Where will Curry and Durant be ranked alltime

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32

Where will Curry and Durant be ranked alltime among all players and also their positions

No votes
Both top 50 alltime and top 10 at their positions
No votes
Both top 40 alltime and top 10 at their positions
No votes
Both top 30 alltime and top 10 at their positions
No votes
Both top 20 alltime and top 10 at their positions
No votes
Durant top 30, Curry top 40 and both top 10 at their positions
100%
Durant top 20, Curry top 30 or 40 and both top 10 at their positions
2

Total votes: 2

User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22189
» Fri Nov 04, 2016 3:13 am
If both stay on the Warriors for at least the next four years together (making it 11 seasons for Curry and 13 for Durant), with what they've already accomplished in their careers, where do you think they'll be ranked alltime, among all players and at their positions?
Last edited by migya on Mon Nov 07, 2016 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 5907
» Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:22 pm
I don't know.. but both will end up in the hall of fame. that is not up for debate!
User avatar

Site Admin
Posts: 4040
» Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:45 pm
I think it's safe to say Curry will, if he's not extremely close already, to being a top 10 PG, especially considering this scoring and shooting is not only completely unprecedented for his position, but for the league as well. KD has some tougher competition at the 3 though, but could be considered the better player in the end.

If both run off a few championships together, that's certainly going to put them in the all-time discussion, but top 20 in the NBA is insane when you consider all the greats.
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 1291
» Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:50 pm
Someone said Durant came to GSW so he could win instead of Curry winning and being the best
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22189
» Mon Nov 07, 2016 12:14 pm
I think Durant is already top ten at SF, barely, but to get near the top five is very hard, though I think what he has done so far in his career is top five compared to all other SFs all-time. He doesn't look like slowing down for a few years either so he may well be a top five SF when it is all said and done.

Similar with Curry, he is for top five all-time the rate that he is going. Can only recall LeBron and Wade, and Shaq and Kobe as players who are probable top five at their position being on the same team. Really is something having that on the team
User avatar

Site Admin
Posts: 4040
» Mon Nov 07, 2016 2:08 pm
I think KD is already top 10, or even 5, at his position as a scorer* <- which will be an asterisk others will place next to his name on all-time lists, probably forever. The fact that people are just now realizing he's a good defender, and that it's still more of an anecdote than a serious attribute, doesn't bode well for his all-time ranking. The SF is probably the most prolific position in today's NBA, so KD might get up there, but how long will he remain?

You also need to keep in mind that people will always continue to consider many past players (pre 70-80s) as all-time greats, regardless of the likelihood that they were only great because of the level of competition. While it's insane to us for Shaq to not be easily a top 5, 3, or even the GOAT center, so many people had him either not in or barely in their top 10 when he retired.

Curry is a different story. The fact that he has done, and is doing, things we've never seen, and in many respects never thought we'd see, is already enough to ensure top 5 status and a clear path to GOAT. He's the first, and only, PG to rank highly in areas (let alone top in some) like PPG, PER, eFG %, etc., while changing the way the game is played, and being unquestionably the best PG in an era dominated by unprecedented, high-scoring, 3-pt shooting PGs.

It's not fair to KD that he is a great defender but doesn't get credit and it'll ultimately hold him back, while Curry isn't but it doesn't matter.

Both guys are just getting going too - this IS their prime - and neither will slow down (if not for injury or something else) for at least several years. LBJ is 32 and still playing some of the best basketball he's played, Kobe didn't see a drop until 35, MJ retired at still the best SG in the league - the list goes on, and consider that all those guys played the equivalent of about 1.5 - 2 seasons in the playoffs (though KD has some miles) by 29 (the age Steph will be turning in March). None of those guys are, or were ever, the shooters these two are, which means it obviously takes a far greater toll on your body when you need to drive most possessions to get your 30 pts. Finally, it might be rough right now, but this team will click, and when they do, we'll be right back to blowing teams out and sitting these two for entire quarters for a good portion of the schedule.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22189
» Fri Nov 11, 2016 2:42 am
A conversation about the best and top ten at each position is always somewhat abstract and opinion based but it can be worked out relatively consistently as the best do standout alltime. I think the likes of Shaq and Kobe surpassed most of the players that came before them at their position, as has Lebron but mostly the older players should be held highly and not be so easily seen as inferior to the modern day players, even if some people think that since the level of the sport was less than today, because the players at those times didn't have any past high level players to use as templates to advance their skills, yet the players today built on what they saw from past era players.

