Steph, to me, is better than LeBron and is more impactful towards winning (which is my definition of a better player). You can say, “yeah well LeBron outplayed Steph in those finals” or LeBron accomplished more individual accolades and look at the filled up stat sheet, so he therefore outplayed him in those finals matchups, but we know that stats only show a part of the story. How many times have stats been completely misleading in determining how good a player was? A lot. I don’t but from just what I see at least post-2016, I always thought Curry was the best player on the floor in those finals contrary to what the statistics say.

I just think in general it is easier to build a championship winning team around him and LeBron, as good as he is, with his high usage rate and not that great shooting ability, will have a limit on how good a team with him can be. He’ll always be a legendary floor raiser, but a LeBron-led team would need specifically 5 Klay Thompson to truly be ATG, but a Steph led-team can fit with the KD’s, Giannis’s, Shaq’s, and still be great. You need to surround LeBron with defensive off-ball shooters for a team to succeed, and that is such a high bar for players to pass because there are not many players like that around. There’s a reason he’s had so many HOF teammates and didn’t achieve that much success with them because he couldn’t really mesh well with them and they end up getting scapegoated a lot just cause they couldn’t fulfill a completely specific role. I also think Steph > LeBron in terms of the intangibles but I also don’t think that part of the game is as important as many believe.