Isaiah Thomas is averaging 26.7 points and 6 assists a game...is he a top 8 PG?

[jambr380]

Fair enough. I don't hate you for your opinion, but I disagree.

Tp - this is an awesome preface to a rebuttal.

[showtime]

Westbrook, Harden, Curry, Maybe Kyrie, that's it. 

[BitterJim]

After Steph, Westbrook, and Harden, it becomes very subjective. I guess you give the nod to Paul for his sustained success and Kyrie for winning last year's championship, but I don't know why players like Lillard, Wall, and [apparently] Conley are automatically considered better than IT. If you just take this season and last (seasons where IT has been the starter for the Cs), it's hard to argue against IT's individual success along with the Cs' team success.

I think we need to consider regular season success vs. playoff success also. I think everyone can agree that Thomas's value come playoff time decreases significantly.
Look at the teams that went to at least the second round last year
Cleveland - Irving
Atlanta - Teague (not better than Thomas but certainly was in the playoffs)
Washington - Wall
Chicago - DRose
GSW- Curry
Memphis - Conley
Clippers - CP3
Houston - Harden

I think everyone on that list other than Teague and DRose are better than Thomas.. even though Rose brought it in the playoffs last year.

People say this a lot, but it isn't really true.  Here are his stats in the regular season and the playoffs for last season (regular season on top):

Code: [Select]

MPG    PPG    RPG    APG    3P%    2P%    FTA    FT%
32.2   22.2   3.0    6.2   35.9%  46.2%   6.6   87.1%
36.7   24.2   3.0    5.0   28.3%  46.6%   7.8   80.9%

With the exception of his assists (which can be at least partially attributed to missing Bradley) and 3P%, his stats were nearly identical (and sometimes better) compared to his regular season stats.  He struggled against the Cavs in 2015, but he was actually very good in the playoffs last year (although he did have a horrible game 5)

Not to mention that he wasn't just the #1 option for the team in the playoffs last year - he was really the only good option once Bradley got hurt.  This year, with a healthy Bradley and Al Horford in the lineup, he should be able to have an even better postseason than last year

[DefenseWinsChamps]

After Steph, Westbrook, and Harden, it becomes very subjective. I guess you give the nod to Paul for his sustained success and Kyrie for winning last year's championship, but I don't know why players like Lillard, Wall, and [apparently] Conley are automatically considered better than IT. If you just take this season and last (seasons where IT has been the starter for the Cs), it's hard to argue against IT's individual success along with the Cs' team success.

I think we need to consider regular season success vs. playoff success also. I think everyone can agree that Thomas's value come playoff time decreases significantly.
Look at the teams that went to at least the second round last year
Cleveland - Irving
Atlanta - Teague (not better than Thomas but certainly was in the playoffs)
Washington - Wall
Chicago - DRose
GSW- Curry
Memphis - Conley
Clippers - CP3
Houston - Harden

I think everyone on that list other than Teague and DRose are better than Thomas.. even though Rose brought it in the playoffs last year.

People say this a lot, but it isn't really true.  Here are his stats in the regular season and the playoffs for last season (regular season on top):

Code: [Select]

MPG    PPG    RPG    APG    3P%    2P%    FTA    FT%
32.2   22.2   3.0    6.2   35.9%  46.2%   6.6   87.1%
36.7   24.2   3.0    5.0   28.3%  46.6%   7.8   80.9%

With the exception of his assists (which can be at least partially attributed to missing Bradley) and 3P%, his stats were nearly identical (and sometimes better) compared to his regular season stats.  He struggled against the Cavs in 2015, but he was actually very good in the playoffs last year (although he did have a horrible game 5)

Not to mention that he wasn't just the #1 option for the team in the playoffs last year - he was really the only good option once Bradley got hurt.  This year, with a healthy Bradley and Al Horford in the lineup, he should be able to have an even better postseason than last year

I would add that Thomas has the right to learn how to play in the playoffs just like anyone else. Young teams need time to grow. Young guys, especially scorers, need to figure out how to work playoff defenses.

[bdm860]

I think you have to put Conley ahead of IT, but its a fine line. Needless to say after the top tier their is definitely a debate who should come next.. Thomas is definitely in the conversation.

Why do you have to? I disagree, but I'd like to hear your reasoning for why.

Never averaged over 17.9 ppg. Never averaged over 6.5 apg.