I think Durant is now definitely a top ten SF but for him to be top five he has to continue on his pace for at least another two years, performing well in the playoffs like he always has. He certainly looks like being a top five SF and maybe even pushing for top two, behind Lebron and ahead of Bird. I think two championships would be enough for him to be seen as much better alltime and the fact he is showing his defense well this season makes him even more superior to other SFs and how they performed in their eras, which is what it is actually more about; how did a player perform in his era and what was the level of competition he had. Durant has had very good level of competition and he has been among the best it can be said even from his rookie season.

Curry, to me at least, is not quite a top ten PG, as he has only played eight seasons after this season, and he only really has been at an alltime elite level the last three seasons, including this one. His efficiency is what makes him great and that really does make a difference, putting him ahead of many other PGs alltime in that regard, but he still needs another four years at his current level to be a top five PG and if he goes another six years at his current level, including this one, giving him fourteen years for his career, he will be top three and comparisons with Magic and Robertson would certainly be legit. I think if he gets in the top 3 or 4 in MVP voting another four more times at least and wins another two championships he could be seen as even being the greatest PG ever. A shock to many but Magic and Robertson, as good as they were, were not as good in any season as Curry was last season and looks like being this season. If Curry stays at around about the level he is now for another five or six seasons, he certainly has to be considered not only as close to the best PG ever but among the best players ever, top ten even.
User avatar

Site Admin
Posts: 4040
» Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:35 pm
Definitely some good points there, migs, and you've at least nudge my opinion on former players.

The one thing I want to say before anything else, and that applies to all my opinions (previous and future) regarding top PGs, is: Magic Johnson has a massive asterisk next to his name, because he really was a point forward, and while he deserves a lot of recognition for performing at such a high level at the point, his stature makes it nearly impossible to fairly compare him to others at the position. So for the sake of brevity, when I say PG, I mean conventional PGs, excluding Magic.

If you're going to consider how well a player played relative to their competition for former players, then surely the fact that the NBA currently has at least 10 PGs that could have easily been the best of a, or this, generation, must be accounted for as well.

This is already considered the golden era of the PG position, and Steph is like a gross, over-exaggerated embodiment of the excellence of the position. He's the cream of the greatest crop we've ever seen. Couple that with the fact that he just capped off the greatest offensive season a player's ever had, was the first unanimous MVP, and was the first player to challenge King James (who will likely go down as the GOAT, if only tied with MJ) for his throne of best player in the league, I think you're under valuing his accomplishments, and over valuing longevity.

My comparison of Curry to the great NFL RBs in the other thread applies here. Steph is quality over quantity (thus far), and I believe he already deserves to be ranked highly based of the samples he's given. If he can keep this up for the time frame you've provided, he should be without question the GOAT.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22189
» Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:29 pm
Magic Johnson was a PG almost all the time, though he did play SF when going against the Celts alot. He was big but he was the PG and so he has to be considered as one for his career. In truth I think Magic had alot of talent around him which allowed him to show his best skills, which he was the best ever at it seems, that being passing and making it look fancy, though even that can be debated that he is the best ever at passing. When Magic cam into the nba he had Kareem, who was being touted at the time as already the best player ever, as well as the likes of McAdoo and Wilkes, both allstars, on his team. That is a luxury that hardly any other player has ever had and though I think that Magic was the brains that made it all work, the talent around him factors much into his success.

Curry is amazing and should be heralded as he is but longevity has to be counted as very important when evaluating a player's greatness and especially alltime ranking among other past and present players. Curry has played eight seasons, not a small sample size but nowhere near a full career length, which is usually between 13-18 years. He likely has been the most efficient PG for the first eight years of a career, I don't think he has had the best stats for a PG in the first eight seasons, but he certainly has been among the best comparatively, but also he hasn't played for that long yet. Imagine that for some reason his career was cut short and ended at ten seasons or his standard dropped to say about 16pts and 6asts a game with slightly above average efficiency, not the alltime high efficiency that he currently has had for a few seasons. What would he look like then as an alltime great? There have been other players that were having great careers and then retired or dropped standard significantly, due to injury or some other reason. Players like Walton and David Thompson are among the best examples of careers that were cut short due to injury or some other reason. Basically, Curry has not done enough over a long enough period of time to be in the top 5 PGs at least, though he may be somewhat considered top 10, though personally I think he needs another two years after this one of the same sort of level to be a top 10 PG.

