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

Could not dribble or get fouls called... lmfao!!! It makes sense why you think Trae is a better player now, you're insane. 22 year old steph was better at Trae at everything offense other than getting fouls drawn and the floater game was probably slightly ahead for Trae. But otherwise, Steph was better at everything. It's funny how bad you guys think one of the most skilled offensive players to ever touch a basketball was at 22. Like he just all of a sudden started practicing dribbling at 23. Dude was a better dribbler and smoother offensive player in college than Trae is now.

nope.

you literally didnt even watch him play a game...one of the most putrid squads in the league playing on the west coast with a weak,skinny rookie/2nd year player that was basically a young steve kerr.

"B-b-B-b-B-bUt I wAs WAtChInG tHe MoSt SkIlLeD oFfEnSiVe PlAyEr Of aLl TiMe At 22!!..HoNeStLy I wAs,He WaS mY fAvOuRiTe!!!.....48/44/93!!!!....48/44/93!!!!!.....48/44/93!!!"

@ThrowDemDarts

 and BIG NOPE to thinking that he couldnt dribble until the age of 23...but hey,we are just playing the game that you are,ya little weasel.....if you wanna lie about him being the greatest offensively skilled player ever at 22....then its open slather for anyone else to say whatever mindless crap they want to.

if i wanna claim he could barely walk and chew gum at the same time then all is fair and equal and nobody is allowed to refute anything,no matter how absurd.....YOU set the rules of engagement you dumbass...youre a fuggin joke and its humiliating how badly you have been defeated in here...you are obviously a masochist to keep coming back for another helping of shame...i guess its that old thing where a dumb guy thinks that if he repeats the same dumb lie enough times that it magically becomes the truth.....48/44/93....48/44/93...48/44/93...gotta get new underwear from k-mart....charlie babbit.

@melossinglet

He was a more skilled dribbler, better shooter, higher basketball iq, and smoother with the ball in college than Trae is now. I have no clue what you see in Trae. He's not that special. Steph was special. Trae needs to figure out how to shoot before the conversation even begins with Steph. Only people who don't understand basketball would think an inefficient shooting, bad defending, small point guard is better than a 22 year old steph curry, 

you are literally just fabricating sh.it off the top of your head and trying to be passing it off as fact..so pretty much the same as the last 30 pages worth of drivel you have subjected the unfortunate readers of covers to....WHAT POSSIBLE EVIDENCE IS THERE that he was a "more skilled dribbler" and had "higher basketball iq"????....WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE????....we can plainly see that trae is able to get anywhere on the court and score in the paint well and he is the fulcrum and leader on an ECF team that isnt very talented comparatively speaking..so those are his credentials as far as dribbling/leadership/reading the game.you have NOTHING to say in response to support the steaming pile of shi.t you just spewed..you literally heard skip bayless say it on t.v,thought it sounded cool and so here you are.

calling basically a skinny,young steve kerr a "skilled dribbler with great basketball iq"......bahahaha

@melossinglet

We posted are evidence and Facts already...FG% and 3 Point FG%...FACTS Bro....U posting opinions...U and Stu...OPINIONS>.

we posting opinions??NOPE.

have you actually been paying attention or just dropping in every week or so??the numbers were put right next to each other side by side and traes were either as good or (probably in most observers opinion) BETTER than what curry's were PLUS he had a significant impact on a very strong run in the playoffs for his team,which curry didnt even come close to doing...so basically dumdum-dart thrower tells us that ONLY your shooting % matter and that no other numbers or performance indicators do..thats because hes a really dumb guy who is just a steph curry slurper pretty much,and he knows he is in a losing battle here so he HAS TO ignore everything that is contradictory to his wrong conclusion.....so whats utterly fuccing hilarious is that,AT WORST...AT ABSOLUTE WORST,the results that both guys put up are pretty even...AT WORST..and yet we got this dart throwing imbecile saying thats its "not even close" and that curry was "much better"...i mean thats how deluded and biased this stooge is.

