U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-14-2018, 09:37 PM
 
Location: Springfield, Ohio
12,237 posts, read 10,524,184 times
Reputation: 11279

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock View Post
That's kinda my point, though. It ain't that serious, but Durant went out of his way to create this dialogue. It's all good with me, but since it is an active talking point this week, Durant's opinion on Kobe is colored by the era he grew up in, and his opinion of Jordan is colored by the era before his that gave him his predisposition, because he definitely didn't watch Jordan's career outside of potentially a season or two, much less the guys before Jordan...
That’s true, everyone is going to be biased by who they’ve seen. A lot of great players get forgotten over time in basketball and other games which aren’t purely driven by statistics like baseball.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-14-2018, 11:56 PM
 
Location: Virginia Beach
4,305 posts, read 2,918,638 times
Reputation: 4597
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
I'd say Bill Russell and it's not even close. Russell played 13 seasons, and won titles 11 of those seasons. The Celtics of that era won their first title his rookie year, and their last title the year he retired. Chamberlain of course had more talent, but Russell used Jedi mind tricks to beat him every time.

I wonder where Stephen Curry will wind up on the all-time list? He is already the greatest 3 point guy in history, in an era where everything revolves around the trey. He's 30 years old, and has three titles so far. It's not inconceivable that he could rack up another 4 if they can keep Curry/Durant/Thompson together. That would take him past Jordan's total of 6 titles.
This is interesting, because if Curry matches Jordan's title count, are people gonna start debating that he is better than Jordan? No, and there are a number of reasons why...

It is absolutely inconceivable that Golden State wins more than one more chip together as currently constructed. My personal opinion is that AT BEST, they can win ONE more. Not more than one. My opinion also is that the run of titles is over...

Klay and Draymond are already showing signs of decline, and there is at least a 50/50 chance KD leaves within the next two years. The rest of the NBA has caught up to the Warriors in pace and style of play; the margin between Golden State and the "next best" teams is slimmer now than it's been during this run. The only way this team has a longer title window is if the well is replenished with new, younger star talent to grow into the roles the aging veterans have currently. It is amazing that so many people buy into this idea that the Warriors can win 5, 6, 7 titles. There is no precedent for that in the modern NBA...

The Bulls won 6/8 in the 90s. 6/8 for GS would be in 2022, at which point Curry will be 34, Durant 33, Klay/Dray/Boogie all 32. The five best players would be over 30. This is not plausible because of a litany of factors. Some of these guys are already declining, the Dubs will not financially be able to retain all of these guys, and the Warriors are not as far ahead of the pack as the Bulls were, as the Warriors themselves once were...

Anyway, I think Steph is already in that Top 20-25 range All-Time. I don't really see a scenario that he gets into Top 8 territory, regardless how many rings he gets. His peak I think could be fringe Top 10, more likely setting in that Top 15-18 range...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2018, 03:50 PM
Status: "but it depends on what the definition of "is" is." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
3,804 posts, read 676,873 times
Reputation: 1220
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock View Post
This is interesting, because if Curry matches Jordan's title count, are people gonna start debating that he is better than Jordan? No, and there are a number of reasons why...

It is absolutely inconceivable that Golden State wins more than one more chip together as currently constructed. My personal opinion is that AT BEST, they can win ONE more. Not more than one. My opinion also is that the run of titles is over...

Klay and Draymond are already showing signs of decline, and there is at least a 50/50 chance KD leaves within the next two years. The rest of the NBA has caught up to the Warriors in pace and style of play; the margin between Golden State and the "next best" teams is slimmer now than it's been during this run. The only way this team has a longer title window is if the well is replenished with new, younger star talent to grow into the roles the aging veterans have currently. It is amazing that so many people buy into this idea that the Warriors can win 5, 6, 7 titles. There is no precedent for that in the modern NBA...