Thomas is averaging more points, assists, and less turnovers than Conley. Conley is a good defender, but not an elite one. He is a good player, but not a guy who can win a game for you.

Some of the reasoning might be fit.  This is from an article based on Chris Mannix talking about the appeal of Avery Bradley and Isaiah Thomas to other GMs:

1. According to Mannix, Bradley was "by far the most popular" Celtics guard among the interviewed front-office figures. The reasoning: his strengths could benefit any team, whereas Thomas only makes sense in a more specific role.

2. Other teams want Thomas, too, but might have concerns about his ability to fit in next to other top scorers. One scout told Mannix: "Boston plays through him, and it works. But would he be happy scoring 12 points a night and winning, or does he need to put up All-Star numbers? I just don't know."

Not saying I agree or disagree, but I understand the point.  I think the thought might be that Conley is going to give you 17/6 and good D on just about any team in the league.  You're not going to find him in a situation where a team would rather play Bledsoe or Dragic over him.  Same thing with guys like John Wall, Damian Lillard, Kyrie Irving, etc.  You put them on just about any team and you're going to get 20ppg, even if you paired them with Harden, Westbrook, or Paul.

Then you have Thomas who the Kings didn't think should be their starting PG and brought in Greivis Vasquez and then Darren Collison to replace him.  Thomas is a guy who was the odd man out in Phoenix behind Bledsoe and Dragic.  Thomas is a guy Brad Stevens thought should come off the bench behind Marcus Smart.  That's never happening with other guys mentioned as top PGs.

Now I love Thomas, love watching him play, love him being "disrespected" in conversations like this, but I can see how a lot of people think he's just a better version of Jamal Crawford in a good situation.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I think you have to put Conley ahead of IT, but its a fine line. Needless to say after the top tier their is definitely a debate who should come next.. Thomas is definitely in the conversation.

Why do you have to? I disagree, but I'd like to hear your reasoning for why.

Never averaged over 17.9 ppg. Never averaged over 6.5 apg.

Thomas is averaging more points, assists, and less turnovers than Conley. Conley is a good defender, but not an elite one. He is a good player, but not a guy who can win a game for you.

Some of the reasoning might be fit.  This is from an article based on Chris Mannix talking about the appeal of Avery Bradley and Isaiah Thomas to other GMs:

1. According to Mannix, Bradley was "by far the most popular" Celtics guard among the interviewed front-office figures. The reasoning: his strengths could benefit any team, whereas Thomas only makes sense in a more specific role.

2. Other teams want Thomas, too, but might have concerns about his ability to fit in next to other top scorers. One scout told Mannix: "Boston plays through him, and it works. But would he be happy scoring 12 points a night and winning, or does he need to put up All-Star numbers? I just don't know."

Not saying I agree or disagree, but I understand the point.  I think the thought might be that Conley is going to give you 17/6 and good D on just about any team in the league.  You're not going to find him in a situation where a team would rather play Bledsoe or Dragic over him.  Same thing with guys like John Wall, Damian Lillard, Kyrie Irving, etc.  You put them on just about any team and you're going to get 20ppg, even if you paired them with Harden, Westbrook, or Paul.

Then you have Thomas who the Kings didn't think should be their starting PG and brought in Greivis Vasquez and then Darren Collison to replace him.  Thomas is a guy who was the odd man out in Phoenix behind Bledsoe and Dragic.  Thomas is a guy Brad Stevens thought should come off the bench behind Marcus Smart.  That's never happening with other guys mentioned as top PGs.

Now I love Thomas, love watching him play, love him being "disrespected" in conversations like this, but I can see how a lot of people think he's just a better version of Jamal Crawford in a good situation.

I understand that reasoning, but would the same thing be said about Lillard? Is he willing to score 12 a night? Is he willing to come off the bench?

Of course not, because any team that does that to him would not be using his talents well. And yet every stay other than 5'9'' says the Thomas is a comparable player to Lillard. A good coach, unlike the Suns or the Kings coaches, use their players in a way to benefit their team the most. They don't get caught up on superficial things or peg players in roles because of height.

I get the point and I'm not arguing against you, but against that line of thinking.

[PhoSita]

Definitely ahead:

Curry
Westbrook
Harden (if he counts)
Paul

Arguable:

Lowry
Irving
Lillard
Kemba
Wall

He's somewhere in there.

[apc]

Did Harden start playing defense?
Or is this Top-8 offense only?

