not a lot to disagree with.
- I think it's too early to include Steph Curry.
It is too early based on career Win Shares. He's been incredible over the last 4-5 years, but it's still a fairly short run of All-NBA caliber play compared to some other guards.
However, it is easy to project that he'll end up on that list if he continues at around his current level for another 4-5 years.
You could make a credible argument for him just on the fact that he had one of the most dominant regular seasons ever and has been the best or second best player on a team that's won 65-70+ games for 3 going on 4 years now, plus 2 titles.
I mean they put Shaq on the first list like 4 seasons into his career. Obviously it was a good call.
I have no issue with Curry. His last 3+ seasons have been about as good as any player in history's best 3 year period. 2 MVP's (the only unanimous one in history), 2 Titles, and a runner-up in a season you set the all time wins record. No team in NBA history has had as many wins over a 3 year period as the Warriors, and it is by and large a result of Curry (I mean even last year with Durant missing a bunch of games they didn't miss a beat).
For me the question is if you remove Miller from the list (as you should) who do you replace him with. Do you put Westbrook or Paul in his place or keep one of the older guys?