The Bulls won 6/8 in the 90s. 6/8 for GS would be in 2022, at which point Curry will be 34, Durant 33, Klay/Dray/Boogie all 32. The five best players would be over 30. This is not plausible because of a litany of factors. Some of these guys are already declining, the Dubs will not financially be able to retain all of these guys, and the Warriors are not as far ahead of the pack as the Bulls were, as the Warriors themselves once were...

Anyway, I think Steph is already in that Top 20-25 range All-Time. I don't really see a scenario that he gets into Top 8 territory, regardless how many rings he gets. His peak I think could be fringe Top 10, more likely setting in that Top 15-18 range...
I agree that they need to restock a little to replace Iguodala and Livingston in particular, both of whom are getting older. The advantage the Warriors have is that they can sign ring-chasers. If they lose Green due to the feud with Durant, he would be tough to replace. Where else do you find a 6'7" point-center who averages 7 rebounds and 7 assists?

However, as long as they keep Durant, Thompson, & Curry, I think they keep going several more years. Year before last, Curry and Klay were #1 and #2 in treys made, by a wide margin.
https://www.basketball-reference.com...7_leaders.html
Last year not quite as lofty due to Curry's injuries.

Among the top 20 that year in 3 pt. pct., Curry was #1 with 324 made threes, Klay was #2 with 268, and JJ. Redick was #3 with 201. That kind of margin between the top 3 is rare in any pro-sports stat. Hence that is a hard combo to beat. And last year KD even upped his game, shooting 41% in treys.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2018, 04:23 AM
 
Location: Virginia Beach
4,305 posts, read 2,918,638 times
Reputation: 4597
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
I agree that they need to restock a little to replace Iguodala and Livingston in particular, both of whom are getting older. The advantage the Warriors have is that they can sign ring-chasers. If they lose Green due to the feud with Durant, he would be tough to replace. Where else do you find a 6'7" point-center who averages 7 rebounds and 7 assists?

However, as long as they keep Durant, Thompson, & Curry, I think they keep going several more years. Year before last, Curry and Klay were #1 and #2 in treys made, by a wide margin.
https://www.basketball-reference.com...7_leaders.html
Last year not quite as lofty due to Curry's injuries.

Among the top 20 that year in 3 pt. pct., Curry was #1 with 324 made threes, Klay was #2 with 268, and JJ. Redick was #3 with 201. That kind of margin between the top 3 is rare in any pro-sports stat. Hence that is a hard combo to beat. And last year KD even upped his game, shooting 41% in treys.
I think even keeping most or all of their core, the issue I see is that the rest of the NBA is closing the competitive gap. I think the Warriors will still be competitive. I don't think they win more than four championships total...

I will consider that KD, Klay, and Dray could just be having relative down years and will revert to form next year; particularly Durant, whose shooting is down, still is an elite player...

But there are reasons to doubt this thing can go on an unprecedented streak. The Warriors already have three in four years. For recent comparison, the Spurs won 5 championships in 16 years (1999 to 2014), and the Lakers won 5 championships in 11 seasons (2000 to 2010). Those sound more attainable to me than this Bulls run everybody is convinced will happen--->long, sustainable success but with separate championship windows (Lakers went seven years between titles in '02 and '09; Spurs went seven years between titles in '07 and '14). I can see the Warriors vets aging gracefully with titles later in their careers, but with a team constructed differently with different #2, #3, or #4 contributors, possibly even a different #1. All of these guys won't be there!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2018, 06:52 PM
Status: "but it depends on what the definition of "is" is." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
3,804 posts, read 676,873 times
Reputation: 1220
Just looked at some numbers yesterday--GSW was still pretty dominant last year in the regular season, even with Curry missing 30 or so games.

#1 in points per game (113.5)
#1 in team field goal percentage (.503). No one else even close. .503 would be a good individual % by current NBA standards. For the entire team to shoot .503 is amazing.
#1 in 3P% (.391)--again that is a pretty good individual number, let alone whole team.
#1 in free throw% (.815)
#3 in opposing fg% (.447) First was Philly (.434) and second was Boston
#3 in average point differential (6 pts). First here was Houston, 2nd was Toronto.

