T-Mac ever play with a top 3 player in the league?

 

Was Westbrook the third best player (in your estimation) in the league when Durant got out of the first round 6 seasons ago? McGrady played with good enough players to get beyond the first round at least one time during his career. To argue otherwise is asinine. Durant is a better T-Mac. It doesn't mean I believe he is the end all be all.

Even though the Thunder have been struggling, KD has still been a consistent, top 5 elite player. And this post was meant for you to choose who you'd rather have more faith in as a top player in your team in the long run. As incredible as Steph has been, Curry has peaked only last season. Durant has been a top 5 elite since 2008.

The Thunder's problem this season is the same as it has been the past 7 seasons. The dynamics of the team are flawed. There is no flow at all to how they play, especially down the stretch.

Yep with 2 more NBA season grinds on him. And 6 months younger btw

 

You're doing a good job at avoiding my point. Durant has been a top tier player since 2008 along with claiming the scoring title many times while Curry started his case last season when Kerr took over.

The Thunder's problem this season is the same as it has been the past 7 seasons. The dynamics of the team are flawed. There is no flow at all to how they play, especially down the stretch.

 

I agree 100%. They need good coaching.

I agree 100%. They need good coaching.

 

That is partly it, but both Durant and Westbrook's skill set don't fully compliment one another in my view.

How does @Jumper_Dad keep liking posts?

Curry... When teams bury you with contested 3's is just devastating. You guard for 20 seconds and are in position to make a stop and they make a 3 anyway. It takes a toll mentally on the defense.

Was Westbrook the third best player (in your estimation) in the league when Durant got out of the first round 6 seasons ago? McGrady played with good enough players to get beyond the first round at least one time during his career. To argue otherwise is asinine. Durant is a better T-Mac. It doesn't mean I believe he is the end all be all.

 

No but he's steadily climbed. He's been in the top handful for the past 3-4 years, wouldn't you say? T-Mac's closest comparable teammate was Ming, who while exceptionally talented, was chronically injured. Durant is superior to T-Mac, but he's in that same caliber of player IMO. Great, hall of fame talent, but he doesn't really make anyone on his team better.

All of you people are fools in my opinion. KD is a way better all around player. This is a post about who you'd pick as a franchise player, not who's been playing better recently. KD has been a top 5 player since 2008 ( Keep in mind that KD is also a year younger). Curry has started his case just last season when Kerr took over. To get to my reasoning why I think KD is a better option in the long run, here are both player's career averages.

KD - 27.4 ppg 7.0 rpg 3.6 apg 48.0% fg 38.0% 3p

SC - 22.2 ppg 4.3 rpg 6.8 apg 47.7% fg 44.4% 3p

You're doing a good job at avoiding my point. Durant has been a top tier player since 2008 along with claiming the scoring title many times while Curry started his case last season when Kerr took over.

I love Durant but no one is avoiding your point. You asked an open ended question that has no wrong answer and when you don't get the reply that jibes with yours you get upset. (See Tom Brady's all time ranking thread for reference). Jeez. I'd take Steph right now and it's no secret how big a Durant fan I am. I'd still take KD if the game was on the line and I needed a bucket. I'd take him over anyone else in the league.

How does @Jumper_Dad keep liking posts?

 

Cause I'm a Boss!!!

 

I think it's still under construction :lol2:...but it's a good sign that they'll be back sooner rather than later I'd guess.

I love Durant but no one is avoiding your point. You asked an open ended question that has no wrong answer and when you don't get the reply that jibes with yours you get upset. (See Tom Brady's all time ranking thread for reference). Jeez. I'd take Steph right now and it's no secret how big a Durant fan I am. I'd still take KD if the game was on the line and I needed a bucket. I'd take him over anyone else in the league.

 

I don't get mad, I just like to argue my case.

All of you people are fools in my opinion. KD is a way better all around player. This is a post about who you'd pick as a franchise player, not who's been playing better recently. KD has been a top 5 player since 2008 ( Keep in mind that KD is also a year younger). Curry has started his case just last season when Kerr took over. To get to my reasoning why I think KD is a better option in the long run, here are both player's career averages.

KD - 27.4 ppg 7.0 rpg 3.6 apg 48.0% fg 38.0% 3p

SC - 22.2 ppg 4.3 rpg 6.8 apg 47.7% fg 44.4% 3p

 

Except Steph has a ring and Durant, with infinitely more tries does not. Green is good, but he's not Westbrook. If anything, Durant has underachieved and Golden State is overachieving. OKC has had 2 of the 5 best players on the planet the past 3-4 years and have nothing to show for it.

Except Steph has a ring and Durant, with infinitely more tries does not. Green is good, but he's not Westbrook. If anything, Durant has underachieved and Golden State is overachieving. OKC has had 2 of the 5 best players on the planet the past 3-4 years and have nothing to show for it.

 

We're then talking about team performance (GSW vs OKC), rather than who is the overall better performer. A ring definately shows something, but it doesnt define whether an individual player is better than a player who doesnt have a ring. Patrick Ewing is far superior to Iguodala for example.

We're then talking about team performance (GSW vs OKC), rather than who is the overall better performer. A ring definately shows something, but it doesnt define whether an individual player is better than a player who doesnt have a ring. Patrick Ewing is far superior to Iguodala for example.

 

Golden State's roster isn't that much better than what Durant has had to work with in his career. It fits together better, but that has to do with what Curry does and Durant doesn't do and coaching style. At this time, the only argument that can be made for Durant over Curry IMO, is that he's been good for longer. But, when deciding to build a team around a player, which was the original question, that can be a negative. Durant, while good, is perhaps not the best player on his team. Curry seems to be the majorities choice for best in the world at this time.