Skip to main content

The Glove steals some of Steph Curry's thunder

Throughout Golden State's record-breaking season this year, former NBA players have continually attempted to minimize the team's accomplishments. Scottie Pippen suggested his Chicago Bulls teams of the past would sweep the Warriors in a best-of-7 series. Charles Barkley has refused to jump on the Warriors bandwagon, even after the team won the title a year ago. Now it's Hall-of-Famer Gary Payton's turn, as he recently said the following about 2-time MVP Stephen Curry:

"Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar were also worthy of the distinction (unanimous MVP vote) that the Curry vote was about era. I think all of those guys were unanimous decisions, too. It just happened in an era that went his way. I commend him and what he's accomplished. But you gotta think about who was voting for MJ, Kareem, in their time, why they wouldn't have given all their votes to those guys. ... If you look at LeBron, what he does for his team, he does everything. I still think he's the best all-around basketball player. As we say, Stephen Curry was the best player this year, but I'm saying all around -- who gives you assists, who gives you rebounding, who gives you points, who does a lot of things for his team to have it? If you take LeBron off that team, I don't think Cleveland is a good team like that. If you take Curry off of it, uh, right now I don't know. They probably would win games. They wouldn't have won 73, but they would win a lot of basketball games. ... We forgot Wilt Chamberlain averaged 50 points and 30 rebounds. You didn't think he was a unanimous decision? Who else ever did that and scored 100 points in one game? And he didn't even win it [in 1962]. That's what I'm trying to say. You look at Michael Jordan. When they set the record at 72-10 in 1996, he didn't get all the votes. So you're trying to tell me these reporters or whoever's voting that you and them guys back then, they didn't know that he was a unanimous decision? Don't blame that on Stephen Curry. Blame that on them reporters."

While I know it's incredibly common, I often have a problem with comparing the impossible in sports. Of what point is there in make-believing two teams, 20 years removed from one another, could play a best-of-7 series, and hypothesizing who would win such a series? Why can't we simply appreciate greatness when it comes and not try to immediately minimize it through meaningless comparisons and hypotheticals which will never come to fruition? Michael Jordan's Chicago Bulls were great in their day and Stephen Curry's Golden State Warriors are great in today's game. NBA basketball has changed quite significantly over the past 20 years, so it's incredibly difficult to accurately conclude how the '90s Bulls would fare in today's game or how today's Warriors would have fared in the '90s. With regard to the comparison between Steph Curry and LeBron James, while they're arguably the two best in the NBA, they're also two completely different players, and surrounded by different teams. It's highly debatable which player plays a larger role in their team's success, but I don't think it can be debated that Steph Curry had the best season of anyone this year. The guy averaged: 30.1 points per game, 5.4 rebounds, 6.7 assists, and 2.1 steals, as he shot: 50.4% from the floor, 45.4% from 3-point range, and 90.8% from the free throw line. Oh, and he made a record-shattering 402 3-pointers this season. LeBron James, meanwhile, averaged: 25.3 points per game, 7.4 rebounds, 6.8 assists, and 1.4 blocks, as he shot: 52.0% from the field, 30.9% from 3-point range (87 made 3s), and 73.1% from the charity stripe. While the playoffs have yet to conclude, Curry led his team to an NBA-record 73-9 regular season. So let's cut it out with the minimization of Golden State's, and with that, Stephen Curry's accomplishments. They won the title last year, broke the NBA record for regular season wins this year, and are one of four teams remaining in the playoffs. Gary Payton's right; Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar were all incredible players, but so is Steph Curry, and it does us absolutely no good to constantly try to bring forth hypothetically impossible comparisons and match-ups, failing to fully witness and appreciate the greatness before us in the process. Once the Golden State Warriors' run comes to a halt and/or Steph Curry calls it a career, we can look back and try to more accurately rank them in a historical context, but for the time being, let's place that to the side and try to just enjoy the moment. If we spend too much time thinking about the past and/or future, we may not be able to fully appreciate the present.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/15618861/gary-payton-says-unanimous-stephen-curry-mvp-era

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryst01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jamesle01.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"