I get Dray your not that type of guy . Props man .

But I fucking am .

• The Warriors' net points per 100 possessions with Stephen Curry on vs. off the floor is 17 points, which is ridiculous. The Warriors' net rating with Draymond Green on vs. off is 16.9.

• Green is a power forward that can shoot from range, rebound over bigger players, drive to the rim, pass to the corner, pass to cutters, screens effectively, defend any player one-on-one, get the rebound, run the break, find the open man, get the offensive rebound and get the put-back. And he can do all this on consecutive possessions without breaking a sweat.

• Green is the emotional engine of the Warriors, who provides the braggartly balance to offset Stephen Curry's endless humility and Andrew Bogut's hyper-realist approach. He is the one who screams on huge plays, who pumps his fists and gets the team engaged. Andre Iguodala is the Warriors' safety net, often tasked with getting the defense under control when it starts to slip, but Green is the one that ensures the emotional energy is high and focused.

• For all his trash talk, beefing, physical play, and outright bullishness, Green has not been involved in an off-court incident. He carries Dennis Rodman's hyper-utility in individual areas with locksmith-like versatility, and yet never provides a distraction, outside of mouthing off about Doc Rivers or whoever has gotten into his sights.

• The Warriors' system likely works without Green. They have enough players who are smart and with talent and good with spacing. They also have, of course, Curry. Golden State would still be wildly successful if you remove Green from the equation. However, it is impossible for you to say that the Warriors would be undefeated without Green. They would not be this good, this unstoppable, without Draymond Green.

• Try and conceive of how many players you can replace Green with and get the same combination of skills, effort, energy and intelligence. Blake Griffin? Not a good enough defender. Kawhi Leonard? Yeah, he doesn't exactly ignite a team with his incredible charisma (though Leonard is very, very close on the basketball stuff.) Anthony Davis? Not a good enough defender or passer, and not as quick. LeBron James? Could never operate with Green's reserved usage, able to fully complement players without needing the ball, though James is honestly the best comparison. LaMarcus Aldridge? Not even remotely as versatile. Paul Millsap? That's probably the closest, but amazingly, not as good of a shooter. These players can all be considered "better" than Green, but would they do what he does, for a team that is obliterating the league in every capacity? Are the Warriors really better if you replace Draymond Green with any one of these guys? They'd certainly be better in areas, but as well balanced?

And if we consider all that, and if we believe that the All-Star Game, after the fans have picked the big names they love, is about recognizing players having great seasons, the game's best, I must ask: