Trae Young better than Doncic and better than Curry at the same age! Let the debate begin.

such a shame steph curry was never good enough to show what he could do in a conference finals..

There u go fellas one referee and trae is a shadow of himself

You're hearing voices again. I never said you can't use stats and team performance. I said using them without context is a casual basketball take. Which, we know you are. We are arguing players 10 years apart in completely different circumstances. If you can't comprehend how those circumstances might have an affect on their statistics that's on you. This conversation is just quite above your pay rate. You need to have a little more depth and understanding about basketball. But to be honest it really doesn't take much to realize a small poor defending, poor shooting pg is not better than a 22 year old steph. Just because he had to share the load with Monta Ellis and was on a terrible team does not mean he wasn't a better basketball player than Trae. Transport 22 year old Steph and put him on this Hawks team and they'd be instantly better. Can't even imagine how lethal they'd be with Steph, Bogdanovic, Galinari, Huerter, and Collins shooting. 4 guys overs 40% and an up and comer in Huerter. My lawddddddddd. Poor mans Warriors but in the Eastern conference. Would dominate.

@ThrowDemDarts

 With all due respect, simply putting up shooting percentages, which is all you have done for what feels like a month in this thread, is as casual as it gets. Total novice, know-nothing shit. I'm not saying that what you are but it more than a little hypocritical to spend the whole thread arguing shooting percentage, then when faced with other, very valid stats, simply say, "Stats without context don't tell the story." The league was different when Steph came in but it's not like he came to the league in '92.

I go back to what i've said many times. You seem to have a very simplistic viewpoint of basketball and a very revisionist memory of Steph at 22. I think you watched him in college, then watched him at 25, and you just filled in the blank. Your extrapolating. It's clear you weren't watching Steph, on the Warriors, at 22.

Nah shooting %'s are an efficiency metric. It's much easier for someone to take a bunch of shots and put up tons of points than for someone to score 19 on 48/44/93. It says those 19 points were scored very efficiently. And since it's very tough to be an efficient shooter in the NBA, it is a much greater indicator of skill than just ppg and assists. Especially when you're sharing the primary ball handling and shooting with a veteran player, something Trae doesn't have to deal with. And especially when you cancel out the fact they are both nothing special on defense, they both are great ball handlers, and they are both relatively small guards. And I did watch him in college and as a rookie and his early years in the NBA. He was always a more skilled player than Trae. You obviously didn't watch Trae in college because Trae literally played the exact same way he does right now, ha ha. 

That's where you guys fail miserably, is you think the Hawks are good now because Trae is some Lebron like freak that lead them here. I've watched them from the beginning Trae got in. Having Gallo, Bogdanovic, and Collins come in as 40%+ 3 pt shooters, with Huerter and Sweet Lou adding extra high skill offense, mixed with a guy who can run a pick and roll and clean up the dirty work inside with Capela, it is a completely different team. Trae did not just progress from last year to this year and become this amazing player. He hasn't progressed very much at all. 

That's why I know you guys don't have a clue what you're talking about. Trae is not much different than his college days and the Hawks are a much better team than they were last year. You can put 22 year old Steph on this Hawks team without Trae and they'd be incredible. 

Comparing him to Curry is beyond absurd

No comparison

@ThrowDemDarts

 You keep making my point. I did watch Trae in college. He did play the exact same way. This is the thesis of my posts. His game immediately transferred to the pros. He played one year of college, and immediately transferred his game to the pros. Steph had a full career at Davidson, and yes was a more polished college player, but did not bring that game immediately to the pro level. It wasn't the garbage team. It wasn't Monta. Hell, you can even take Steph's first full season without Monta. It's because he had physical limitations. He wasn't strong enough. He wasn't athletic enough. He doesn't have the pure point instincts. He's was/is a flashy ball handler but a sloppy ball handler. Was a walking turnover. Neither is a good defender. Small guards rarely are but Steph was a sloppy defender. Got whistled a ton. Wasn't able to get to the rim. Scored 4ish PIP for like his first 5 years which means as good as a FT shooter as he is, he was never getting to the line either. You sound like every newbie basketball fan that thinks the whole game is 3pt shooting. Steph's the best shooter of all time. That was clear even when he was 22 but that's all you can say. Either because you don't understand basketball as well as you claim or, as i've said many times, you just weren't watching Steph at 22, 23, 24. Hell, he wasn't even creating his own shots back then unless he brought the ball up and casted from deep. He was very much a catch and shoot guy. He hadn't even mastered working off a screen, which is one of his main tools now. You're so smug but you have the basketball takes of a chick who calls the Warriors the dubs and didn't start paying attention until the Warriors started winning. "Wooo, Steph shoots so well. He's the best!" I'm not calling you a chick. You seem like a pretty solid dude but for someone so smug, you have such a simplistic take.

