Kyrie Irving

[DatDudeZ3]

The argument is who is a better player... and that is clearly Kyrie Irving.

 

[Ohio]

You need the right team to complement your best players period. We did a horrible job doing that for Kyrie his first 3 years, that shouldn't be a blemish on him, when the front office didn't do him much of a service. Washington did a good job putting the right team around Wall.

That, and since people want to bring up coaching...Kyrie played for absolutely abysmal coaches his first three years in the league. Worse than Wittman.

 

[Chris]

The argument is who is a better player... and that is clearly Kyrie Irving.

Compelling contribution...

 

[gourimoko]

Agreed- which is why he averaged 10 assists this year. That's...pretty freaking elite in that department. I think they're coached like shit. Should be a much better team. If they get Durant and a good coach, got damn. But that's off topic.

Right, I think everyone agrees Wall is a better facilitator than Irving at this point in their careers.

Wall is also a better defender, at least, on average over 82 games.

However, in almost every other department, Kyrie has him bested.

There is probably no GM in the NBA that would take Wall over Kyrie, regardless of their need for a point guard.

Kyrie + Durant is better than Wall + Durant, because Kyrie is simply that much better than John Wall.

I think that's the point that many of us are making.

 

[gourimoko]

Compelling contribution...

But seriously bro, do you really disagree that Kyrie is a better overall player than John Wall?

 

[DatDudeZ3]

Compelling contribution...

I already gave my reasoning... I'm letting you know my argument was Kyrie was the better player, not "point guard". I could care less about positions.

 

[gourimoko]

I already gave my reasoning... I'm letting you know my argument was Kyrie was the better player, not "point guard". I could care less about positions.

Yeah this hanging on to the "point" term label is silly...

 

[Chris]

But seriously bro, do you really disagree that Kyrie is a better overall player than John Wall?

I'm not really sure; that's my point. I think you could argue it either way. Like I said, I like Irving for this team. But if this team was constructed a bit differently? Could see Wall being a better fit. I don't think it's absolute one way or the other. That's my stance.

I guaranfuckingtee you are wrong about your "Every GM!" statement, and neither of us can back it up so why say it?

 

[Ohio]

Gonna go all Gouri on you here...

I think you're jumping to conclusions watching Wall in one game.

No, I mean, he's a bad shooter. There's not really much else to it.

If you don't think an elite ball distributor is nearly as valuable as an elite scorer, so be it. That's just a difference of opinion and I guess I can understand it. I agree that an elite distributor ala Chris Paul will rarely win a title as the best player on their team, at least historically (I'll get to this in a second). I said so as much back when we drafted Irving. Turns out, Irving is much more of an elite scoring machine and not much of a facilitator. As it happens, that fits in perfectly on this team, much more so for reasons I've gone over repeatedly. I'd take Kyrie on this team over Wall.

Agreed with all points.

But in a vacuum? There is absolutely an argument to be made for John Wall being a better player. It's a subjective matter so no, there really is no "wrong" answer.

Fair enough. People value things how they want, that is fine.

I see you talking about elite scorers being able to win championships as the best player on the team but not elite facilitators. How many championships have been won with 6'3 combo guards as the best player on the team, out of curiosity? This why I don't like to use historical precedent as some sort of absolute proof. We see new things happen all the time, new types of players, and the game itself evolves over time.

Couldn't agree more. Hence my distaste for old ideas of what a "Point Guard" is supposed to do.

I see someone else mentioned this too, but the Wizards have an awful coach, too. Just awful. But that's neither here nor there, I suppose.

Byron Scott and Mike Brown are both worse. Much worse.

 

[Chris]

Gonna go all Gouri on you here...



No, I mean, he's a bad shooter. There's not really much else to it.



Agreed with all points.



Fair enough. People value things how they want, that is fine.



Couldn't agree more. Hence my distaste for old ideas of what a "Point Guard" is supposed to do.



Byron Scott and Mike Brown are both worse. Much worse.

This was not even close to going Gouri and you know it!

I still laughed though.

 

[gourimoko]

I guaranfuckingtee you are wrong about your "Every GM!" statement, and neither of us can back it up so why say it?

So what GM would take Wall over Irving? Would you? Would anyone here?

 

[Chris]

So what GM would take Wall over Irving? Would you? Would anyone here?

I don't know. What GM wouldn't? Neither of us have talked to the GMs...so...again, why say it?

 

[Ohio]

This was not even close to going Gouri and you know it!

I still laughed though.

Haha, I just meant with the quote blocking. No need for the long responses, I already gave my take on the matter.

 

[godfather]

I do agree though, Wall is very good. I think Irving is better, but it's not like "oh my gosh, how dare someone even go there" kind of argument when asking who is better. I mean, to me Lowry isn't in the same category as either one of these two at all.

Wall is the second best guard in the East. I think he is. Wade is too injured to even be counted for anymore. Health matters, and missing half a season isn't very good to me.

It's a joke Lowry was a starter over Kyrie, people are going to go WTF over that one for a long time.

 

[Ohio]

The GM thing is situational based.

If the NBA started over with a fantasy draft, I guarantee Kyrie would be taken before Wall.

But, say this is the....2008 Celtics. If they kept their team but had to replace Rondo with either Wall or Kyrie, I'm sure they would choose Wall. But this is a pretty rare instance. Hence my value argument earlier.