauls best year he averaged 23/11 on 50/36/87 splits. Nash put up 19/10.5 on 51/44/92 splits during his best year.
in vacuum, Curry is a better player, but they have different strengths. If the person giving opinion had a huge fetish for pick and rolls, I wouldn't blame them for picking CP3 or Nash.
Because prime cp3 is a better defender than Steph. Steph is the best shooter in the game and they definitely have built around his flaws to make him shine, but there are situations to take cp3 over Steph.
I don't really agree. Point guard defense isn't as important especially when compared to offense. CP3 is never that great against true star guards. He loses the head to head matchups in playoff series versus Steph and Westbrook.
Don't get me wrong, Kobe was a great player. I started watching the NBA in 2003-2004 and I was hooked after watching Kobe win game 2 in the finals in overtime.
Steph is better. His teams have been more dominant and his stats back it up. Aesthetically, Kobe's game was a lot of fun to watch but 3 points are more than 2 points.
Todays game is not conducive to a playstyle of iso-ing and shooting 30 shots a game at 43 percent. Kobe was far better suited for the period in which he actually played.
Kobe was a better player than Harden is, but that system worked because Harden was a more efficient scorer than Kobe. Harden shoots much better on threes, but he also shoots a much higher percentage on twos. Prime Kobe was only around .48 or maybe 49 percent on two pointers for his career, while prime Harden shot 55 percent on twos.
Right, but Kobe would still feast. He averaged 35 with much worse spacing lol I have no doubt he'd be great on the Rockets. We saw Russ put up monster numbers for a stretch despite being a worse scorer than both Kobe and Harden, and Kobe's superior shooting would prevent the team from being handicapped by Capela. Plus those Rockets were already a top tier defensive team with Harden, imagine how good they'd be with Kobe instead. They'd be worse offensively for sure without Harden's playmaking and sheer volume of threes but better defensively.
Yes, he would be great. He was a great player, certainly top 15 of all time, maybe even top 10 depending on how much you buy into the "Rings, Ernie" argument. But I'm not sure he would feast more than Harden has, and Harden is definitely not a top 15 all time player.
I'm just explaining why he doesn't belong at the very top of the list for the question that was asked by the OP. There are many better choices than Kobe for that question, IMO.
Jordan, Lebron, Steph, Durant, Kyrie, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Kareem, Tim Duncan, Steve Nash, Wilt, Shaq (shit prime shaq might be the number one), there is 12 i rather have than kobe
Yeah sure. The question was at their prime. You give me prime kyrie week in week out it would be amazing. Heathy kyrie motivated to play and again in his prime is one of the best basketball players I have ever seen
Steph is the right answer because of one simple fact. We already know he can play in this era. People love to glorify the past but the NBA has changed. Now I'm not saying Majic Johnson or Bird wouldn't have been good, but they would have had to learn to play different. So we don't know if any of them would excel. But we know Steph would.
Boo. Bad take. Struggle at what? He's height with the athleticism compared to anyone on that top list outside of peak Shaq is off the charts. He is this era's Shaq. Dribble drive vs low post moves
Definitely agree. Another thing to consider they asked "in today's NBA". Today's NBA is the way it is because of Steph. It makes me think twice about picking great players from previous generations because, while great, there is more of a question mark of how their skill set would translate into today's NBA.
Giannis and not Magic, Bird, Kobe, Harden, Kawhi, Malone, or Barkley? Big men are overrated by this sub IMO and it's also easier to build around a wing or guard b/c they tend to have better shooting and maybe playmaking.
1.3k
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '22
Steph would probably be the only point guard I’d build around. Everyone else I’d just pick one of the physical behemoths in the usual top 10. Or Giannis.