@davemsh

 and also the cherry on top is the opinion of a guy like stu who lived in the area and saw almost every fuggin game that curry played so it holds some weight,no??and he is a long time admitted warriors/curry fan so if anything his bias should sawy in that direction,no??but really it just exemplifies and emphasises how dumb and wrong you guys are that a curry hardcore fan can even concede that trae has an edge at this point in their respective careers....you,me,budwiser and the dart-throwing lie machine DID NOT watch much,if any,of curry play so why would our opinions hold much weight?

and oh by the way,on the subject of opinions "dartman" has posted PLENTY of them,such as curry had great dribbling skill and iq in just his second year in the league....no way to verify this as it is opinion after all..but his most egregious,disastrous take of all is that 22 year old curry was "the most skilled offensive player of all time" which is fuccing absurd to the point of being comical.i dare say if you polled every human being on the planet that watches basketball you wouldnt find one single person that agrees even a little bit...do you agree with that ridiculous assessment??its not even a valid opinion when it is clearly a lie...and at that point we have to start asking if he is impossibly thick or this whole thing hes been doing in here is just baiting and pranking for shi.ts'n'giggles.

Stu mellosinger and beginnerboy vs the universe loll

@budwiser

736 replies in this thread.. Mellosinger has about 200 off the replies....I am dead Serious....

"Most people don't know shit about boxing."

Roger Mayweather

@davemsh

 He'll keep on singin along.  It's all good entertainment 4 the offseason 

@StumpTownStu

 Yeah i kno, u saw the guy ur a warriors fan and shooting % doesn't matter as much as we thinkr

You extrapolated a lot from a Roger Mayweather quote. Where have I said shooting % doesn't matter? Typical social media bullshit. Just randomly attribute quotes and opinions to people just to have something to counter.

@StumpTownStu

 You said multiple times people that think only shooting % matters don't know basketball

You also said many times ypu saw curry personally at 22 you were a warriors fan went to the games.  You knew his limitations

Or do i have that wrong

I don't think i've used that exact wording once but even that's a big difference from simply saying "shooting % doesn't matter", which I can promise I have never said.

Now as far as stressing how much I actually watched Steph at 22, absolutely. It has merit. In sports, you kinda have to actually watch the shit, and understand the game from a fundamental standpoint, to break it down.

@StumpTownStu

 So how do you explain curry being unanimous all rookie

Vote was wrong, or curry was good trae just better?

"Curry, a three time Western Conference Rookie of the Month selection (January, March, April) ranked second among rookies in scoring (17.5 ppg) and finished first in assists (5.9 apg), steals (1.9 spg), minutes (37.2), free throw percentage (.885) and three-point percentage (.437). Curry’s 166 three-pointers made led all rookies. "

So that's more than just 3-point %, which is incredible.

First among all rookies in steals and assists and minutes.

Kinda seems to me like he was pretty good at 22.