@StumpTownStu

To be honest, there is nothing more embarrassing here than you claiming to have more knowledge of Steph because you went to their games, ha ha. We have tvs you know. And I saw Steph in college and as a rookie and early in his career. What he did as a 19 year old against Wisconsin, Kansas, Gonzaga, Blake Griffins Oklahoma teams is stuff of legend. He was not too weak for them, he was not sloppy with the ball just because he had some turnovers. He was an elite and smooth ball handler, much more than Trae. That's how I know you have no clue what you are talking about. He was a more polished offensive scorer as a junior in college than Trae is now. His game didn't translate in the NBA because they forced him in to a role playing alongside Monta, who was there to be the scorer. For someone who followed the Warriors so much back than you certainly don't take in to account the fact there was plenty of drama within the org about what to do between Steph and Monta. They ended up choosing Steph because he's obviously a superstar in the making and the rest is history. 

Steph was more than capable of playing in the NBA as a 22 year old and more than capable of doing what Trae does. He was always a better and more skilled offensive player than him at just about every aspect of the game. 22 year old steph's game would have more than translated in todays NBA. He would have been amazing. I think you just don't understand what you were watching to be honest. Steph did not stop being great between 22 and 24 years old just because he was stuck on a crap team with a veteran ball hog, 

hehehehehe..so what you are saying was that he definitely WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER,but conditions and circumstances would not allow that to be shown...but seeing as you are a curry ball-washer/slurper and you are so arrogant that you think you are a hoops "savant" you think you can know that what NEVER,EVER happened WOULD HAVE happened IF things had gone down differently in stephs early years....woulda coulda shoulda,i coulda been a contender!!!

okay folks thats settled then.we can all pack up and go home..king douche has admitted it right here (not like he hasnt already over the past 3 pages)..he is clearly saying that curry COULD HAVE BEEN better had he had similar conditions as what trae has now...which logically means HE WAS NOT BETTER.

and i totally agree,if you switch out trae for a young steph,the hawks team would be good and dangerous...but they ALREADY ARE THAT NOW,whether or not they are better is certainly highly debatable...you add accurate shooting,particularly from 3 point land but you remove 4 assists worth of team points per game..thats probably about 10 points a game,plus all the pressure put on the defense by traes paint activity,plus fouls drawn on the opposition,plus the confidence trae instills in his team-mates.steph is now a terrific leader but he was NEVER,EVER that at the age of 22 when just making his way in the league.

and for about the 100th time,YOU of all people calling other individuals "basic/casual" is pure fuggin comedy..do you think we are kidding when calling you dumb??i mean im dead serious,you come across as one of the dumbest,most remedial people in this place...for almost 25 pages now you have simply repeated those corny phrases/tropes "48/44/93.most skilled offensive player ever."(one of which is A LIE.as admitted by yourself)...and yet you have the unmitigated gall to sling that accusation at others..mmmm,its me thats "basic".thats right.

You think a poor defending, poor shooting small pg is better than a 22 year old Steph Curry because he's on a better team in a weaker conference than Steph was at 22... can't get more casual than that. Trae is not even a top 100 shooter in the league. I really don't get what you guys are watching to come to such ridiculous conclusions that a poor shooting, poor defending, not super athletic point guard is better than the most skilled offensive player to ever play the game at the same age. It's hysterical. Mostly because it's not even close. 22 year old steph on this Hawks team instead of Trae would instantly make them better. Trae needs to work on his shooting if he ever wants to be on Steph's level. And you an Stump saying Steph was sloppy and had trouble with ball handling. L M F A O. You guys must have drank way too much 10 years ago. Basketball novices.

and as for your other point,the last time you joined the thread was about when this stooge was first asked just how much of steph he watched at the age of 22.....and just like every other question or point raised in this thread he has yet to address it.i think we all know why.

its pretty clear by this point that he is one of those pig-headed,stubborn ignoramuses that you sometimes come across in life that will state an opinion hastily and no matter what you show them to the contrary they will not move off of it...in fact,the more you show them the more they dig their heels in.....mental age of an infant.im sure you may have encountered such folk in your lifetime.

and to be more accurate,his take has gotten EVEN MORE radical since the beginning of the thread i believe..he has started saying that this comparison is "NOT EVEN CLOSE"...that curry is on a whole nother level.which is fuccing insane.its tough to be more wrong than that.

Not only went to games. Watched all the games I didn't go to. Nothing is more asinine that you thinking you knew Steph better at 22 than a homer who watched every game he played at 22. So now you want us to believe you were using your NBA package to watch a shitty Warriors team? Staying up to till 11:30 West Coast time to watch Warriors games? Get the fuck out of here. Do you realize thar before the Warriors were good and Steph was a superstar you could just go to their practice facility when they were getting run in. And if it wasn't an official practice, you could get shots up with them. It is fucking ridiculous that you think you know Steph better than me. You keep proving my point by bringing up college and then saying, "Well, he didn't just forget how to play basketball after college." No, but the competition is a lot different to in the pros and not everybody's college game translates immediately to the pros. Some never do. Do I really need to list all the great college players, phenoms, that fizzled out in the pros? You claim to watch so much college hoop. This shouldn't be news to you. Steph didn't just come to the pros the same player he was in college. That shit almost never happens. He had so many shortcomings. You try to blame Monta but look at his first season without Monta. Same story. Then you blame the team. You make so many excuses and what ifs and all I list are facts.

And Trae is on a better team because he makes them better. Besides Danilo and Sweet Lou providing a veteran presence, none of those guys have proven shit.

youre a top notch weirdo.

why are you bringing up traes (lack of) improvement?????..has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand...his performance as a 22 year old as compared to curry's..THATS IT!!!that is all that is being addressed here.but when you lose as convincingly as what you have done i guess you need a whole bucket full of red herrings to throw all over the place,right?

@ThrowDemDarts

    and i totally agree,if you switch out trae for a young steph,the hawks team would be good and dangerous...but they ALREADY ARE THAT NOW,whether or not they are better is certainly highly debatable...you add accurate shooting,particularly from 3 point land but you remove 4 assists worth of team points per game..thats probably about 10 points a game,plus all the pressure put on the defense by traes paint activity,plus fouls drawn on the opposition,plus the confidence trae instills in his team-mates.steph is now a terrific leader but he was NEVER,EVER that at the age of 22 when just making his way in the league.   and for about the 100th time,YOU of all people calling other individuals "basic/casual" is pure fuggin comedy..do you think we are kidding when calling you dumb??i mean im dead serious,you come across as one of the dumbest,most remedial people in this place...for almost 25 pages now you have simply repeated those corny phrases/tropes "48/44/93.most skilled offensive player ever."(one of which is A LIE.as admitted by yourself)...and yet you have the unmitigated gall to sling that accusation at others..mmmm,its me thats "basic".thats right. You think a poor defending, poor shooting small pg is better than a 22 year old Steph Curry because he's on a better team in a weaker conference than Steph was at 22... can't get more casual than that. Trae is not even a top 100 shooter in the league. I really don't get what you guys are watching to come to such ridiculous conclusions that a poor shooting, poor defending, not super athletic point guard is better than the most skilled offensive player to ever play the game at the same age. It's hysterical. Mostly because it's not even close. 22 year old steph on this Hawks team instead of Trae would instantly make them better. Trae needs to work on his shooting if he ever wants to be on Steph's level. And you an Stump saying Steph was sloppy and had trouble with ball handling. L M F A O. You guys must have drank way too much 10 years ago. Basketball novices.[/Quote]

holy shi.t,youre dumb...what in the actual fucc goes through the mind of someone as they are just copy-pasting the exact same corny drivel they have been posting non-stop for 20+ pages...you are special needs for sure.

I like Huerter. I like Collins. I like Bogdan but you're acting like they're all-stars. Huerter has came into his own down the stretch but he averaged like 11 points this year. They're all young and unproven and Trae is their undisputed leader. The engine that makes it all run. I love Steph but he's never been a bring a teammate's game up type of guy. He's a force of nature but not a force multiplier. That's Draymond. The real point.

@ThrowDemDarts

  You think a poor defending, poor shooting small pg is better than a 22 year old Steph Curry because he's on a better team in a weaker conference than Steph was at 22... can't get more casual than that. Trae is not even a top 100 shooter in the league. I really don't get what you guys are watching to come to such ridiculous conclusions that a poor shooting, poor defending, not super athletic point guard is better than the most skilled offensive player to ever play the game at the same age. It's hysterical. Mostly because it's not even close. 22 year old steph on this Hawks team instead of Trae would instantly make them better. Trae needs to work on his shooting if he ever wants to be on Steph's level. And you an Stump saying Steph was sloppy and had trouble with ball handling. L M F A O. You guys must have drank way too much 10 years ago. Basketball novices.[/Quote]

steph IS a poor defending small pg,you fuccin douche-bag...you dont need to try and insult one guy by using the EXACT SAME FAULTS that apply to the other guy he is being compared to.jeezus you are one thick ma-fkr...just call him "poor shooting" cos the other qualities cancel each other out.

and WHY ARE YOU STILL CALLING HIM THE MOST SKILLED OFFENSIVE PLAYER TO EVER PLAY THE GAME WHEN YOU HAVE ALREADY ADMITTED THAT IS A LIE???

You forgot one thing. Steph is a poor defending, small point guard.... who wait for it... can shoot and score at a very efficient rate. What a shocker.

And you an Stump saying Steph was sloppy and had trouble with ball handling. L M F A O. You guys must have drank way too much 10 years ago. Basketball novices.

His own coach still gets on him about this even now but i'm a novice? Yeah, ok. You don't know dick about basketball. Probably never played an actual organized game, at any level, in your life. And you're in love with 3pt shooting like someone who just started watching 10 years ago 

He literally played the exact same way last year and they were 20-47 and one of the worst teams in the NBA. They restocked, got him some elite shooters, and a 15/14 pick and roll center, and what a shocker. They are better. And it's hilarious how you think Bogdanovic and Capela didn't prove shit this year. Their team D against the 76ers was way more impressive than Trae Young inefficient shooting.

Yea, he makes turnovers just like every other guard and coaches don't like turnovers, but to say he's a sloppy ball handler, is ridiculous. One of the smoothest ball handlers to ever play the game. Oh and here we go with the "you've never played basketball before". Lmao. That's even more embarrassing than you watching Steph in practice one time. Good lord.

@StumpTownStu

yep,not a soul on this planet was talking about the "juggernaut" hawks this season and how they are poised to go deep into the playoffs..not a single fuggin person in the basketball universe..they are all nice,solid quality guys to have on your team but dumb-dumb dart-thrower here acting like they are mvp calibre guys taking trae along for the ride.

and just why in the actual fuqq would anybody (outside of a local fan perhaps) be watching the 2011 andris biedrins/dan gadzuric/lou amundson/david lee/epke udoh warriors coming off a 26-56 season??a bottom dwelling team playing late at night without any jaw-droppingly exciting players...(monta was okay but not enough to tune in to)...this fuggin stooge is just spewing lie after lie after lie....oh well,i guess thats what the interwebz were invented for,right?to pretend to be someone you aint.....darts is that to a tee.

And that struggled to get into the paint. Struggled to get his own shot. Didn't make his teammates better. Turned the ball over too much for his usage rate. Committed too many personal fouls. I saw all this with my own eyes but the numbers actually support this. I know this will go way over your head but i'm about to school you. There are basketball stats besides shooting percentage. Crazy, right? How come Steph's points and assists didn't shoot up in his first year when Monta left. I mean, I know the Warriors sucked but they scored plenty of points. Why didn't he score or assist on more of them? What's the next excuse you'll make because all I have provided are first hand accounts that I saw with my own eyes that are also supported by numbers and all you have done is list his shooting percentage over and over again. Like I said in the first couple pages, Anthony Morrow had higher shooting percentages than Steph. Does that make him better? You don't even know who Anthony Morrow is.

nope,didnt forget it at all???i actually LITERALLY REFERENCED IT by calling the other guy "poor shooting" right there in my comment.thats clearly the major,and only,advantage steph has over him......and????..we all know that,its as obvious as saying that water is fuccing wet........and as obvious as pointing out that he couldnt create his own shot,couldnt create fouls,couldnt lead (yet),couldnt score in the paint,couldnt assist at as high a rate....are YOU the one forgetting all of this??......oh no.....no,thats right.my bad...he "WOULD HAVE" done all of that in your very own personal fantasy scenario in which he gets to play in a different situation at a different time period...

welcome to throw-dem-lies fantasy playland where,if you lose and you dont like it you just change the parameters entirely and make up hypothetical scenarios where you "would have" won the argument.

He's sloppy in that he does a bunch of flashy shit that leads to turnovers instead of basic, high percentage, textbook shit that doesn't. He's a flashy dribbler. A flashy passer. This has often lead to unforced turnovers. Unforced turnovers. Not a good defender picking your pocket. Just throwing the ball away. How many Steve Kerr press conferences have you watched? 10 in life? You don't know shit about the Warriors.