You'd think Ayesha Curry was that poster's ex gf given his irrational bias against Steph LOLLmfao how did Steph hurt you?
Steph is a better scorer, period. Way better. Way better defender too. These things separate him from Nash.
You'd think Ayesha Curry was that poster's ex gf given his irrational bias against Steph LOLLmfao how did Steph hurt you?
Steph is a better scorer, period. Way better. Way better defender too. These things separate him from Nash.
Isiah wouldn't be that great in this era with his terrible 3pt shooting.
Curry would dominate in any era since the 3 point line was introduced. He would have completely broken the game in the 90s.
I think Curry's the best shooter ever , but he 100% benefits from playing in this era.
Durant could play in any era , and is one of the best scorers of all-time. A total freak of nature.
Durant is without a doubt a top 20 player - with Curry, it's a little more difficult , but he's absurdly skilled and has the resume to back it up.
I'd love to see prime Gary Payton guard Curry with 90's rules in place , but unfortunately, I can't. I don't think Curry could do as much unless he was on a super stacked team like he is now. If you gave him just a reasonably talented team with rules that actually allowed defenders to defend and he had to be the focal point like Zeke was, I just can't see him dominating like he does now. His lack of athleticism would really hurt him , despite having the best range of all-time (imo). You actually allow perimeter defenders to get up on him and put their hands on him... he just wouldn't be able to create off the dribble to the same degree. He'd have to resort to off-ball movement and catch and shoot scenarios a lot more than he does now (which, to be fair , he's exceptional at). He'd still be a great player , but he wouldn't be mentioned where he is now.
Isiah Thomas isn't rated as highly as he should be , imo. But he would an absolute monster in the modern NBA. A monster. For me , he and Curry are about neck and neck.
The NBA wanted free-flowing scoring that accentuated the talents of the skilled small man , and they got their wish. It's a completely different game now , and Curry epitomizes it.
For me , there's quite a few PG's I'd take over Curry all-time , with Durant, it's a very small list of SF's. (Bird and Lebron).
Isiah wouldn't be that great in this era with his terrible 3pt shooting.
Curry would dominate in any era since the 3 point line was introduced. He would have completely broken the game in the 90s.
Isiah wouldn't be that great in this era with his terrible 3pt shooting.
Curry would dominate in any era since the 3 point line was introduced. He would have completely broken the game in the 90s.
Isn't John Wall a similar player to Isiah Thomas?
Remove zone defenses from the equation and Curry could shoot 50% from 3.
nonsense.
The rule changes were made for more perimeter production , not to decrease it.
He could have worked on his range in the 80s too, but he didn't. That's why Chris Paul is a better version of Zeke.If you assume he wouldn't just work on his jump shot , like literally any other player in this era.
Friggin' big men that couldn't shoot have altered their games and adapted.
Isiah would do just fine. His talent and work ethic was as good as it gets.
Well first of all if you put Wall on those Pistons teams instead of Isiah they don't win a titleFeel free to explain how they're not similar
Feel free to explain how they're not similar
He could have worked on his range in the 80s too, but he didn't. That's why Chris Paul is a better version of Zeke.
Right, because allowing zone defenses with the old handchecking rules had decreased production too severely. Nobody had an issue with perimeter scoring prior to the introduction of zone defenses to the NBA
He took 3s at a shitty percentage his whole career, come on.What kind of logic is that?
Zeke didn't develop/uitilize his 3 pointer because the era didn't require it or encourage it to the same degree, not because he was incapable.
He's not Rondo.
Do you not realize how violent the 80s & 90s were?
He took 3s at a ****ty percentage his whole career, come on.
Certain player types had no issue.
Name a focal point scoring player with Curry's (lack of) athleticism/body type that dominated in the 90's on the perimeter.
It just didn't happen. You needed size/athleticism to be a scoring guard (that's an elite player) , or you'd be a facilitator , or worse a role player.
He'd be forced to use ball-screens way more , and he wouldn't be nearly as effective driving to the hoop despite having a ridiculous touch around the rim.
Iverson was really the first guy to break the mold (as an elite scorer), and no , I don't think Curry could've handled the punishment A.I took earlier in his career , nor do I think he was a good of an athlete. A.I was a freak , Curry's just not.
You can't touch people out there any more , that has benefitted Curry as much as anyone. Zone defense means nothing to a guy with his range. Zone defense hurts the big man , or the slasher, more than the shooter. It has to be man-to-man against Curry , and you have to fight through a million screens (which they don't even let you do anymore). If you switch a big on to him - you die.
In the 90's that wouldn't have been as big of an issue , because you could actually put hands on people and fight through screens. A hand-checked Curry being funnelled into the paint is not a 30 ppg guy. Not unless he's on a historically stacked team again.
Ball movement and shooting has always been the way to beat the zone, what on earth are you talking about?Remove zone defenses from the equation and Curry could shoot 50% from 3.
Name someone from the 90s who could shoot like Steph
Ball movement and shooting has always been the way to beat the zone, what on earth are you talking about?