This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

There are reasons to respect old guys' opinions, especially former players such as Charles Barkley, Oscar Robertson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Walt Frazier, Ron Harper, Stephen Jackson, Cedric Ceballos, and Tracy McGrady. Some of them have a lot of rings on their fingers, as well as a lot of rings around their trunks. They've played a lot of basketball and watched it, too.

But their criticism of the Warriors in general and Steph Curry specifically, the first unanimous MVP in NBA history, is flat off-target, and the way Curry is playing, he's making them look more and more foolish. To what their comments are traceable is speculative, but the temptation is to attribute them to some kind of desperate clinging to days gone by, to a time back when basketball was played by real men the real way against real competition.

Now, in Robertson's view, coaches don't understand the game.

They understand it, all right. They understand that the game has changed. Everybody should get that. But the crusty vets can't seem to fathom or stomach that what Curry is doing — the shots he is taking and making, his moves and his handle, accomplished with such apparent ease — is authentic, and would have been difficult to contend with in any era. It just couldn't be done, everything else being equal, even with the game being played, in their estimation, tough and proper, even against the talent against which they competed.

McGrady, now an analyst for ESPN, was the latest of the oldsters to join in on the casting of stones, the casting of doubt. Regarding Steph's gaining the nods of all 131 MVP voters, he said: "For him to get this unanimously, it just tells you how watered down our league is. When you think of MJ, Shaq … I mean, those guys really played against top-notch competition. More superstars, I think on more teams, than it is in our league today. But it's well-deserved. He had a hell of a season."

Playing both sides of the fence a bit there, criticizing and complimenting in the same breath, normally would show some balance on McGrady's part. But, in this case, he is wrong about the number of star players against which Curry is doing his business in such spectacular fashion, and impressing every one of the voters. There were great players back then, and there are great players now, guys like LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard, Russell Westbrook, Kevin Durant and Chris Paul.

Barkley, who seems to have softened on some of his downplaying of Curry's accomplishments, earlier said of the MVP: "He's not a great playmaker. He's just a great shooter."

Frazier, who was correct in pointing out that for most of the time he played there was no 3-point shot and that much of Curry's success comes from a skill that had no extra value back then. Clyde added: "He's having a phenomenal season … but is he going to do this for the next five years? I don't really think so. This is what he's doing now."

Earlier this season, Robertson famously said: "[Curry's] shot well because of what's going on in basketball today. It's almost like if you can dunk or make a 3-point shot, you're the greatest thing since sliced bread. … When I played years ago, if you shot a shot outside and hit it, the next time, I'm going to be up on top of you. I'm going to pressure you with three-quarters, half-court defense. But now, they don't do that."

When Ceballos was asked in February if his Phoenix Suns team of 20-plus years ago could beat the Warriors, he answered: "Oh, easy. Warriors have to go with our team with Barkley, [Dan] Majerle, [Danny] Ainge, [Kevin Johnson], Tom Chambers. Don't get me wrong, Draymond [Green] is playing unbelievable, but he wouldn't do anything with Charles Barkley. It would be so ridiculous what that guy would get done to him."

Of the MVP, Ceballos said: "Steph Curry, unbelievable shooter, but K.J. was a point guard's nightmare because he was so strong and he loved going to the basket. That's one thing these teams don't do — they do not expose Steph and the way he plays defense."

Harper, a longtime member of the Bulls great teams, including the one that won 72 regular-season games, tweeted out earlier this season: "records are made to be broke but we would've sweep [the Warriors] for sure!!!!"

Look, anyone who has lived through, say, five decades gets tired of young fans going berserk over the achievements of the latest stars, proclaiming them automatically the best ever, forgetting how great some of the guys upon whose shoulders the success of modern athletes was built. That's understood.

But some of these graybeards have to back off. What Curry is doing is flat remarkable. Yes, the rules of the game have changed, and there were some terrific basketball players going strong, playing fantastic ball in the '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s, and beyond. I watched most of it. I remember watching all of these critics, and their teams, play. They had some advantages, too, edges Curry doesn't have, going against athletes now that are big, fast and strong.

Steph Curry is not Michael Jordan. But, in his own way, he's doing things that were far past the imagination of players in decades gone by. This season alone, he had the greatest year ever from beyond the arc, hitting 402 3-pointers. He shot better than 90 percent from the line, better than 50 percent overall and better than 40 percent from 3, averaging more than 30 points in 34 minutes played per game. He made 45 percent of his shots from outside of 25 feet, and he took 565 of them. That's shocking.

So, old guys, please stop.

You were great back then and Curry's greatness — for that matter, the Warriors' greatness — now diminishes your greatness — and your teams' greatness — not one iota.

GORDON MONSON hosts "The Big Show" with Spence Checketts weekdays from 3-7 p.m. on 97.5 FM and 1280 AM The Zone. Twitter: @GordonMonson.