- 8,894
- 1,395
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2010
¿que?The fact that it could be Steph, Rubio, and Love makes me extremely nauseous.
8O
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
¿que?The fact that it could be Steph, Rubio, and Love makes me extremely nauseous.
Timberwolves could have had all three of those guys if they knew how to draft.¿que?The fact that it could be Steph, Rubio, and Love makes me extremely nauseous.
8O
Timberwolves could have had all three of those guys if they knew how to draft.¿que?The fact that it could be Steph, Rubio, and Love makes me extremely nauseous.
8O
I think people forget that skip aactually knows what hes talking about...Skip Bayless was driving this bandwagon before anybody. He thought Steph shoulda been the 1st pick in that draft.
I think people forget that skip aactually knows what hes talking about...Skip Bayless was driving this bandwagon before anybody. He thought Steph shoulda been the 1st pick in that draft.
I think people forget that skip aactually knows what hes talking about...Skip Bayless was driving this bandwagon before anybody. He thought Steph shoulda been the 1st pick in that draft.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
um ....nash did it...i guess ppl forget he was a 90/50/40 or better shooter a good stretch of his career... but the boy can cook....and him and irving different type of players.... its like comparing rondo and roseCurry > Irving. Never in the RECENT history of the NBA has there been as pure a shooter WITH the ability to handle the ball and create his own shot and separation needed to get off the shot like Stephen Curry. No need for cute nicknames...just good old fashioned balling.
YOu usually have volume shooters (Montae Ellis types) or percentage shooters (think Steve Kerr and Legler), but when's the last time we've seen a volume shooter with a percentage shooter's numbers?
Why are they so different though? Because Steph shoots more? I dont see the problem with comparing the two. Its absolutely NOT like comparing Rondo and Rose.and him and irving different type of players.... its like comparing rondo and rose
[COLOR=#red]Curry > Irving. Never in the RECENT history of the NBA has there been as pure a shooter WITH the ability to handle the ball and create his own shot and separation needed to get off the shot like Stephen Curry. No need for cute nicknames...just good old fashioned balling.
YOu usually have volume shooters (Montae Ellis types) or percentage shooters (think Steve Kerr and Legler), but when's the last time we've seen a volume shooter with a percentage shooter's numbers?[/COLOR]
they dont play the same is why... kyrie and wall game is similiar...steph plays nothing like kyrie. outside of being pg's and main guys on a up and comming team, thats about all they have in common.Why are they so different though? Because Steph shoots more? I dont see the problem with comparing the two. Its absolutely NOT like comparing Rondo and Rose.
I think the reason why people have such issues with comparing Curry and Irving, is because you guys JUST spent the better part of a season hyping Irving....and now you have to basically go back on what you said because its apparent that Curry is actually better. I know Kyrie is a stud, and most would love to build a franchise around him. But the fact of the matter is, he isnt on Curry's level.
I get what you are saying. I guess the biggest problem I have is the fact that people (you included) are trying to say that we shouldn't compare Curry and Irving because their games are different.....but people compare players who play the same position but have different games all the time! Durant and LeBron get compared to one another all the time, and their games arent the same. Not so much anymore, but when in their primes, people compared Duncan and Dirk all the time....and their games couldnt more different.they dont play the same is why... kyrie and wall game is similiar...steph plays nothing like kyrie. outside of being pg's and main guys on a up and comming team, thats about all they have in common.Why are they so different though? Because Steph shoots more? I dont see the problem with comparing the two. Its absolutely NOT like comparing Rondo and Rose.
I think the reason why people have such issues with comparing Curry and Irving, is because you guys JUST spent the better part of a season hyping Irving....and now you have to basically go back on what you said because its apparent that Curry is actually better. I know Kyrie is a stud, and most would love to build a franchise around him. But the fact of the matter is, he isnt on Curry's level.
It isnt an issue...and ive said steph is great...matter fact i said he shouldve been an allstar, and was trippen when folks said oh if monte wasnt ever voted as an allstar while in gsw..why would steph.
And it isnt about who is better, or who would you choose. Its not just as simple as that. To many factors such as the other players on the team, the coach, style of play etc...chemistry with the players.
Also we live in a knee jerk live in the moment type of society...especially with sports. Not saying you, but if the cavs made the playoffs everyone would be talking bout how they knew he was great...the best young pg etc.
um ....nash did it...i guess ppl forget he was a 90/50/40 or better shooter a good stretch of his career... but the boy can cook....and him and irving different type of players.... its like comparing rondo and rose
[COLOR=#red]Curry > Irving. Never in the RECENT history of the NBA has there been as pure a shooter WITH the ability to handle the ball and create his own shot and separation needed to get off the shot like Stephen Curry. No need for cute nicknames...just good old fashioned balling.
YOu usually have volume shooters (Montae Ellis types) or percentage shooters (think Steve Kerr and Legler), but when's the last time we've seen a volume shooter with a percentage shooter's numbers?[/COLOR]
and those ppl who do compare usually do so to promote their preference over said player...ie kobe and lebron so on and so forth. For example rondo based on the team the coach etc...is a better fit then lets say a rose would fit the c's and vice versa... am i saying either one is better then the other...NO. But if i was a bulls fan i could use the fact that rose means more to the bulls (especially on offense) then rondo does the c's...therefore rose>rondo.I get what you are saying. I guess the biggest problem I have is the fact that people (you included) are trying to say that we shouldn't compare Curry and Irving because their games are different.....but people compare players who play the same position but have different games all the time! Durant and LeBron get compared to one another all the time, and their games arent the same. Not so much anymore, but when in their primes, people compared Duncan and Dirk all the time....and their games couldnt more different.
I swear this "you cant compare them because their games are different" excuse seems to only fly when it fits certain agendas (not necessarily you, just in general).
Nobody got time fah-dat.Steph "3 point flurry in a hurry" Curry
Knicks were behind the Warriors in that draft