Curry Vs. Paul

[Patr1ck]

Mediahype is why Steve Nash won MVP with 15 ppg and 10 ast. So, I guess you are right. Curry is the MVP, regardless of what I think about his numbers

I like how 4.3 7.7 2.0 0.2 23.8 is better than 4.1 7.7 1.0 0.6 25.0 and 6.3 5.4 1.8 0.5 28.3.
2 out of 5 in both cases, so your not really wrong. I just don't like those numbers for an MVP, but I don't like league leading scorers having less than 30, either.

Who should be the MVP? I think it's a toss up at this point, but nobody is really arguing against Stephen Curry, even though James Harden, and LeBron James have put up tremendous seasons on winning teams. Even Russell Westbrook and Anthony Davis could be getting some votes this year. Maybe they should just give it to Adam Silver.

[Mandich]

Lol @ you not realizing they score the same amount of points per minute, Curry turns it over less, has more steals, assists and is only slightly worse in rebounds PER minute.

It's not like Harden plays much more either, only 4 minutes, which means you can't reply with the fatigue factor I've seen a lot of people around the internet go with.

And that's just basic stats. Curry HAS BETTER stats all across the board, really. Check Advanced stats (at this point just stats).

If you use basic stats, at least go per 36 in these situations.

the only reason why Harden is scoring more PER GAME is becasue he jacks up more shots and plays more minutes.

[NovU]

Mediahype is why Steve Nash won MVP with 15 ppg and 10 ast. So, I guess you are right. Curry is the MVP, regardless of what I think about his numbers

I like how 4.3 7.7 2.0 0.2 23.8 is better than 4.1 7.7 1.0 0.6 25.0 and 6.3 5.4 1.8 0.5 28.3.
2 out of 5 in both cases, so your not really wrong. I just don't like those numbers for an MVP, but I don't like league leading scorers having less than 30, either.

Who should be the MVP? I think it's a toss up at this point, but nobody is really arguing against Stephen Curry, even though James Harden, and LeBron James have put up tremendous seasons on winning teams. Even Russell Westbrook and Anthony Davis could be getting some votes this year. Maybe they should just give it to Adam Silver.

I feel you. That's just the criteria of modern day MVPs imo. Team emphasis is stronger now days that individual's mass raw stats is overlooked for efficiency and story to sell.





MVP award is basically a promotional tool for the league. You can't have it boring and let one player win it every year, it'd be counter productive kinda like any team going for 3-peat, it's extremely boring to people, even I didn't watch the LBJ's Heat in their last year. I think it's the same reason why Michael Jordumb couldn't win more MVPs.

The league needs to keep on awarding new players, promote new stars(like they did Rose), create rivalry, sell awesome stories, create controversy, so on. Curry, Harden, Westy all fit that bill. CP3 doesn't, despite having to play just as good this year, if not better.

[[Q]]

Lol @ you not realizing they score the same amount of points per minute, Curry turns it over less, has more steals, assists and is only slightly worse in rebounds PER minute

Using per minute stats with curry in the mix still isn't a fair comparison because they have more possessions per minute

[shadowgrin]

And with that post Q just showed the significance of using per (100) possession.

*slaps Q in the butt for his good play execution*

[Mandich]

GSW is 1st and HOU 2nd in pace. Not really much of a statement.

Per 100 possesions they virtually shot the same amount of times, yet Curry has the better Ortg, TS% and actually has the better PER despite the belief Harden is doing more all-around this year.

To go back to my point. He may not have the amazing MVP numbers at first sight(he plays 32 minutes), but when you look up he is a lock for the MVP this year.

*Slaps shadow for his shitty name*

[[Q]]

GSW is 1st and HOU 2nd in pace. Not really much of a statement.

Per 100 possesions they virtually shot the same amount of times, yet Curry has the better Ortg, TS% and actually has the better PER despite the belief Harden is doing more all-around this year.

Isn't this a "Curry vs. Paul" thread? Paul still pwns everyone

[NovU]

Yes, Q. That's why I said this above.

CP3 has been extremely efficient and is better than Curry in this regard, backed up by ORtg. However Curry does more on slightly less efficient terms, thus the higher PER than CP3.

CP3 also has higher Offensive WinShare. Only thing Curry really has going is Total WinShare but it's meaningless because as I said, defensive winShare is team stats and Curry's DWS is inflated for playing on a superior defensive team.

CP3 actually has a real good case to be the better of two, but Curry's Team Record is just overwhelming. As I said, you aren't wrong either if you picked CP3 over Curry this season. The truth is these two separated themselves from rest of the pack. No sir, Westbrook isn't touching them.

[Murat]

This matchup is going to be the Western Conference Finals. Then we'll see who is better.

[Andrew]

This matchup is going to be the Western Conference Finals. Then we'll see who is better.

You feel the Spurs are done in the first round?

[Patr1ck]

I think if the Clippers can beat the Spurs, they can win a title.

[Mandich]

Agreed. Clippers/Warriors matchups are always fun.

Clippers will probably play Memphis if they passs the Spurs which will also be fun to watch.

[Murat]

This matchup is going to be the Western Conference Finals. Then we'll see who is better.

You feel the Spurs are done in the first round?

An aging squad, hampered by injuries. Clips will end the reign of Spurs, unfortunately.

But it's not certainty, I may have to swallow my words.

[Kevin]

clips will end the reign of Spurs, unfortunately.

[Mandich]

Could you elaborate, Kevin?

[Andrew]

They're fairly healthy at the moment, and while they are an older team, they're also still a really good squad who defeated one of the best trios in years by an average of 18.3 ppg just one year ago. Maybe they are done, but how often has that been said in the past decade or so? I'm not counting them out so soon.

If they do fall and the Clippers go through, I agree they've got as good a chance as pretty much anyone else in the West right now. It would be quite a series with the Warriors, CP3 and Curry going head to head.

And getting back to that comparison, it certainly speaks volumes about Curry's ascension into the elite class of players in today's game, when he's putting up numbers that place him in the company of Chris Paul; a player who most would agree is one of the best (if not the best) point guards in the league for some years now. Curry has to be challenging him for that title, but I feel it'll be another year or two of him playing at this level (or CP3 dropping off a bit) until he can be considered the "a" in 1a and 1b...which I agree is a fair way to rank them as of now.

Touching on the MVP debate for a moment, I just wanted to chime in on the whole "undeserving" argument. I feel that's invoking a false dichotomy, as is often the case on the Internet. There's a difference between not necessarily being the most deserving of an award, and not deserving to win it at all. In other words, an award winner who didn't deserve to win at all is also not the most deserving player by default, but an award winner whose case arguably isn't the strongest isn't automatically undeserving. "Should have gone to a different candidate" is a long way from "Should never have gone to that person by any stretch of the imagination."

To that end, I don't think there's been any MVP winners who absolutely did not have a case and were completely unworthy or undeserving. Iffy selections? Sure. Years where there was at least one or two other players who probably deserved it a little more? Definitely. But I don't believe there's ever been an MVP that didn't at least deserve to be in the conversation, even if they weren't the "perfect" choice to actually win. It's like some of the iffier All-Star selections over the years. Questionable and contestable aren't the same thing as completely undeserving and unjustifiable.

That's how I see the race between Stephen Curry and James Harden. There's valid arguments for both, and if one of them ends up getting the nod, then a worthy player will have received recognition for the season they've had. There'll be arguments in favour of the player who misses out, but while we can debate which player is the most worthy and deserving, neither are unworthy or undeserving. It's a tough call when there's no concrete criteria, and room for an opinion on what's more impressive and worthy of recognition. In any event, it's between them this year.

[shadowgrin]

An aging squad......end the reign of Spurs, unfortunately.

I've heard that for years now and the Spurs still keep coming back each season.