There's nothing to explain. Curry was extremely good. Trae's just better, at 22. As i've said, it doesn't mean Trae will end up half the player Steph is when it's all said and done. Steph was no where near reaching his potential at 22, whereas Trae is kind of who is going to be imo but we're talking a snapshot in one year of a players life. And I just don't believe people saw much of Curry in that year. People have selective memories. They think back to Steph at 24-26, they think back to his tournament run at Davidson, and they are like, "Oh, yeah, I remember Steph at 22." Maybe guys caught a few Warriors games back then. They weren't good. They weren't on national TV often. He was really good at 22. Really good but he had flaws like any player at 22. Hell, any person. Trae's flaws are obvious. He isn't a pure shooter. At his height, I don't think he'll ever even develop a pure, effortless release at the NBA level. And frankly, his height itself could be called a flaw but I give him the edge based on his court vision and passing/distribution. Extremely important with a team constructed like Atlanta. His ability to get into the paint and finish at the rim. For his size, it's amazing. Steph didn't develop a paint presence until much later. Scored about 4 in the paint in his early years. He just wasn't athletic enough. Lacked explosiveness. Had weak ankles. He's still not crazy athletic. That'a not his game and it doesn't matter but just a fact. Likewise, not getting into the paint means lack of FT attempts. I know darts scoffed at getting to the line being a skill but anyone who knows basketball knows that being aggressive, drawing contact, getting to the line, getting an opponent in foul trouble, it is a skill. And it's extremely important in a basketball game. Steph shot wide open spot up jumpers at 22 and never got to the line. Never drew fouls yet he committed a ton of them. And he was a flashy ball handler but sloppy/careless with the ball. He committed a ton of what I like to call unforced errors. Losing your own dribble, throwing the ball away on bad, flashy passes, etc. He does this even now. Anyone who knows Warriors basketball knows turnovers have been their achilles heal (and rebounding). The turnovers are often of this variety. I've provided so much actual basketball insight that is supported by actual stats and all anyone has been able to say in return is a googled shooting % and a tons of ifs, ands, or buts. Tons of hypotheticals. What could've been if. Guys know nothing of the work it took for Steph to be the player he is today. They watched a few college games,n a few early pro games, looked at him at 26 and just filled in the blanks. It's like debating the meaning of a book with someone who never read it and only saw previews and the climax of a movie based on it. It's like talking about Moby Dick and everyone is like, "Sure, I know Moby Dick. White whale, Ahab... Call me Ismail." and you know they've never read that shit. This shit is maddening.

@StumpTownStu

 Well let's compare the first year in the league.  They both suck at d so consider that a wash.  And basketball is a lot more than stats.  Nevertheles..

As rookies...

Steph vs Trae

Minutes: 37.2 vs 30.9

Points: 17.2 vs 19.1

Free Throw %: .885 vs .829

Free Throw Attempts: 2.5 vs 5.1

3 pt %: .437 vs .324

2 pt %: .474 vs .477

Assists: 5.9 vs 8.1

Steals: 1.9 vs .9

Rebounds: 4.5 vs 3.7

Turnovers: 3.0 vs 3.8

Fouls: 3.2 vs 1.7

you look at pure stats, the only big difference is trae better at assists and getting to the foul line, curry better at 3 point shots and steals.

Which is why, as I've said over and over again, it's like comparing apples to oranges.  One guy is a shooter, the other a disher.

Of course Curry had flaws as a rookie (22) (paint presence etc). It was his first year in the league.  This is Trae's 3rd year in the league, and late into it (playoffs).  We all know Curry is a better player at 25 than Trae at 22.

Trae is a great player.  But it's a circular argument.  A great thread to waste time on tho. loll

the universe??gtfoh...who has done that poll??in any case its all irrelevant..name any topic you want and theres a WHOOOOLE lot of people in the world whose opinions are factually inaccurate and this would be no different..someone like throw-dem-lies is quite clearly a curry-flavouredcum guzzler and theres probably plenty more out there that are emotionally invested that struggle to separate fact from fiction.

...cool story.you dont tend to have much to say when you are objectively WRONG,so that explains the absence of opposition i guess.

on the other hand i suppose you could just fabricate 2 or 3 lies and then repeat them for 30 pages like dart-boy has...he also has 200 replies i bet.except really its just one fallacious reply regurgitated 199 times..sad and pathetic but hey thats our little dart-boy.

They spoke about this on Speak for Yourself yesterday about Trae, Luka, and Ayton. They agreed it’s Luka and not even close. They also chose Ayton over Trae. But Trae is better at the same age as one of the most skilled basketball players in history. A dude who can’t play defense and isn’t even in the top 100 in shooting. 

once again,every time you foolishly mash away at your keyboard your stupidity shines even brighter..this is one of the worst humiliations i think ive ever seen on the interwebzz...doncic and ayton are BOTH better than 22 year old steph curry so yep,it stands to reason that they would be put ahead of trae and ALSO ahead of curry...this isnt hard,little fella..but you seem to be making it harder than it is.

and if that werent bad enough...you are actually putting even the slightest amount of weight/stock in what the speak for yourself hosts have to say about anything basketball related????"throw-dem-lies"....