Don Nelson’s belief helped break through the doubts around Steph Curry’s draft outlook

Stephen Curry did not arrive in the NBA as an unquestioned prospect. According to a report published by Yahoo Sports, multiple teams passed on him in the draft, with the concerns framed around his size, his ability to run an offense, and even the durability of his ankles. In that telling, Curry’s situation was not merely about potential. It was about whether his game would translate quickly enough to justify a roster spot, and whether the physical risk was worth the investment.

At the center of the turnaround, in that same account, is Don Nelson, the longtime Golden State Warriors executive known for valuing skill, creativity, and fit over conventional “measuring stick” arguments. The story is not that Nelson found a cure for all skepticism in Curry’s profile. It is that Nelson’s evaluation process allegedly led him to take Curry’s case seriously when other teams either did not or could not justify the gamble.

The reported moment of recognition ties directly to a college event that gave Curry a stage to be seen in motion rather than on paper. Yahoo Sports notes that Curry “caught Nelson’s attention” during the 2009 NIT at Saint Mary’s College. The NIT matters in recruiting and scouting terms because it places prospects in higher-leverage games and against unfamiliar scouting profiles, compressing the time window in which an evaluator has to decide whether what they see is sustainable against stronger, tournament-level opposition.

The contrast between doubt and attention is the engine of this narrative. Curry, as the report frames it, was questioned for what he was not: not big enough, not proven enough as a playmaking engine, and not reliable enough given the ankle concerns. Yet Nelson’s reported response appears to have been to look past the immediate labels and focus on whether the basketball traits were real, repeatable, and usable in a pro system.

Even for fans who know the ending of Curry’s career arc, the point of returning to this story is how much draft decisions can hinge on a small set of competing interpretations. The same prospect who is seen as a “risky fit” can be seen by another decision-maker as an opportunity to manufacture an advantage. In this case, the report suggests Nelson’s judgment aligned with Curry’s offensive potential and the idea that a smaller, more skill-driven style could still function at the NBA level.

There is also a subtler takeaway for how franchises evaluate. Nelson’s approach, as implied by the account, was not limited to a single game or single skill, but it began with being willing to update the evaluation after a meaningful performance window. For Warriors observers, that is the kind of executive behavior that can separate “we’re not sure” from “we’re going to get him,” especially when the market has already indicated hesitation by letting other teams pass.

What to watch next, if this story continues to be discussed publicly, is whether more primary detail emerges about the precise nature of Nelson’s conversations and the specific elements of Curry’s NIT showing that mattered most. For now, the verifiable parts of the account emphasize three things: multiple teams passed on Curry amid size, playmaking, and ankle concerns; Nelson was reportedly persuaded by Curry’s NIT performance at Saint Mary’s; and Nelson’s support helped set the course for Curry’s path to the Warriors organization.