It's time to ask the board: where do we rank Steph Curry all time?

[Janus]

AI hasn't seen them all play, I have. Numbers don't translate into success when taken from their safe environment. Those 3 pt artists for example, maybe they don't see as many 3 opportunities in a game featuring say Big O and West on the perimeter.
Judging or assuming one player could fit in a different game era is dangerous. The game is faster today for sure but the rules remain a constant, I think it's easier to up your game than down your game so maybe today players would have the advantage with their speed and ability but that's assuming those players become comfortable.
I'm sure more of today's players can transition than yesterday but the quality of yesterday's best can still make a career in today's market
Guys like Domonique and Payton could play, the era's not important but remembering they could is

 

[msgkings322]

Ok I’ll simplify it then. He has and never will be an asset on the defensive end of the floor. Of the players on your list Bird would be the only one that wasn’t a way above average defender. That said, you didnt want to square up against him either.

Curry is plenty qualified to play team defense, as proven by that team being a defensive force throughout the title years. He also averages 1.53 steals a game which is 78th all time. So now you are switching from 'one dimensional' to 'doesn't play good defense' which is different (even if I don't agree with that take)

I presume you agree with the players I listed over him. Who else would you put above Curry? Maybe Kobe should be too.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

I don't mean to hijack this thread.. but I'd like to see more threads like, "Where do we rank Jaws all time." I know the site is named sportshoopla but I think we should change it to sharkhoopla at least once a year for a few days.

 

[thunderc]

Curry is plenty qualified to play team defense, as proven by that team being a defensive force throughout the title years. He also averages 1.53 steals a game which is 78th all time. So now you are switching from 'one dimensional' to 'doesn't play good defense' which is different (even if I don't agree with that take)

I presume you agree with the players I listed over him. Who else would you put above Curry?

I only pivoted because you kept saying he has more dimensions to his game. Of course I know he can pass, that would be another dimension. He is by far the worst defender on your list, it’s not close. I would have him top 15 though most likely because of his contribution to the changing of the game.

 

[msgkings322]

I only pivoted because you kept saying he has more dimensions to his game. Of course I know he can pass, that would be another dimension. He is by far the worst defender on your list, it’s not close. I would have him top 15 though most likely because of his contribution to the changing of the game.

I have him top 15 too so we're on the same page. Kobe maybe goes above him too, which puts him at 13. I think he's at 12 or maybe 11 just ahead of KD and Kobe but I'm open to arguments against.

He has other 'dimensions', he's a shooter, good passer, has really good moves and touch around the basket (does some of his best work there not just shooting 3s), gets a few steals, plays solid and smart team defense, and of course is a team leader and winner, considered the least egotistical superstar ever (you should appreciate that) and the easiest to play with. Maybe SGA will match that aspect.

But again, we agree where to rank him so

 

[thunderc]

I have him top 15 too so we're on the same page. Kobe maybe goes above him too, which puts him at 13. I think he's at 12 or maybe 11 just ahead of KD and Kobe but I'm open to arguments against.

He has other 'dimensions', he's a shooter, good passer, has really good moves and touch around the basket (does some of his best work there not just shooting 3s), gets a few steals, plays solid and smart team defense, and of course is a team leader and winner, considered the least egotistical superstar ever (you should appreciate that) and the easiest to play with. Maybe SGA will match that aspect.

But again, we agree where to rank him so

He’s certainly higher than that on the Winner list

 

[msgkings322]

He’s certainly higher than that on the Winner list

Yeah but that's a weird list with Bill Russell at the top LOL

 

[thunderc]

Yeah but that's a weird list with Bill Russell at the top LOL

Honestly I didn’t really mean just trophies. The dudes a winner.

 

[msgkings322]

Honestly I didn’t really mean just trophies. The dudes a winner.

I know what you meant

 

[tlance]

Ok I’ll simplify it then. He has and never will be an asset on the defensive end of the floor. Of the players on your list Bird would be the only one that wasn’t a way above average defender. That said, you didnt want to square up against him either.

