Steve Kerr: Stephen Curry's Impact on Opposing D's Greater Than Michael Jordan's

Golden State Warriors coach Steve Kerr said Wednesday that Stephen Curry is more impactful on defenses than Michael Jordan. 

"Even Michael Jordan—people had the Jordan rules—but nothing has ever been as dramatic as what I've seen from opponents' defensive schemes as how they have to deal with Steph," Kerr told Tim Kawakami on the TK Show (h/t Drew Shiller of CSN Bay Area).

Kerr also reiterated his stance that everything the Warriors do offensively is based around Curry's ability to draw defensive attention. 

"Everything we do is based on Steph," Kerr said. "From the very beginning of this run, Steph was the guy who started it ... I feel like our foundation is built around not only his talent, but his character, his selflessness, his joy, his work ethic.

"Literally our offensive system is built around the chaos that he creates for defenses. I've never seen a player who elicited so much of a defensive schematic response because of his ability to shoot from 30 feet and dribble around everybody."

Curry's willingness to take a back seat to Kevin Durant, particularly in the NBA Finals, was a testament to his character. He'd just won back-to-back MVPs, led the Warriors to the 2015 title and was a game away from going back to back. Some players would have let their ego get in the way, but Curry willingly ceded shots and some limelight to get another ring.

As for whether Curry is more impactful than Jordan, that's one of those past-era debates bound to give you a headache. Kerr is probably more qualified than anyone to talk about the situation, having played with Jordan and coached Curry.

But the era in which Jordan and Curry play are completely different. MJ without hand-check rules would be an absolute menace for opposing defense. That said, he also played during a time when today's hybrid defenses were illegal and three-point shots were still seen as more of a gimmick. It's impossible to imagine how Jordan would alter a modern defense because he never played a modern game.

Same goes for Curry. He's a perfect fit for his era but probably would have faced some stylistic resistance from coaches in the '80s and '90s. 

In a nutshell: Both were super-impactful. It's probably best to allow each to have his own era.