NBA Season 2016/17

[LaHug]

just a fun stat to see what would happend if other players had there numbers adjusted to Westbrook ussage.

Westbrook 32.1 PPG  10.5 RPG 10 APG  5.5 TOV
Harden 35.6 PPG 9.7 RPG 13.7 APG 7.1 TOV
Kawhi 34.8 PPG 7.9 RPG 4.5 APG 2.6 TOV
Lebron 36.7 RPG 11.6 RPG 12.4 APG 5.9 TOV

does make Westbrooks Turnovers look much better and harden shocking. Lebron is insane though, clearly the best player in the league.

pretty much every year people clutch to some flimsy argument on why the real best player shouldn't win. This year its a made up stat of triple doubles.

forget winning games, forget efficiency and how often you have it in your hands, forget turnovers, forget how you make others around you better.

im giving Lebron his 3rd straight RMVP and 8th total RMVP. Only guy in the last 9 years legitimately won a MVP over him and that is Kevin Durrant.

How can you say Durant deserved his MVP but Curry didn't (last year's one)? That was one of the most insane and efficient seasons ever.

Durrant shot 39.1% from 3 point land to Curry's amazing 45.4% but they shot the same FG% so that means durrant was superior inside and he averaged 2 more points. So on offense slight edge to Durrant.

Nope. Not even close to right. Curry had a better 3PT% and 2PT% (SC: 56.6% vs. KD: 54.9%). The only reason Durant had a better FG% was because he took WAY more shots inside than Curry (9 out of 20.2 attempts for Curry, 14.8 out of 20.8 for Durant). It's called Simpson's Paradox.

Advanced stats also show Curry was better on offence.
TS% - SC: 66.9% vs. KD: 63.5% (KD is close here because of his incredibly high number of free throws)
EFG% - SC: 63.0% vs. KD: 56.0%

So Curry was much more efficient, scoring 1.9 fewer points on approximately 5 fewer scoring possessions per game. Slightly fewer turnovers and 1.4 more assists is actually significant too. I would say Curry has a big edge over Durant's '14 season on offence and think it's laughable to say Durant has a slight edge or any edge at all.

I'm not saying Durant didn't deserve his (he very much did) but to say Curry didn't is just hating for the sake of hating.

Some other fun facts we missed...
Net rating - SC: 18.3 vs. KD: 8.0 (yes, Curry's team was 18.3 points better than opponents when he was on the floor)
Usage - SC: 32.0 vs. KD: 32.7 (slightly higher usage and slightly fewer assists leading to slightly more points... checks out)
TO ratio - SC: 10.2 vs. KD: 10.3 (well, about the same here)
Steals - SC: 2.1 vs. KD: 1.3 (but KD had a "big edge" on D...)
Blocks - SC: 0.2 vs. KD: 0.7 (oh, there it is! that half a block per game was the big deal, of course)
Team record - SC: 73-9 vs. KD: 59-23

I could go on... I'm not even trying to say Curry's season was definitively better than KD's (although I personally believe it was) but I think I've made my point that he definitely deserved the MVP.

[Holz]

Curry's shooting last season is the reason they won so many, his irrational confidence in his shot, the way defences curved to him, the way he finished at the rim.

It was an all time season. Also we all know his defensive weaknesses but he is improved and the warriors didnt pay for him being on floor.

yeah all time 3 point shooting season. thats one facet of the game.

as i said Durrant is a great shooter, better then curry inside, a better re bounder and a better defender.

im not the biggest Jordan fan but he had 7-8 better seasons, was leaps ahead of curry in everything but shooting.

how about prime shaq?

how about Magic and Kareem?

the only thing curry did better was shoot.

Not discounting what any of them did, why do we need to discount others to say we saw greatness?

He changed the whole trajectory of the game for probably the next 5-10 years with the way he shot.

Comparing the rebounding of a PG against that of a 7 foot durant is not really relevant.

That warriors team that won the title then into 73 wins was built around Steph's gravitational pull, simple as that. There's a Simmons podcast on it where it points out why and how it's all time. If you are anti Steph it wont change your opinion i'm sure, but we def saw an all time season, it's also not purely about statistics i felt the same way watching Steph last year that i did watching peak MJ/Kobe/Shaq and seeing guys like Lebron and I saw Durant drop 43 on lakers in 14 live, you know you are watching something all time.

Watching Russ this year is a 1 man wrecking ball that i'm sure we will talk about for a long time. They got the W today based on him doing it all not just scoring.

People are either horribly wrong or all using language incorrectly

All Time: more than all others have ever been

So we have been running for 61 seasons and lets say every year 4 players put up great performances. So out of the 244 best seasons out their on record last year from curry was the pinacle?

was this best season or even lets say top 5 of those 244 great performances.

If you saying there is 100 all time performances then yes curry was all time great.

the biggest point on which i havent even started on as this is a MVP discussion but needs to be said. He had a great regular season you cant even say he had a top 100 season of all time you need to qualifiy it with he had a top 100 regular season of all time as his playoffs was barely low end All Star.

and Curry isnt the only shooter on that team you cant give him all the credit for changing the NBA. There has be one man who has single handed changed the way the NBA works and that is Lebron with the creation of super teams in their prime driven by players and how much influence he has on players negotiating contracts.

im not anti steph i was the orginal steph cheerleader i dont like guys getting overhyped. So i defend what i think is correct. If anything im anti Jordan because im certainly pro Lebron and even then Jordan's worse is far far better then anything curry has ever done. He has had 2 MVP conversation regular seasons and put up decent all star playoff appearances.

[Holz]

was wrong on the scoring 2s thing so the numbers make sense.

i wont back down from the considerably better defender and steals doesn't make up for it especially when one is a guard and the other a forward.

stats and metrics can only tell you soo much. Unless Steph has totally fallen off a cliff from last year, if you watch a thunder game seriously who is the better player on the court and who impacts the defense the most?

Klay goes on the hardest guard anyway and teams attack curry. Never heard anyone say im going to go out and attack durrant on defense.

[Cookie Monster]

As much as I admire what Westbrook is doing, and as much as I want him to win MVP and average a triple-double this season. I'm getting so frustrated not getting any W's. OKC are still in touching distance of making the 4th playoff seed.

Through the first half of the season, I was in awe of the records he was breaking, but I found myself when he scored 58 the other day being frustrated with not getting an important win. We have the spurs tomorrow and that's going to make it tough to get further up the West.

If we can reach 6th we have a chance of reaching the second round but none against the spurs and if we're not careful the Warriors.

With the acquisition of Gibson, I reckon we're going to move Kanter at the end of the year and develop Sabonis under Taj. Good move as with that cap space can sign a great 2nd and 3rd option for Westbrook to work with.


Also, Westbrook will average the points and assists. He only needs to average 8.3 for the rest of the season to get that triple-double.


I could go on and on with my frustrations with the Thunder but it's no use. It's upsetting to see what's happened this season and i'll follow them throughout but it's got to a point where i'm not enjoying what Westbrook is doing anymore and thats sad.

I've always wondered why there's not more Blake to OKC talk being his home town

I would like Blake on the team if he does join. But we desperately need another perimeter shooter to keep up with the rest.

When Westbrook triple doubles Thunder are 25/6, when he doesn't they are 11/23

THIS

The triple double is not empty stats or just trying to reach the triple double. If anything the fact he averages a triple double would make him win MVP even more.

You can't say all he's trying to do is get a triple double. Well he might considering we win when he does.

[Holz]

When Westbrook triple doubles Thunder are 25/6, when he doesn't they are 11/23

THIS

The triple double is not empty stats or just trying to reach the triple double. If anything the fact he averages a triple double would make him win MVP even more.

You can't say all he's trying to do is get a triple double. Well he might considering we win when he does.

cause an effect is in question though. Did they win becuase he got the triple double or where they winning an he put up the stats?

my whole argument is Lebron puts up 30 17 and 6. Is it more impressive if he puts up 30 10 10 and gets one of these "Triple Doubles"

take away 1 assist and give him a extra rebound and is he even getting talked about with 32 11.5 and 0?


Colin Cowherd brought up a good point, watch what happens when people leave him they almost always do far better. Durant, Harden, Jackson, Scott Brooks in DC and even Ibaka looking good in Toronto.

He actually doesnt have that bad a cast either Oladipo, Adams, Kanter, Sabonis, Gibson, McDermot. These guys arent scrubs they are probably just annoyed watching westbrook jack up 3s and grabbing rebounds. What do you want them to do? they have big guys let them get the boards, they have better 3 point shooters let them shoot.

I dont blame Durrant for leaving anymore

[RiOtChEsS]

When Westbrook triple doubles Thunder are 25/6, when he doesn't they are 11/23

THIS

The triple double is not empty stats or just trying to reach the triple double. If anything the fact he averages a triple double would make him win MVP even more.

You can't say all he's trying to do is get a triple double. Well he might considering we win when he does.

cause an effect is in question though. Did they win becuase he got the triple double or where they winning an he put up the stats?

my whole argument is Lebron puts up 30 17 and 6. Is it more impressive if he puts up 30 10 10 and gets one of these "Triple Doubles"

take away 1 assist and give him a extra rebound and is he even getting talked about with 32 11.5 and 0?

I'l say it again, "once in the history of the NBA" clearly it is more impressive

Before you stated 40 something usage rating, now you want to query whether or not he may have been responsible for winning ???

[Cookie Monster]

When Westbrook triple doubles Thunder are 25/6, when he doesn't they are 11/23

THIS

The triple double is not empty stats or just trying to reach the triple double. If anything the fact he averages a triple double would make him win MVP even more.

You can't say all he's trying to do is get a triple double. Well he might considering we win when he does.

cause an effect is in question though. Did they win becuase he got the triple double or where they winning an he put up the stats?

my whole argument is Lebron puts up 30 17 and 6. Is it more impressive if he puts up 30 10 10 and gets one of these "Triple Doubles"

take away 1 assist and give him a extra rebound and is he even getting talked about with 32 11.5 and 0?

The argument you're making for Lebron is similar to the one that could have been made in the whole 00's.

I don't disagree with that at all. The MVP award is wrongly named or wrongly given almost every year. If you're talking most "valuable"... Take Westbrook of the Thunder and they're the worst team in the league. Take Lebron of the Cavs and although they'll drop they still have players capable of carrying the team to W's. (Even though their record without Lebron this season doesn't say so)

Also, if Lebron consistently put up say 30-15-8 and averages that then it's a different story this year. Exactly why it's a two way race between Harden and Westbrook.

But Lebron averages 26-8-8, to AVERAGE 32-10-10 is something else. Done once before in history.

[Holz]

When Westbrook triple doubles Thunder are 25/6, when he doesn't they are 11/23

THIS

The triple double is not empty stats or just trying to reach the triple double. If anything the fact he averages a triple double would make him win MVP even more.

You can't say all he's trying to do is get a triple double. Well he might considering we win when he does.

cause an effect is in question though. Did they win becuase he got the triple double or where they winning an he put up the stats?

my whole argument is Lebron puts up 30 17 and 6. Is it more impressive if he puts up 30 10 10 and gets one of these "Triple Doubles"

take away 1 assist and give him a extra rebound and is he even getting talked about with 32 11.5 and 0?

I'l say it again, "once in the history of the NBA" clearly it is more impressive

Before you stated 40 something usage rating, now you want to query whether or not he may have been responsible for winning ???

hes a top 5 player and its a star driven league of course he has alot of the reason they win.

So they beat the spurs today and he recorded another tripple double. Did they win because of him?

7/21 shooting with 1/6 from 3 point land.