Magic and Shaq were not great defenders.

hard to say what O and Wilt would be defensively in more athletically competitive era. O certainly wasn’t know for his defense. And Wilt I think would be good defensively in any era, but again just harder to think about him out chasing pick and rolls.

 

[trojanfan12]

Ok I’ll simplify it then. He has and never will be an asset on the defensive end of the floor. Of the players on your list Bird would be the only one that wasn’t a way above average defender. That said, you didnt want to square up against him either.

Magic was an average at best defender.

 

[trojanfan12]

The problem with comparing Magic and Steph is that they are different types of point guard.

Magic was among the last of the traditional "pass first" point guards. As @tlance pointed out, Steph is a "score first" point guard.

If Magic chose/was needed to, he could have averaged scoring what Steph does and if Steph chose/needed to, he could average what Magic did in assists.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

He’s not a 2 he’s a 1. You can like Magic more but that’s his position

I know what he is, but I’d put him at 2 on my team, Magic number one …

 

[msgkings322]

I know what he is, but I’d put him at 2 on my team, Magic number one …

Well sure if those guys share a back court Steph would be the off ball 2 guard most of the time.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Well sure if those guys share a back court Steph would be the off ball 2 guard most of the time.

My starting 5 …. Magic, Jordan, Bird, Duncan, Shaq …. Curry would come off the bench, I’d even have Jordan, Magic, Curry out there together sometimes for sure …

 

[trojanfan12]

Well sure if those guys share a back court Steph would be the off ball 2 guard most of the time.

And Magic would have about eleventy billion assists. lol

 

[rmilia1]

These debates are tough because do you rank guys based on eye test or resume?

If it's resume then Curry is definitely top 10. Maybe even top 7/8.

IF you use eye test then shit starts to get murky

 

[trojanfan12]

These debates are tough because do you rank guys based on eye test or resume?

If it's resume then Curry is definitely top 10. Maybe even top 7/8.

IF you use eye test then shit starts to get murky

That's the thing...it's all of it to some extent or another. I also think "impact on the game" is big as well.

A fair amount of the reason Magic and Bird are ranked so high is that they took the NBA from a niche league whose finals games were shown on tape delay at 11:30 at night to the 2nd most popular sports league in the country...a good part of MJ being considered the GOAT is that he took the NBA international.

A fair amount of Steph's impact is that he showed a way for "regular folks" to be able to play in the NBA...if you can learn to shoot well enough, you can play. He and Klay essentially "weaponized" the 3. That gets him a little higher ranking than he otherwise might have, imo.

 

[msgkings322]

These debates are tough because do you rank guys based on eye test or resume?

If it's resume then Curry is definitely top 10. Maybe even top 7/8.

IF you use eye test then shit starts to get murky

Right which is sort of what I said in the OP, so I put him just outside the top 10

 

[rmilia1]

Right which is sort of what I said in the OP, so I put him just outside the top 10

I tend to lean heavily on resume

Eye test is so biased o for it to be unreliable. We all have things we prefer hoops wise ( or any other sport ) so you'll automatically lean more to valuing those things when you use eye test. And that's before you even get into team biases, era biases, age biases

My Dad grew up a Celtics fan and to this day he will tell anyone who will listen that Bill Russell is the best basketball player he ever saw

I used to think he was just lying to himself because he was a Cs fan but as I've gotten older and seen how people my age romanticize MJ compared to what he really was ( and more importantly severely overrate the era he played in to justify their opinion ) the more I've realized that people inherently massively overrate the guys they grew up watching. The era that made them fall in live with the game

So i just don't think it's possible too use anything other than actual resume to do a top 10/20/50 list unless you want it to be compleyely biased

I only caught the end of Kareems career ( 83-89 are the only years i saw ) so of i used eye test id never say he was the GOAT

But using resume there's very little doubt his is the best. So he's my GOAT