If Rose can consistently beat Curry in a game of 1 on 1 does that make him better?

[Im so nba'd out]

Just using Derrick & Steph as an example.Would you consider rose the better player if curry loses 9 out of 10 1 on 1 games to him?Or does 1 on 1 mean nothing

[305Baller]

But he cant.

[ShawkFactory]

It makes him better at 1-on-1, yes

[RepMe]

It would mean he is better at 1 on 1.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

It means nothing.

[hawksdogsbraves]

He can't and it would mean nothing if he could.

One dude averages 17/5 on 40%fg and is an average PG at best. The other averages 24/8 on 48%fg and is the MVP of the league.

It's not rocket science.

[T_L_P]

Your weakest thread yet, and that's really saying something.

[navy]

No, basketball is a team sport, not 1 on 1.

Curry's ability to knock down threes from anywhere and passing ability could make him a better nba player even if he couldnt beat Rose 1 on 1.

Not saying that he's better than Rose ( he is) but just using an example.

[Lensanity]

If I can consistently beat Lebron James in a game of 1 on 1 does that make me better?

[LiLharvard]

Ish's retarded son.

[BigNBAfan]

rose cant even beat his shadow

[nathanjizzle]

no, basketball is a team sport. but, rose would destroy curry in a 1vs1.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Game isn't balanced around duels.

:no: