Does Steph Curry Justify Greater Than an 99 Overall Rating?

[jfsolo]

I thought OS was above "click bait" pieces. This just isn't an intellectually honest question, it's totally farcical.

[dxyyz1]

Quote: Originally Posted by cima

I don't know how you can argue his season was better when Jordan won MVP and DPOY, something only Hakeem has also done. Obviously this debate is going nowhere. Curry is God-like on offense but he's average on defense. End of discussion.

Im sure if DPOY existed before 1982 im sure there would be more than just Hakeem and Jordan. DPOY shouldnt be used comparing season it just handicaps anyone who played before the 80s.

[iloveosalot]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mauer4MVP

No you're right. There are so many people that have average 30 a game with a TS% over .660 or a 50/45/90 slash line with good defense and 5 rebounds, 6.7 assists, and 2 steals per game. Oh wait, it's just Steph Curry.

Jordan averaged 37ppg one year and was not a dominating outside threat. He drove and finished over, around, and through people constantly in a league with much bigger and stronger defenders than curry has.

That's a much bigger accomplishment and also he has 6 rings and steph has 1.

[BA2929]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dice

Not at all. He's a legendary player, future HOFer and probably the best player in the league right now. But if 2K is sticking to it's policy of ratings, Curry is not in the conversation of thee best player of all time. Sorry.

He's the best shooter of all time and it isn't even close.

In a lot of basketball circles, that puts him in the running for best player of all time.

[Mauer4MVP]

Quote: Originally Posted by iloveosalot

Jordan averaged 37ppg one year and was not a dominating outside threat. He drove and finished over, around, and through people constantly in a league with much bigger and stronger defenders than curry has. That's a much bigger accomplishment and also he has 6 rings and steph has 1.

We'll you're talking about career. We're talking about at their peak. Two completely different things.

And yeah Jordan was a great scorer. Curry is still a much more efficient player in terms of scoring (which should blow Jordan supporters' minds considering how efficient he was).

And again, I can't emphasize how pointless saying Jordan didn't shoot threes is. Does that make it more impressive in in a way? Sure. I'd you want to think so. But Curry shooting so many and making so many threes is a much better thing. You really. Any even argue that. 45 3pt% is 1.35 points per attempt. 51% 2pt is 1.02

[Mauer4MVP]

I'm not even arguing that Curry should be greater than 99 so I sincerely apologize for steering the point of the thread in the wrong discussion.

But people that laugh at the notion that Curry right now is as good as peak Jordan, Wilt, or Bird or any other legend really need to do some studying. It's a fact that he had one of the best season ever.

I think he should be a 99 along with Jordan.

[RyanFitzmagic]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mauer4MVP

We'll you're talking about career. We're talking about at their peak. Two completely different things.

EXACTLY.

People are really up in arms but have no idea what they're talking about.

Curry just had one of the best seasons ever. It's reflected in the 400 threes he made, his ridiculously high 66% true shooting while averaging 30, and his team winning 73 games. He's at a level no player has ever unarguably exceeded. 99 overall is fine, but these arguments are pointless anyway.

I thought Sim Nation was supposed to be about realism? Well then who gives a **** about the numerical ratings as long as the players perform to their ability?

[SpeedyClaxton]

GS are just fine without Curry, as it have been seen during Playoffs. Trailblazers beaten them in regular season when Curry was healthy so it's not valid to say they are much weaker team without him, with this being said...

Imagine Bulls without Jordan tho ^^ best case scenario they would win 1 championship and that's big maybe because of strong Jazz, Houston and other teams.