CTbasketball92
08-03-2016, 12:35 AM
Barring injury, Kyrie will make at least 6 more all star teams, and probably at least a few more ALL NBA teams. I think his best season will see him average about 26 ppg on 48/42/88 % splits to go along with 6.5 assists and 4.5 rebounds. He'll top out at like a 25 PER, so around what he did in this year's playoffs.
He'll never be a great defender, but he has the physical attributes to be at least adequate when it matters, which is really all you can do against Westbrook, Curry and really CP3. I don't think Kyrie will ever actually be better than James Harden is right now, and I don't think he'll ever be a top 3 or top 5 player, unless there's a huge dropoff in talent after LeBron, Durant and Curry retire or fall-off. James Harden has gotten a lot of hate, but he's actually a pretty amazing player and his series against GSW last year was pretty impressive. He's a bit better of a natural playmaker than Kyrie and his TS% is higher, though i think Kyrie is actually less prone to being shut down because he's more agile, quicker and is a much better midrange shooter. Kyrie is an adequate passer, but I don't really see incredible court vision and creativity.
As for what Kyrie can do: he can blow past anybody and get to anywhere on the court and score against absolutely every defense imaginable. He can be an elite 3 point shooter who makes 3 threes a game at over 40%. He can hit the midrange at 47-50%. He can finish at the rim at 60%. He can keep his turnover rate really low. He can pass adequately enough if he's on at least a good team. He can play solid defense. If you give him the current Cavs team with one more young, solid role player minus LeBron, the Cavs still have a great chance to come out of the east.
In today's NBA, it doesn't matter that Kyrie isn't a conventional point guard because big men can pass and he can defend opposing point guards fairly well. Basically, if you are serious about building a contending team, you need to have players like Shaun Livingston and Iggy and some fairly versatile defenders and a decent offensive systerm. No player besides maybe LeBron and Durant can seriously threaten a team without all of those things. Kyrie is an elite iso scorer, and though he might seem one-dimensional, it doesn't matter all that much. Scoring is the most important part of the game, and as long as you do so as efficiently as Kyrie does, while also keeping your turnover rate low and playing average to solid defense, it doesn't matter.
Still, I don't think Kyrie is anything more than a potential top 4-5 MVP candidate. He doesn't quite have the all around impact of peak CP3 or current Westbrook. He is only truly, truly elite in the midrange. His finishing ability for a player 6'3" and under is awesome, but it'd have to be at 64-65% to be phenomenal and enable to score like, say, a michael jordan or a Kobe. He is also still a pretty average playmaker. He's not the overwhelming force that westbrook is. Westbrook can literally dominate a game even when he's shooting 38% from the field (see spurs series). Kyrie isn't a LeBron or KD, because they're both so good they can lead literally any team to a 50-win season. Kyrie probably couldn't get the 76ers from last year more than 32 games (still, damn good).
Overall, I think Kyrie is like a Vince Carter/Ray Allen/Paul Pierce level player now, and possibly a bit better in his peak. i think Ray got underrated because SG's were in the 2000s what point guards are now. Had it not been for Kobe, TMAC, DWade, Vince Carter, AI ... etc, Ray would've made a few more All NBA teams for sure. He'd no doubt be at worst the second best SG in the game now, and clearly a better player than Klay Thompson because he could score better off the dribble and pass really well when he wanted to. Maybe another way to say it is this: Kyrie is more responsible for the Cavs chip this year than Paul Pierce was. In fact, considering Kyrie's all around stats from this year's playoffs and the fact that he just played a major role in beating a 73-win team, I think it might be safe to say he just had a better playoff run than any of those players have ever had. He averages less points in the regular season because he had to at least try running his underwhelming team during his first three years, he played fewer minutes and volume scoring isn't as condoned as it was then. A kyrie in 2001 averages 27 points per game with like a 54 TS% on like 22 shots per game. Kyrie won't reach LeBron/Steph/KD level, and he prob. won't reach peak Kobe's level in terms of raw stats and all around dominance. BUT I think he will top out in maybe the third tier of all time greats. I think he might be a Carmelo Anthony who ended up in a great situation and made the most of it. Maybe one day a top 50 player.
Basically:
7 time all NBA selection. 12 All Star. 2-3X NBA champion. Maybe 1 FMVP. A few top 5 MVP voting seasons. Career averages of 22 ppg, 5 assists , 3.5 rebounds on 46/38/87 splits.