Kanter put up 14 points on 6/10 shooting with 6 offensive rebounds.
Oladipo put up 20 points on 8/14 shooting with 3/4 3 pointers
adams put up 11 points on 5/8 shooting

want to know what the tagline is on NBA Australia

Westbrook records 31st triple double as Thunder tops Spurs.

and now you have another game to show hey westbrook tripple double and the team won. Good job wesbrook. forget the 19/32 shooting from the above 3 guys it was all westbrook.

[plumdog millionaire]

Do you think those guys are nearly as good without Westbrook?

[RiOtChEsS]

When Westbrook triple doubles Thunder are 25/6, when he doesn't they are 11/23

THIS

The triple double is not empty stats or just trying to reach the triple double. If anything the fact he averages a triple double would make him win MVP even more.

You can't say all he's trying to do is get a triple double. Well he might considering we win when he does.

cause an effect is in question though. Did they win becuase he got the triple double or where they winning an he put up the stats?

my whole argument is Lebron puts up 30 17 and 6. Is it more impressive if he puts up 30 10 10 and gets one of these "Triple Doubles"

take away 1 assist and give him a extra rebound and is he even getting talked about with 32 11.5 and 0?

I'l say it again, "once in the history of the NBA" clearly it is more impressive

Before you stated 40 something usage rating, now you want to query whether or not he may have been responsible for winning ???

hes a top 5 player and its a star driven league of course he has alot of the reason they win.

So they beat the spurs today and he recorded another tripple double. Did they win because of him?

7/21 shooting with 1/6 from 3 point land.

Kanter put up 14 points on 6/10 shooting with 6 offensive rebounds.
Oladipo put up 20 points on 8/14 shooting with 3/4 3 pointers
adams put up 11 points on 5/8 shooting

want to know what the tagline is on NBA Australia

Westbrook records 31st triple double as Thunder tops Spurs.

and now you have another game to show hey westbrook tripple double and the team won. Good job wesbrook. forget the 19/32 shooting from the above 3 guys it was all westbrook.

You are just arguing for the sake of arguing, or whatever else the reason it is only valid to you

[Holz]

You are just arguing for the sake of arguing, or whatever else the reason it is only valid to you

Not at all.

I dont hate westbrook he's a great player and i have him ranked 5th in the NBA.

I just clearly see people overreacting to a "headline stat"  a triple double is not a stat, its not a assist its not a point, its not a steal its just a title.

I see a highly talented player who is probably the best athlete in the game, go in day in and day out to kill himself to play the hardest he can to go out there to win but also to go out there in a quest to prove he is the best.

All the props in the world for him, but he is not the best player in the world, he is not the player anyone would pick to start their franchise, say if Boston wanted to pick a guy to push the cavs he is not that guy and im starting to think that he is too tough a guy to play with that he has a negative impact on others.

If that your definition of the MVP then soo be it. But im not arguing for the sake of it.

can definitely see im bias on curry and yes to a point i have a side and i will defend that but the west brook thing is totally different. I am not the only one who shares this opinion on westbrook.

all i have heard in his defense is the triple double stat, only been done once before.

[killerbees]

Curry's shooting last season is the reason they won so many, his irrational confidence in his shot, the way defences curved to him, the way he finished at the rim.

It was an all time season. Also we all know his defensive weaknesses but he is improved and the warriors didnt pay for him being on floor.

yeah all time 3 point shooting season. thats one facet of the game.

as i said Durrant is a great shooter, better then curry inside, a better re bounder and a better defender.

im not the biggest Jordan fan but he had 7-8 better seasons, was leaps ahead of curry in everything but shooting.

how about prime shaq?

how about Magic and Kareem?

the only thing curry did better was shoot.

Not discounting what any of them did, why do we need to discount others to say we saw greatness?

He changed the whole trajectory of the game for probably the next 5-10 years with the way he shot.

Comparing the rebounding of a PG against that of a 7 foot durant is not really relevant.