I think in 2016-2017 GSW was first in both FG% AND opposing FGP%, and even opposing 3Pt%. I guess you could point to that as decline.

Two things in the NBA that are less perishable than other stuff: height (you don't lose height w/ age), and three point shooting. Ray Allen was still effective until around age 35. Kyle Korver could still shoot threes (.463 last year) at age 37, although he can't do much of anything else now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2018, 08:45 AM
 
52,456 posts, read 42,188,366 times
Reputation: 32732
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
I'd say Bill Russell and it's not even close. Russell played 13 seasons, and won titles 11 of those seasons. The Celtics of that era won their first title his rookie year, and their last title the year he retired. Chamberlain of course had more talent, but Russell used Jedi mind tricks to beat him every time.

I wonder where Stephen Curry will wind up on the all-time list? He is already the greatest 3 point guy in history, in an era where everything revolves around the trey. He's 30 years old, and has three titles so far. It's not inconceivable that he could rack up another 4 if they can keep Curry/Durant/Thompson together. That would take him past Jordan's total of 6 titles.
LMAO....Russell used a stacked rest of his team to beat Wilt's team despite Wilt kickin' his butt over and over and over.

We already covered all that here. Russell, had 2 all-nba 1st teamers on his squad for most of his career (besides himself).

Be like saying that Horace Grant beat Barkley in the Finals using "Jedi Mind Tricks" it's ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2018, 08:54 AM
 
52,456 posts, read 42,188,366 times
Reputation: 32732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural510 View Post
That’s true, everyone is going to be biased by who they’ve seen. A lot of great players get forgotten over time in basketball and other games which aren’t purely driven by statistics like baseball.
The key is what people use in their GOAT definition.

For me, to be in the discussion you have to have *everything* which includes defense, offense, longevity, titles, personal records etc. etc. You have to CLEARLY be the best player in the NBA during your prime as well because if they redrafted the whole NBA in your prime and you weren't dang near a unanimous #1 then sorry, you're not the GOAT. (Hey, looking at you Bill Russell! I feel most people would have taken Wilt who never had a supporting cast like that.)

That crosses off *a lot* of HOF players off the list.

I personally feel that Kareem has the strongest GOAT argument to rival Jordan. I can understand why Russell is in the conversation, but he got beat by Wilt over and over and over heads up. Not sure how someone can say otherwise with a straight face and then turn around and say Russell is the GOAT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2018, 09:23 AM
 
Location: Springfield, Ohio
12,237 posts, read 10,524,184 times
Reputation: 11279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
The key is what people use in their GOAT definition.

For me, to be in the discussion you have to have *everything* which includes defense, offense, longevity, titles, personal records etc. etc. You have to CLEARLY be the best player in the NBA during your prime as well because if they redrafted the whole NBA in your prime and you weren't dang near a unanimous #1 then sorry, you're not the GOAT. (Hey, looking at you Bill Russell! I feel most people would have taken Wilt who never had a supporting cast like that.)

That crosses off *a lot* of HOF players off the list.

I personally feel that Kareem has the strongest GOAT argument to rival Jordan. I can understand why Russell is in the conversation, but he got beat by Wilt over and over and over heads up. Not sure how someone can say otherwise with a straight face and then turn around and say Russell is the GOAT.
My top three are Mike, Kareem and Wilt. The order varies from time to time, lol. The last two had an advantage from their height but that shouldn’t take away from their greatness. Lebron instantly changes a team in the way Jordan did, but the difference is he’s more prone to making excuses and throwing his team under the bus whereas Jordan would throw them on his back and carry them over the hump. A true champion throws in everything but the kitchen sink and physically wills his team to greatness...the only time I saw that from Lebron was in 2016. Mike is still the GOAT, end of story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top