Obv. this is looking too far ahead and it's fairly ridiculous, but just wanted to put this out there as what I think he's capable of. Wondering what you guys' takes are lol.
He'll never be a great defender, but he has the physical attributes to be at least adequate when it matters, which is really all you can do against Westbrook, Curry and really CP3. I don't think Kyrie will ever actually be better than James Harden is right now, and I don't think he'll ever be a top 3 or top 5 player, unless there's a huge dropoff in talent after LeBron, Durant and Curry retire or fall-off. James Harden has gotten a lot of hate, but he's actually a pretty amazing player and his series against GSW last year was pretty impressive. He's a bit better of a natural playmaker than Kyrie and his TS% is higher, though i think Kyrie is actually less prone to being shut down because he's more agile, quicker and is a much better midrange shooter. Kyrie is an adequate passer, but I don't really see incredible court vision and creativity.
As for what Kyrie can do: he can blow past anybody and get to anywhere on the court and score against absolutely every defense imaginable. He can be an elite 3 point shooter who makes 3 threes a game at over 40%. He can hit the midrange at 47-50%. He can finish at the rim at 60%. He can keep his turnover rate really low. He can pass adequately enough if he's on at least a good team. He can play solid defense. If you give him the current Cavs team with one more young, solid role player minus LeBron, the Cavs still have a great chance to come out of the east.
In today's NBA, it doesn't matter that Kyrie isn't a conventional point guard because big men can pass and he can defend opposing point guards fairly well. Basically, if you are serious about building a contending team, you need to have players like Shaun Livingston and Iggy and some fairly versatile defenders and a decent offensive systerm. No player besides maybe LeBron and Durant can seriously threaten a team without all of those things. Kyrie is an elite iso scorer, and though he might seem one-dimensional, it doesn't matter all that much. Scoring is the most important part of the game, and as long as you do so as efficiently as Kyrie does, while also keeping your turnover rate low and playing average to solid defense, it doesn't matter.
Still, I don't think Kyrie is anything more than a potential top 4-5 MVP candidate. He doesn't quite have the all around impact of peak CP3 or current Westbrook. He is only truly, truly elite in the midrange. His finishing ability for a player 6'3" and under is awesome, but it'd have to be at 64-65% to be phenomenal and enable to score like, say, a michael jordan or a Kobe. He is also still a pretty average playmaker. He's not the overwhelming force that westbrook is. Westbrook can literally dominate a game even when he's shooting 38% from the field (see spurs series). Kyrie isn't a LeBron or KD, because they're both so good they can lead literally any team to a 50-win season. Kyrie probably couldn't get the 76ers from last year more than 32 games (still, damn good).
Overall, I think Kyrie is like a Vince Carter/Ray Allen/Paul Pierce level player now, and possibly a bit better in his peak. i think Ray got underrated because SG's were in the 2000s what point guards are now. Had it not been for Kobe, TMAC, DWade, Vince Carter, AI ... etc, Ray would've made a few more All NBA teams for sure. He'd no doubt be at worst the second best SG in the game now, and clearly a better player than Klay Thompson because he could score better off the dribble and pass really well when he wanted to. Maybe another way to say it is this: Kyrie is more responsible for the Cavs chip this year than Paul Pierce was. In fact, considering Kyrie's all around stats from this year's playoffs and the fact that he just played a major role in beating a 73-win team, I think it might be safe to say he just had a better playoff run than any of those players have ever had. He averages less points in the regular season because he had to at least try running his underwhelming team during his first three years, he played fewer minutes and volume scoring isn't as condoned as it was then. A kyrie in 2001 averages 27 points per game with like a 54 TS% on like 22 shots per game. Kyrie won't reach LeBron/Steph/KD level, and he prob. won't reach peak Kobe's level in terms of raw stats and all around dominance. BUT I think he will top out in maybe the third tier of all time greats. I think he might be a Carmelo Anthony who ended up in a great situation and made the most of it. Maybe one day a top 50 player.
Basically:
7 time all NBA selection. 12 All Star. 2-3X NBA champion. Maybe 1 FMVP. A few top 5 MVP voting seasons. Career averages of 22 ppg, 5 assists , 3.5 rebounds on 46/38/87 splits.
Obv. this is looking too far ahead and it's fairly ridiculous, but just wanted to put this out there as what I think he's capable of. Wondering what you guys' takes are lol.