That warriors team that won the title then into 73 wins was built around Steph's gravitational pull, simple as that. There's a Simmons podcast on it where it points out why and how it's all time. If you are anti Steph it wont change your opinion i'm sure, but we def saw an all time season, it's also not purely about statistics i felt the same way watching Steph last year that i did watching peak MJ/Kobe/Shaq and seeing guys like Lebron and I saw Durant drop 43 on lakers in 14 live, you know you are watching something all time.

Watching Russ this year is a 1 man wrecking ball that i'm sure we will talk about for a long time. They got the W today based on him doing it all not just scoring.

People are either horribly wrong or all using language incorrectly

All Time: more than all others have ever been

So we have been running for 61 seasons and lets say every year 4 players put up great performances. So out of the 244 best seasons out their on record last year from curry was the pinacle?

was this best season or even lets say top 5 of those 244 great performances.

If you saying there is 100 all time performances then yes curry was all time great.

the biggest point on which i havent even started on as this is a MVP discussion but needs to be said. He had a great regular season you cant even say he had a top 100 season of all time you need to qualifiy it with he had a top 100 regular season of all time as his playoffs was barely low end All Star.

and Curry isnt the only shooter on that team you cant give him all the credit for changing the NBA. There has be one man who has single handed changed the way the NBA works and that is Lebron with the creation of super teams in their prime driven by players and how much influence he has on players negotiating contracts.

im not anti steph i was the orginal steph cheerleader i dont like guys getting overhyped. So i defend what i think is correct. If anything im anti Jordan because im certainly pro Lebron and even then Jordan's worse is far far better then anything curry has ever done. He has had 2 MVP conversation regular seasons and put up decent all star playoff appearances.

You are very caught on semantics.

Was it arguably the greatest SHOOTING season of all time? Most metrics would say its not even an argument.
Has it changed the way - sure along with his team but it's Steph pulling up from 35 feet - that kids play in high school now and thus changed the way the NBA looks for the next 10 years as they come through?

Why cant the all time greatest shooting season be an all time great season?

Lebron is more influential and better than Kobe and will end his career top 5 all time, nobody is discounting that, but i think you are massively undervaluing Steph's run

[Holz]

You are very caught on semantics.

Why cant the all time greatest shooting season be an all time great season?

when there where headlines likes this "Stephen Curry just finished the greatest individual regular season in NBA history"

then im not getting caught on semantics.

all time - means the best of all time.

If people throw out those lines then what you are saying is he was better then anyone ever has been in the NBA. Which in my books is ridiculous.

might just be my but when i hear all time, greatest, best they mean its better then everything else.

I dare say Lebron is potentially the greatest ever and cop flack from everywhere (not just FF) then steph gets the greatest ever and anyone who goes against it is a hater, anti steph or just likes to argue.

I dont have his regular season in the top 20 and dont have his overall season in the top 100. So you see how crazy best ever seems to me.

[Jay]

Great post, Huggy! People are underrating Steph's 2015-16 because of what happened in the finals. His regular season was the greatest offensive season by an individual since MJ. Maybe an early 2000s Shaq year could come close or LeBron's 2nd season in Miami, but it's in the conversation that's for sure.

He had the best stats, and was the best player on the best regular season real in history. To say that LeBron deserved MVP that year is absurd.

As for Westbrook's usage, I liked Holz's post pointing out what other stars' stats would look like at Westbrook's usage, but as I've said before, there is no way that Westbrook's usage is a negative, because that's what's needed for the thunder to win games. If his usage was 25%, I could bet that OKC wouldn't even make the playoffs - just look at their numbers with Westbrook off the floor!

[Mat0369]

There is a huge flaw to saying if 'blah blah blah' had X usage they would be putting up those numbers. The more you have the ball the more room for error and fatigue. While I love Embiid, it's why I don't put a lot of stock in the if he played 40 minutes his stats would be this argument. You need to take into account a fatigue factor and the decline in performance when a player is fatigued. The fact that Russ is carrying the load the way he is and doing it on a nightly basis is incredible and shouldn't be diminished because he has his ball in his hands a lot of the time. You can say he is inefficient, but that comes back to attention he receives along with having to carry the load.