I think that players like Duncan, Pierce, Kidd and Stockton; players of the current era as such, performed well over a long period of time, over seventeen years in fact, and at what can be considered an alltime level compared to others at their position for most of their careers. That sort of continued high level performance to me is what makes a truly alltime great. Abdul Jabbar is perhaps the best example of high level over almost an entire career, for at least a time period of seventeen odd years of alltime level performance. Chamberlain played about fourteen seasons and can be considered to have played at an alltime highest level for all those years but it wasn't as long as what Abdul Jabbar did. Therefore likely Kareem should be ranked ahead of Chamberlain because not only did he perform at the highest of levels for much longer but the difference in performance over their careers is about the same. Many can sight that noone came close to doing what Chamberlain did in the first five or so seasons of his career, and noone has, and many can say that such a performance level is beyond any difference that longevity can make, but Chamberlain's performance in his first few years is really not much better than Abdul Jabbar's in his first eight or so seasons. Point is that the level over a shorter period of time in a career has to be clearly significantly higher standard for that player to be considered as having a better career than a player that played for a few years longer while maintaing a similar standard to most of his career.

I don't think Garnett has done himself justice by playing past his 15th season. His last five or so seasons have been quite insignificant and of an average at best level. That somewhat diminishes his career value, thus going the other way instead of making him look better. His last five or so years actually drop his career standard a bit because they have were so much lower than the rest of his career was.

Nash, to me, should not be ranked among the top 10 PGs. Some may disagree but if you look at the first four odd seasons of his carer and then the last few, he was insignificant. Only when he returned to Phoenix, and from then on for about seven or so seasons, did he perform at an alltime level and like with Magic, a substantial amount of his success can be credited to the talented players he had around him. He too was the brains that made that team work. I think Tim Hardaway had a better career than Nash, only slightly. He had a consistently high level of performance for at least his first ten years and was always among the best PGs in his era, excluding his last three or so seasons. He was never on such a talented team as when Nash returned to Phoenix and if he had of been, likely he would have come very close to winning a championship or two. Can you imagine if the Miami Heat of the late 1990s had Joe Johnson of the mid 2000s instead of Voshon Leonard? If they'd had Marion instead of PJ Brown? That team would have really pushed the second threepeat Bulls more than once, perhaps even beating them.

There are a number of factors involved that affect a player's career success and it is near impossible to have a complete evaluation of a player for his career. Going by what has been done in evaluating players, the current era of players are under the same criteria and though quite a number of them are very skilled and have had much success, really it is comparable to players in other eras and really as a whole not much different to other eras.


I have recently discovered a quizz site called Sporcle (www.sporcle.com) and it has some very nice and entertaining quizzes on all sorts of subjects including the nba. I was actually quite knowledgeable on nba history but now I am certainly much more so. This site with the quizzes some people have made gives some insight into players of past eras and how they performed and it allows you to see that there were many players from each decade that performed at a high standard, some even higher than most of the players in the current era.

Maybe we can have a competition on there and post our results of doing some of those quizzes in a thread here on the forum.
User avatar

Rookie
Posts: 2
» Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:50 am
I have been hearing some trade rumours regarding Klay and Cousins . If this is true , then we won't be having problems regarding scoring points since Curry and Durant can both score good in threes and twos . One thing to notice , we really have to spread the ball to get the ball moving .
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22189
» Wed Nov 16, 2016 6:47 pm
I haven't been keeping up to date with the nba too much this season but if Klay is to be traded, which shouldn't happen unless he has said he wants out, it should be after the season and not during because it can mess with everything. It would be a shame to lose Klay, like the team lost Richmond, Richardson and Arenas so early in their careers. I think Klay should be smart if he does want out and play out the season on the team and try to get another championship, as he might not get the chance again, you never know. Getting Cousins for Klay straight up is about even as far as talent and skill goes but Cousins is still a headcase right now and a big risk. I'd rather send Klay east and get one or two good players back, preferably another star SG, like Butler of Chicago or even Beal of Washington. There is more talent in the West but it is usually better to send a great player as far away as possible from you.
User avatar

Rookie
Posts: 130
» Mon Nov 21, 2016 5:21 pm
Thread hijack - but Klay's fine. He's happy to be here, not going anywhere. Keep Klay. Yeah Cousins is a headcase, no place for him on this team.

Curry and Durant are both a little weak on defense so that keeps them out of the top all time greats, but they certainly will deserve consideration. I guess you could argue that Magic and Bird were not particularly great defenders either though, and no one questions when they are talked about in the top 5 - top 10 all time players.
User avatar

Site Admin
Posts: 4040
» Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:40 pm
There isn't much debate over Magic being the best passer of all time, he's not. Magic was a great passer for a big guy, and his size gave him the ability to do things other, normal, PGs couldn't, but he didn't have a normal PG skillset. The talent around him was what enabled him to play the 1, and it's not like he could dribble and pass like typical 1s such as Curry and CP3.

