Would Steph Curry of the Golden State Warriors have survived in past eras of the NBA?
It is a question that many basketball fans ask, even though there will obviously never be a definitive answer.
Speaking on “First Take,” Stephen A. Smith spoke about a conversation he recently had with a Hall of Famer about Curry playing in the past decades of the league.
“I had a Hall of Famer come up to me and said to me, ‘Steph Curry would not have averaged more than 17 points a game. … In our era, we would’ve hurt him,'” Smith said, via NBACentral.
"I had a Hall of Famer come up to me and said to me, 'Steph Curry would not have averaged more than 17 points a game. … In our era, we would've hurt him.'"
– Stephen A. Smith
(🎥 @FirstTake )
pic.twitter.com/OEfzelwVzC
— NBACentral (@TheDunkCentral) April 2, 2025
Smith said this claim about Curry isn’t a dig at his talent, but rather the physical nature of the NBA of yesteryear.
Things were different decades ago, and the players were willing to rough one another up and weren’t afraid of a fight.
In fact, they would take advantage of the injuries of a player.
Smith said that Curry’s bad ankle would have been messed with by other players if he were a star in previous decades.
There is no doubt that Curry is one of the best players in the league right now, but he may have had a harder time in the past.
Of course, we will never know how accurate this statement is, but it will continue the debate and comparison between the past and present NBA and how things have changed.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter because Curry is still a dominant basketball figure today, and speculation about how he would have performed years before his birth doesn’t change that.
NEXT: Nikola Jokic Has Honest Admission About His 61-Point Performance