scm5
03-06-2012, 12:41 PM
Ignoring Steph Curry's ankle issues...
Who is the better player?
Their rookie seasons, they put up very similar stats.
Curry: 17.5ppg @ 46% shooting and 44% from 3, 4.5 RPG, 5.9APG, 1.9 SPG, 3.1 TO/gm.
Takes about 5 3's per game. 89% FT%. 57% TS%.
Irving: 18.6 PPG @ 48% FG% and 42% from 3, 3.4 RPG, 5.1 APG, .8 SPG, 3.0 TO/gm.
Takes about 3 3's per game. 86% FT%. 58% TS%.
I think Curry is the better player even though he has a much lower rookie season PER. This comes from more minutes played and a much lower usage%.
His stats are better across the board EXCEPT for FG% which is partially a result of taking more 3's per game. His SPG was also much higher than Kyrie's and his defense is solid. In fact, Curry is one of the best players to defend Rose.
I realize I might get arguments against Curry for putting up these stats, but the stats are pretty telling of Curry's basketball IQ. He's nowhere near the level of athlete Rose/Irving are.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=curryst01&p2=rosede01
Small sample size, but in those 5 games, Curry did an amazing job on Rose and I have yet to find a PG that has done the same to Rose.
I am biased because I love Curry's game and his shooting form, but this is one of the reasons why I don't think PER is a good stat. Curry in his rookie season was on the floor for longer than Irving, but his usage was lower, so he produced less for the minutes he was on the floor.
I realize Kyrie is only 19 (he's just about 20), and Curry was 21 in his rookie season. I am sure Kyrie with his shooting ability and speed will be a hell of a player. I just love Curry's game because while he's not the most athletic player in the league, he gets it done.
Who is the better player?
Their rookie seasons, they put up very similar stats.
Curry: 17.5ppg @ 46% shooting and 44% from 3, 4.5 RPG, 5.9APG, 1.9 SPG, 3.1 TO/gm.
Takes about 5 3's per game. 89% FT%. 57% TS%.
Irving: 18.6 PPG @ 48% FG% and 42% from 3, 3.4 RPG, 5.1 APG, .8 SPG, 3.0 TO/gm.
Takes about 3 3's per game. 86% FT%. 58% TS%.
I think Curry is the better player even though he has a much lower rookie season PER. This comes from more minutes played and a much lower usage%.
His stats are better across the board EXCEPT for FG% which is partially a result of taking more 3's per game. His SPG was also much higher than Kyrie's and his defense is solid. In fact, Curry is one of the best players to defend Rose.
I realize I might get arguments against Curry for putting up these stats, but the stats are pretty telling of Curry's basketball IQ. He's nowhere near the level of athlete Rose/Irving are.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=curryst01&p2=rosede01
Small sample size, but in those 5 games, Curry did an amazing job on Rose and I have yet to find a PG that has done the same to Rose.
I am biased because I love Curry's game and his shooting form, but this is one of the reasons why I don't think PER is a good stat. Curry in his rookie season was on the floor for longer than Irving, but his usage was lower, so he produced less for the minutes he was on the floor.
I realize Kyrie is only 19 (he's just about 20), and Curry was 21 in his rookie season. I am sure Kyrie with his shooting ability and speed will be a hell of a player. I just love Curry's game because while he's not the most athletic player in the league, he gets it done.