Bill Simmons thoughts on Curry & Roy award
I think Curry was the 2009-10 Rookie of the Year.
Look, I wanted to pick Brandon Jennings because he started for a playoff team, but you can't miss 65 percent of your shots for the last four months of the regular season and be my rookie of the year. Sorry. That leaves two guards (Curry and Evans) who put up gaudy stats on terrible teams. I just thought Curry had a higher degree of difficulty: crazy coaching situation, crazy ownership/front-office situation, super-crazy roster. He played with Ellis and Corey Maggette (two of the ultimate me-first guys), and a rotating cast of promoted D-Leaguers and bench guys. He didn't have a decent low-post player or rebounder; you knew things were bad when someone said the words, "We really miss Ronny Turiaf right now." And yet, he got better every month (check out his splits), and became the first rookie ever to average 17 points and two 3s per game and top 85 percent free throw shooting and 40 percent 3-point shooting (nobody even came close before).
Evans made history as well, joining the 20-5-5 Rookie Club along with MJ, Oscar Robertson and LeBron. Pretty good company. But he had better teammates, and if you want to get technical, I never watched a Warriors game without thinking, "Curry would be fun to play with" at least once. I can't say the same about Evans. Curry gets my vote. By the way, I still want to know how Minnesota's David Kahn had the fifth and sixth picks in the draft, took two point guards, and somehow missed Curry AND Jennings. He was like the kid with the gun in the Big Kahuna Burger apartment who fired 25 bullets at Jules and Vincent Vega, and somehow didn't hit either of them.
Thoughts on if OKC drafted him ahead of Harden:
The Curry Universe: Much more intriguing. Fits in from a chemistry standpoint. Hurts them defensively, but you can always get away with one squeaky wheel if the other four wheels are humming. (See: Parker, Tony.) Doesn't totally threaten Westbrook; as we saw with the Curry-Monta Ellis experiment this season, Curry floats between both guard spots effortlessly. And the shooting ... I mean ... good God. Nobody could ever double Durant with Curry's guy. Beyond that, alt-OKC would have two younger-than-22 shooters with 28-foot range and two 50-40-90 (field goal-3 point-free throw) percentage threats year after year. Could it find another Harden-like talent through the draft or free agency? Yes. Could it find another Curry-like talent? No. He's an original prototype. I like this universe more than Harden World. Sorry. Speaking of Curry ...
Thoughts?, I really respect his NBA mind
I think Harden was the perfect fit for OKC no matter who you bring up. He is smart can shoot, can defend and does all the small things to blend it but still get the job done. Curry needed minutes and experience to get things going and same with Evans. Harden has shown similiar skills and has done it with fewer minutes. I am still a fan of both Evans and Curry and despite Curry's finish, I would either give it to Evans or both and to me this looks like a great chance for both to get it.
The Evans Universe: Makes the Zombie Sonics better on paper, screws them up in real life. Russell Westbrook would be threatened as the primary playmaker/distributor; Durant would be threatened as the alpha dog. From a chemistry standpoint, I'm dubious. I just don't think you need him. Think of it this way: I'm already making you dinner with Durant as my main course. He's the $200 slab of filet mignon on the bone. We're at a table with 10 other people. We're chowing down. We already have a Caesar salad (Westbrook), cream of mushroom soup (Serge Ibaka), potatoes au gratin (Jeff Green), asparagus (Thabo Sefolosha), sweet potatoes (Eric Maynor) and the filet (Durant). Harden is delicious corn bread done southwestern-style; Evans is a $150 rack of lamb. Do I really need the lamb? If I brought that out, wouldn't you say, "Good God, this is too much food; I'm gonna have a heart attack!" It might be delicious, but I don't need it. I need the corn bread.
I think Simmons knows ALOT about basketball, but I think there's 2 things about him...for one I think he has bias towards certain players(like everyone) and he shows it alot...and another thing is he uses stats a little too much for my taste, I CANNOT backup my arguement off lof stats, they are not a replacement for watching games
I haven't figured out if Simmons' problem is that he doesn't watch teams outside of Boston and LA or if he does and has no clue what he is watching. He, like so many, don't seem to understand that the way Golden State plays makes numbers irrelevant. In his analysis of the hypothetical scenario of Curry on OKC ignores defense entirely. If you watch any playoff game, you can see that small and scrawny is no way to win in the NBA.
Simmons doesn't realize just how bad Stephen Curry's defence was this year.
Jennings was one of the top defensive PGs, while Stephen Curry was one of the worst.
On offense though, Stephen Curry was incredible. Yes, his counting stats are higher because he's in the Warriors system, but he was still extremely efficient, which translates well to any other team.
So I think Jennings wins based on the defensive side. He missed a ton of shots, but overall was effective on offense too as a passer.
jennins was not anywhere near one of the best defensive pg's. Far from it.
"jennins was not anywhere near one of the best defensive pg's. Far from it."
Where does that come from?
I think Rondo is clearly the best PG defender.
Then you can argue Westbrook, Felton... and I'd have to put Jennings in that group.
I would have to diagree with the defensive arguement, Jenning was not one of the better defenders at his position, you mentioned a few, i can add Billups, Mario Chalmers, Jason Kidd, Devin Harris*** to that list too. Jenning is a pesky denfender, i would not call him a lock down guy, he is just too small. I also watched a lot of curry & he was not a poor defender. It was not priority for GSW but he did compete and played smart def at times, he was top 5 in nba steals.....Much better natural defender then a Steve nash
What ever Simmons says doesn't mean that he's right.
and if you want to get technical, I never watched a Warriors game without thinking, "Curry would be fun to play with" at least once. I can't say the same about Evans
A) How is that getting technical?
B) I never realized how much fun thinking someone is to play with was a key factor in deciding rookie of the year.....
Simmons and Skip Bayless are the two most non-basketball playingest dudes to think they know EVERYTHING about the game.
and thats with a healthy team in the beginning of the season.