I think it’s a lot closer than any of us want it to be. Putting them together in groupings (all of these guys are their teams starting PG):
Elite (3)
Curry, Luka (or Kyrie down a couple tiers), SGA
All Stars (6)
Haliburton, Brunson, Lillard, Booker, Maxey, Young,
Should Have Been All Stars (2)
Fox, Murray
Above Average (2)
Harden, Holiday
So that’s an easy 13, and he lucks out because Dallas has two and we are only counting one, and because his own teammate has shown him up in the PG role as well, but is really the starting two.
We don’t want to believe it and I really dislike these players, but both of these guys looked significantly better in their short stints this season as well:
Injured (2)
Morant, Ball
On a game by game basis I’d understand the argument for any of this next group over Garland this year too:
The Debateables (5)
White, Cunningham, Russell, VanVleet, McCollum
Talent wise, there’s no reason he shouldn’t be considered a top 10 PG. His continued reliance on a play style that isn’t working, either through stubbornness or lack of ability to play any differently has moved him down my personal rankings significantly. He just got outplayed twice in a week by Terry Rozier for crying out loud.
I don’t know man. I’m in the group that is really coming around to the guy we are counting on to be our floor general being a major cause of the issues. The night and day difference in the way the team played in games that Mitchell ran the show is something I just can’t ignore or try to explain away by schedule.
The sample size is getting larger and larger, and I was totally one of those guys who refused to believe that Garland wasn’t the future.
I don’t know the answer, but it sure seems like DG not being able to figure it out consistently is the problem.
Edit: I found this ranking online that puts the tiers pretty damn closely to mine.