[jbpats]

After Steph, Westbrook, and Harden, it becomes very subjective. I guess you give the nod to Paul for his sustained success and Kyrie for winning last year's championship, but I don't know why players like Lillard, Wall, and [apparently] Conley are automatically considered better than IT. If you just take this season and last (seasons where IT has been the starter for the Cs), it's hard to argue against IT's individual success along with the Cs' team success.

I think we need to consider regular season success vs. playoff success also. I think everyone can agree that Thomas's value come playoff time decreases significantly.
Look at the teams that went to at least the second round last year
Cleveland - Irving
Atlanta - Teague (not better than Thomas but certainly was in the playoffs)
Washington - Wall
Chicago - DRose
GSW- Curry
Memphis - Conley
Clippers - CP3
Houston - Harden

I think everyone on that list other than Teague and DRose are better than Thomas.. even though Rose brought it in the playoffs last year.

The Bulls and Wizards didn't even make the playoffs last year (they were 9th and 10th in the conference), but you forgot Westbrook and Lillard on your list (who had some major luck with Clippers injuries). Maybe you used 2014-15 standings(?)

Overall, though, I agree that Curry, Westbrook, Harden are definitely better with CP3 and Irving being a little better. Conley I would have to drop into the 'a little worse' category.

TP for the correction

[GRADYCOLNON]

I think we need to realize that there are different types of point guards in the league rn.  Curry, Lillard, Westbrook and Thomas lean towards shoot first and pass second.  Although that distinction is traditionally negative as the point guards role is to get everyone involved first, I think that there has been an evolution in game particularly at the point.  The other group of PG is the team involvement first like CP3, Conley and Wall.  I think that these groups shouldn't be compared as it more apples to oranges nowadays.

[Csfan1984]

Way I have it is in groups where guys can be switched based on needs its 1-2 then 3-6 and 7-9.

1-2. Westbrook and Curry

3-6 CP3, Lowry, Irving, Lillard

7-9. Thomas, Wall, Walker

10. Dragic

Honorable mentions but outside the top 10 clearly (due to dropped or unsustainable play).
Hill, Conley, Teague, Parker, Bledsoe

[celticsclay]

Way I have it is in groups where guys can be switched based on needs its 1-2 then 3-6 and 7-9.

1-2. Westbrook and Curry

3-6 CP3, Lowry, Irving, Lillard

7-9. Thomas, Wall, Walker

10. Dragic

Honorable mentions but outside the top 10 clearly (due to dropped or unsustainable play).
Hill, Conley, Teague, Parker, Bledsoe

in a pretty low moment for Celtics fan local pessimist moranis said the jazz wouldn't trade hill for Thomas

[mctyson]

Thoughts?

Him and Kemba are near perfect comparisons:

http://bkref.com/tiny/xKRvk

Basically the same age, experience, and career stats.

Kemba is singed for $12M per for 3 years.  He signed this before the cap blew up, so there is no way IT accepts the same number.  But at least you have some leverage going into a negotiation with IT, and I would try to extend him now (maybe he takes a 2-3 years @ $18M per) if you want to keep him.

[saltlover]

Way I have it is in groups where guys can be switched based on needs its 1-2 then 3-6 and 7-9.

1-2. Westbrook and Curry

3-6 CP3, Lowry, Irving, Lillard

7-9. Thomas, Wall, Walker

10. Dragic

Honorable mentions but outside the top 10 clearly (due to dropped or unsustainable play).
Hill, Conley, Teague, Parker, Bledsoe

I would absolutely take Conley over Walker, Dragic, and probably IT.  Might take him over Lillard and Wall too.  Unlike a lot of the names on this list, he plays both ends of the court, and is serially underrated on an annual basis.

[Csfan1984]

Way I have it is in groups where guys can be switched based on needs its 1-2 then 3-6 and 7-9.

1-2. Westbrook and Curry

3-6 CP3, Lowry, Irving, Lillard

7-9. Thomas, Wall, Walker

10. Dragic

Honorable mentions but outside the top 10 clearly (due to dropped or unsustainable play).
Hill, Conley, Teague, Parker, Bledsoe

in a pretty low moment for Celtics fan local pessimist moranis said the jazz wouldn't trade hill for Thomas

Hill is having great contract year. Could be just that or he has found his nitch. Either way it's one strong year so can't put him in the top ten.