If Curry's career was cut short by injury or something like that, then we'd all consider what he's done thus far - which includes things nobody else has ever done, and he has a lifetime of accolades already - his body of work would be extrapolated over the course of a normal length career, and that wouldn't even be necessary in many cases.

Of course he would be discredited if he all the suddenly started to suck, or play at an average level, but anything is possible if you consider all the hypothetical scenarios. Tim Lincecum, a MLB pitcher, comes to mind as a player on the fast track to being considered one of the greats, but he had a huge decline due to his small size. This is actually relatively comon in some other sports (eg pitchers that were amazing until they lost their touch or were "figured out," running backs that lost a step, etc), but it's so rare in the NBA, unless it's via injury. I just feel like the odds of him just falling off for the rest of his career are so remote that it's not really worth considering, and if he did then clearly he wasn't deserving.

Are you referring to Bill Walton? His career wasn't short in terms of his age, but I guess it was short in terms of seasons. Just based on stats, Curry is on a different level than Thompson though.

IMO it's not even up to debate as to whether Kareem was better than Wilt - they are both all-time greats, but Wilt takes that one. By your logic, Kobe ought to be considered better than MJ and LBJ, but we know that's not the case (though I'd argue Kobe is closer to MJ thanany give him credit, bit that's a different topic).

IMO, longevity is one of the most subjective criterion when judging players careers. I do agree that if Curry kept up what he's doing for two more seasons then he'd be beyond reproach, but what's the magic number? We can all agree that 4 years isn't long enough, but what if a player was so much better than anyone else for 5 or 6 season?

I think you're either drastically devaluing Steph's career this far, and/or over-valuing the longevity aspect. I agree that both aspects must be considered, but in many cases, the greatness of a player over a shorter career can supercede the length (or lack of). They aren't mutually exclusive, but they don't need to coincide either.

There's another, less tangible, aspect to ranking a player all-time, and that's their impact. It can be on the team, the league during and era, or the game as a whole. Very few players have had the level of impact that Curry has, and it's on par of all-timers as Russell, Wilt, Pistol, and MJ.

To back up my belief that Curry should be considered one of the greatest all ready, was a segment on CSNBay which a panel of beat writers ranked the greatest Dubs of all time. Of course it was "Greatest Warriors," which is why Wilt didn't top the list. I thought it'd be Curry no. 2 and Rick Berry as no. 1 (who's widely considered one of the GoATs in NBA history, but it was Steph at no. 1, largely due to his accolades and his impact on the sport:
Image
These types of things will always be debated, and nobody will ever be "right," but the point of sports is competition. I believe the greats are competing with other, past and current, greats just as much as they are with the guy guarding them.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22189
» Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:57 pm
Curry has been great for the last four years especially, the last two, before this season, being comparable to alltime greats. For his career though he hasn't been clearly better than other players who don't even crack the top 5 at their position. I think Dominique Wilkins did similar to Curry in his first eight years and continued his standard for at least ten to twelve years and he is barley top 10 among SFs to many people.

Longevity evaluated properly means mostly a high standard over a substantial amount of time in a career. Usually, a career lasts between 14-17 years. If Curry was to continue his "current standard", as in the level he has been at the last two seasons (in particular last season, which is alltime great but the only season he really has been at that level) for another four seasons, giving him twelve seasons of his career, the last five being at his current standard, then he could be considered top 3 at PG, ahead of the likes of Stockton, Kidd and CP, who I considered the 3-5 PGs alltime.

Curry's efficiency seems to be the alltime great aspect about him and I had read about two years ago that that is what makes him elite, better than his stats show. That should count for something but doesn't raise him to the heights of those that played at a similar level yet for more years. If a player drops off a fair bit, sort of how Garnett has the last five years or so, that doesn't diminish their career, it just means that that player's career is to be evaluated by their years up until the point where they started dropping significantly in their level of performance. Not that easy to judge actually. As an example, I used to rank Garnett as second behind Duncan alltime at PF but now I rank him third, not because of his significant drop off in level the last five odd years or so (though that doesn't make him look better) but because Karl Malone performed at such a high standard for some 17-18 years, higher than Garnett did and definitely longer, like some four years longer.

I don't think accolades and attention from the fans means anything, that is just popularity. Curry is popular but his career is evaluated on performance and level of standard. Curry has been very good, not what I consider alltime elite for his eight years as a whole, but he has to continue for a few more years at least to be considered among the very best at his position.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests