CP3 is not a top 5 player nor is he the best PG in the league.

[Connor B]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.

[wally_world]

The question is who would you take over him. I don't think he's top 5, but he has a case. Main reason I don't have him there anymore is because I haven't seen him take over a game like a top 5 player would for a couple seasons now.

[kells333]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.


You think lillard is better than cp3? What does he do better? I also dont agree with rondo and aldridge but i can atleast understand the arguement.

[Kblaze8855]

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round?

Equal and better players than Chris Paul have taken more talent and lost in the first and second round with it. If you need to ask who I mean its clear you have little knowledge of history with which to make the "If ___ were ___ then he wouldn't ____" claim to begin with.

All these topics ever are....is people who have a small basketball case to make so they resort to what is basically trivia.

I don't care if you find Paul top 5 or not. I don't care about arbitrary top ____ rankings that act like multiples of 5 or 10 are significant breaks in basketball rankings. Its nothing to me.

What is something to me...is a sound basketball explanation. If you cant explain why all these people are better using between the lines ball in play basketball skills your opinion means next to nothing to me.

And it seems none of you EVER do so when making some "Chris paul isn't ____" argument. Which is very telling.

If you cant explain it...why should I take you serious?

And if you can explain it....why not do that instead of making false assumptions about what top ____ players do that ignores 70 years of top ___ players not doing it time and again?

Like Paul losing to the MVP and Westbrook in disappointing fashion matters but Kareem and Magic taking 2 additional all stars and a DPOY to a second round loss to the MVP and Calvin Murphy...on a 40 win team at that...doesn't.

Chris Paul might not be top 5. He might not be top 10. Whatever.

The way you and others go about explaining it is ridiculous.

[navy]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.

Why is it people want serious discussion but then go full retard in their post?

Honestly we could have a perfect discussion about CP3's placement but not if you arent going to discuss or debate honestly. There is no point now.

[navy]

Equal and better players than Chris Paul have taken more talent and lost in the first and second round with it. If you need to ask who I mean its clear you have little knowledge of history with which to make the "If ___ were ___ then he wouldn't ____" claim to begin with.

All these topics ever are....is people who have a small basketball case to make so they resort to what is basically trivia.

I don't care if you find Paul top 5 or not. I don't care about arbitrary top ____ rankings that act like multiples of 5 or 10 are significant breaks in basketball rankings. Its nothing to me.

What is something to me...is a sound basketball explanation. If you cant explain why all these people are better using between the lines ball in play basketball skills your opinion means next to nothing to me.

And it seems none of you EVER do so when making some "Chris paul isn't ____" argument. Which is very telling.

If you cant explain it...why should I take you serious?

And if you can explain it....why not do that instead of making false assumptions about what top ____ players do that ignores 70 years of top ___ players not doing it time and again?

Like Paul losing to the MVP and Westbrook in disappointing fashion matters but Kareem and Magic taking 2 additional all stars and a DPOY to a second round loss to the MVP and Calvin Murphy...on a 40 win team at that...doesn't.

Chris Paul might not be top 5. He might not be top 10. Whatever.

The way you and others go about explaining it is ridiculous.
Kblaze ending a thread as usual.

[ninephive]

Why is it people want serious discussion but then go full retard in their post?

Honestly we could have a perfect discussion about CP3's placement but not if you arent going to discuss or debate honestly. There is no point now.
I don't think his claim is ridiculous at all. And of your bolded names, I take everyone except Rondo and Lilliard over him at this point.

[Young X]

Because he's one of the few players left that can efficiently run an offense, can score 20 and give you elite playmaking at the same time, can rebound better than most SG's, and can play solid defense in the reg season and the playoffs.

YES he did **** up in that game and cost his team (wouldn't have mattered if the refereeing wasn't horrible) and deserves alot of criticism for it but that's still only one game. It's not like players greater than Paul haven't ****ed up in a similar fashion.

In terms of his lack of deep playoff runs, when has he lost to a team weaker than his?

The media thinks an 19/11/4 player who leads the league in assists and steals on one of the leagues best teams is a top 5 player, nothing ridiculous about that.

And why would you take Curry, Lillard, Aldridge, Rondo and Love above him when none of them got further in the playoffs last season? Doesn't make any sense. You're saying Paul is overrated because he didn't get far in the playoffs yet rank players who made it less further? lol

[bdreason]

CP3 is the total package. Great perimeter defender. Controls the tempo of the game. Fantastic shooter. Amazing passer. Ferocious competitor.


In a league stacked with talented PG's, CP3 is clearly the best at the position.

[HOoopCityJones]

Thirty seconds, final game of their series this year with OKC.

CP3 proved why he isn't the best PG in the game.

30 seconds , thats all it took.

[CelticBalla32]

Equal and better players than Chris Paul have taken more talent and lost in the first and second round with it. If you need to ask who I mean its clear you have little knowledge of history with which to make the "If ___ were ___ then he wouldn't ____" claim to begin with.

All these topics ever are....is people who have a small basketball case to make so they resort to what is basically trivia.

I don't care if you find Paul top 5 or not. I don't care about arbitrary top ____ rankings that act like multiples of 5 or 10 are significant breaks in basketball rankings. Its nothing to me.

What is something to me...is a sound basketball explanation. If you cant explain why all these people are better using between the lines ball in play basketball skills your opinion means next to nothing to me.

And it seems none of you EVER do so when making some "Chris paul isn't ____" argument. Which is very telling.

If you cant explain it...why should I take you serious?

And if you can explain it....why not do that instead of making false assumptions about what top ____ players do that ignores 70 years of top ___ players not doing it time and again?

Like Paul losing to the MVP and Westbrook in disappointing fashion matters but Kareem and Magic taking 2 additional all stars and a DPOY to a second round loss to the MVP and Calvin Murphy...on a 40 win team at that...doesn't.

Chris Paul might not be top 5. He might not be top 10. Whatever.

The way you and others go about explaining it is ridiculous.

Well said about the "top 5" and "top 10" rankings nonsense. I agree with you 100% - people always focus on that, and it is the most irrelevant thing ever lol.

I personally believe CP3 is the best and most complete point guard in the NBA. Most point guards don't make a two-way impact like Paul, he is an absolute defensive pest and playmaker.

I think he overdribbles a lot, but it's because he's so good at creating. Nobody matches his prowess of a combination scorer/table setter. He runs an offense as well as anyone, creates for others as well as anyone, is an All-Defense 1st Teamer and is clearly one of the best scoring point guards in the league along with that. He's not a "great" 3-point shooter but he is a threat, and his mid-range/pull-up game makes him the most lethal pick n' roll point guard in the league. Everyone says this - "the pick n' roll game is the bread and butter of the NBA." CP is the most complete pick n' roll orchestrator out there.

He possesses big time leadership qualities, which at his level, you're either born with or not. I would summarize my thoughts like this:

I think there are better scorers than CP3 at the point guard position (such as Curry). I think there are equally skilled playmakers/table setters (such as Rondo). I think there are equal/better defensive point guards than CP3 (such as Beverly). There are equally impressive ball handlers (such as Irving). CP3 isn't the only great leader. There are people that produce equally impressive numbers.

But nobody combines all of those attributes to accumulate the same kind of impact as CP3 right now. There are some close calls, but I think CP3 is the best and most complete floor general in the game.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

CP3 is a top 3 player and easily the best PG in the league

when players like Steph, Lillard, Westbrook, Parker, Kyrie and Goran want to start taking challenges and anchoring defenses we can talk about them being in CPs level.

when Wall can shoot and not be prone to be total shit on offense we can talk about it

[Graviton]

Only one that has an argument over him is Westbrook. How you gonna take Curry, Parker, Rondo, Lilard when he is better than them in more than 2 categories.

His only weakness is over-dribbling and passive attitude at times. On paper he is definitely Top 5 player, and I say this as one of the biggest CP3 bashers on the forum. :oldlol:

[Mass Debator]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

:facepalm

No other point is a leader like CP3 is on both sides of the ball and still produce like a top 3-5 player year in and year out. He's the best 1 in the league!

[qrich]

#1 in assists per game with 10.7, 1.9 ahead of second place John Wall.
#1 in assists per turnover with 4.57. Pablo Prigoni is the second point guard with 3.80.
#1 in steals per game with 2.48, .16 ahead of second place Rubio.
#9 in steals per turnover (#1 among points) with 1.09. Livingston is #19/#2 among points with 0.89.
#2 in steals per foul (#1 among points) with 0.98. CJ Watson is #7/#2 among points with 0.91.
#3 among points in rebounds per (tied with Curry), grabbing 4.3. Behind Lowry & Carter-Williams.
#3 among points in FG% (tied with Collison), behind Curry & Parker.
#1 among points in Points Per Shot.
#4 among points in Free Throw Attempts per game, behind Lawson, Westbrook & Thomas.
#1 among points in Double-Doubles. 10 more than second place despite 20 less games.

Should I continue?

[dubeta]

I have him at #3

1. LeBron
2. Westbrook
3. CP3

[riseagainst]

here is my top 5:

1. durant
2. Lebron
3. cp3
4. westbrook
5. blah

[SOD 21]

It is because too many people are enamored with the idea of the quintessential pass first point guard and want to ignore a player like Russell Westbrook, while not playing a traditional point guard role as much, is actually more dominant and a better player.

Essentially, Russell Westbrook doesn't fit the paradigm that many believe a point guard should be and it's penalized for it.

[CelticBalla32]

It is because too many people are enamored with the idea of the quintessential pass first point guard and want to ignore a player like Russell Westbrook, while not playing a traditional point guard role as much, is actually more dominant and a better player.

Essentially, Russell Westbrook doesn't fit the paradigm that many believe a point guard should be and it's penalized for it.

I'll agree when you say that Westbrook gets too much hate because of the "prototypical point guard" definition everyone is too enamored with. But he is not a better or more complete player than Paul. He's bigger, a more physically imposing specimen, a better athlete and more explosive off the dribble-drive but he is not a more skilled player. He's a better athlete and a great player, but just not as skilled overall.

You could argue that they make an equal defensive impact but CP3 is a better pick n' roll player by far, a more intelligent player, a much better table setter/floor general, a better shooter (both off the catch and off the dribble), a better leader and a better decision maker.

[CelticBalla32]

#1 in assists per game with 10.7, 1.9 ahead of second place John Wall.
#1 in assists per turnover with 4.57. Pablo Prigoni is the second point guard with 3.80.
#1 in steals per game with 2.48, .16 ahead of second place Rubio.
#9 in steals per turnover (#1 among points) with 1.09. Livingston is #19/#2 among points with 0.89.
#2 in steals per foul (#1 among points) with 0.98. CJ Watson is #7/#2 among points with 0.91.
#3 among points in rebounds per (tied with Curry), grabbing 4.3. Behind Lowry & Carter-Williams.
#3 among points in FG% (tied with Collison), behind Curry & Parker.
#1 among points in Points Per Shot.
#4 among points in Free Throw Attempts per game, behind Lawson, Westbrook & Thomas.
#1 among points in Double-Doubles. 10 more than second place despite 20 less games.

Should I continue?

People are too focused on numbers with every single argument.

People need to break things down with their eyes, not mathematical equations. I think CP3 is definitely the best point guard but do you really think things like "steals per foul" determine the differential between players?

Break down their basketball attributes with what you watch on the court, not John Hollinger's beat off material.

[DaSeba5]

He's in my top 3.

LeBron
Durant
CP3

[qrich]

People are too focused on numbers with every single argument.

People need to break things down with their eyes, not mathematical equations. I think CP3 is definitely the best point guard but do you really think things like "steals per foul" determine the differential between players?

Break down their basketball attributes with what you watch on the court, not John Hollinger's beat off material.

No one is too focused on numbers, but when one player is atop nearly every list, while the other is floating in the teens or later in the majority of them, it plays a good part in determining who is superior.

[CelticBalla32]

No one is too focused on numbers, but when one player is atop nearly every list, while the other is floating in the teens or later in the majority of them, it plays a good part in determining who is superior.

It is definitely a factor and I don't want to seem like I'm clowning on you for bringing them up. Numbers are relevant my man, I just don't like when people only illustrate statistical equations to make their entire argument, that's all. Especially when if you really want to dive into the numbers, you'll find that many players' usage is different depending on their team/coach/system/etc. There are so many factors, numbers just tell you what they do on their particular team. But put the same player in a different situation, his "APG" will be different, etc.

It's not about how many points, assists, rebounds, etc. they accumulate. It's how they get them and how much of an impact on the game they actually make.

[SOD 21]

I'll agree when you say that Westbrook gets too much hate because of the "prototypical point guard" definition everyone is too enamored with. But he is not a better or more complete player than Paul. He's bigger, a more physically imposing specimen, a better athlete and more explosive off the dribble-drive but he is not a more skilled player. He's a better athlete and a great player, but just not as skilled overall.

You could argue that they make an equal defensive impact but CP3 is a better pick n' roll player by far, a more intelligent player, a much better table setter/floor general, a better shooter (both off the catch and off the dribble), a better leader and a better decision maker.

There certainly isn't much separation between Chris Paul and Russell Westbrook because they are both two of the top six or seven players in the world.

I'll say this though, Chris Paul probably plays more consistently at a high-level because he makes better decisions. But Russell Westbrook when he is dialed in and making better decisions is the better player and has a higher ceiling.

[CelticBalla32]

There certainly isn't much separation between Chris Paul and Russell Westbrook because they are both two of the top six or seven players in the world.

I'll say this though, Chris Paul probably plays more consistently at a high-level because he makes better decisions. But Russell Westbrook when he is dialed in and making better decisions is the better player and has a higher ceiling.

That's the point though. Paul is the better and more efficient player on a more consistent basis. That's what separates great players from one another. Consistency. Westbrook is absolutely incredible, but Paul gets the job done at a higher level.

[SOD 21]

That's the point though. Paul is the better and more efficient player on a more consistent basis. That's what separates great players from one another. Consistency. Westbrook is absolutely incredible, but Paul gets the job done at a higher level.

If the argument was strictly who the better player was between Russell Westbrook and Chris Paul over the last couple of years, then I would certainly agree with you.

However Russell Westbrook is just entering his prime and should continue to improve, and with his athletic ability his ceiling is higher than Chris Paul, IMO. It was fun watching the two of them go at it during the conference semifinals last year; which honestly, they played each other to a virtual draw. I would give a slight edge to Russell Westbrook because of several plays that he made at crucial moment so that series that help turn the tide.

Both were great in that series though, with Russell Westbrook averaging 28 points, 6 rebounds, nine assists and 49% from the field. Meanwhile, Chris Paul was equally impressive by averaging 23 points, four rebounds, 12 assists and 51% for the field.

Really, you can't go wrong with either one.

[BigMacAttack]

I think he is the best PG in the league, easily the best at running and offense and one of the most well rounded players in the league. He just doesnt seem to have that ability to go to the next level and take over games like a Durant, Lebron, Westbrook, Curry etc but his consistent level of play is so high. He is a bit hotheaded though, players can get under his skin and force the occassional brain explosion.

[iamgine]

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round?

No because OKC has a player that is ranked higher than him.

If Durant is ranked higher than CP3, wouldn't it be normal for his team to win?

Hows that for rational.

[CelticBalla32]

If the argument was strictly who the better player was between Russell Westbrook and Chris Paul over the last couple of years, then I would certainly agree with you.

However Russell Westbrook is just entering his prime and should continue to improve, and with his athletic ability his ceiling is higher than Chris Paul, IMO. It was fun watching the two of them go at it during the conference semifinals last year; which honestly, they played each other to a virtual draw. I would give a slight edge to Russell Westbrook because of several plays that he made at crucial moment so that series that help turn the tide.

Both were great in that series though, with Russell Westbrook averaging 28 points, 6 rebounds, nine assists and 49% from the field. Meanwhile, Chris Paul was equally impressive by averaging 23 points, four rebounds, 12 assists and 51% for the field.

Really, you can't go wrong with either one.

You can't go wrong, Paul is better but Westbrook would fit better with certain responsibilities. You can't ask Westbrook to do what Paul does as a floor general, but I think you could ask Paul to be more aggressive as a scorer and be just as lethal as Westbrook. He doesn't have that mentality, but he absolutely has the ability. Westbrook doesn't have the ability to do some of the things that CP does.

However, I don't think it's fair to incorporate your personal future projections into this discussion. By that logic, you could say "Andrew Wiggins has a higher ceiling than Chandler Parsons." But that doesn't really matter until he actually reaches a superior level on the court. Westbrook is close, but he's not quite there right now.

But you're right, I don't think we've seen the best of Westbrook yet. He's an animal.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Top 5 Player:

2008
2009
2012
2013
2014

[ralph_i_el]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.

your only argument is he hasn't got past the second round, and ONE bad series of plays...then you list a bunch of dudes who haven't got past the second round....

[knicksman]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.

maybe because if you have knowledge about this game, you would realize that score first pgs are cancerous like iverson, marbury, robertson while pass first are impactful like nash, stockton, magic, isiah. So if you really think that westbrook, who made his team from the number 1 in the league to almost losing the 2nd seed to pauls clippers when he came back, is better than paul. Then you clearly dont understand this game.

[knicksman]

It is because too many people are enamored with the idea of the quintessential pass first point guard and want to ignore a player like Russell Westbrook, while not playing a traditional point guard role as much, is actually more dominant and a better player.

Essentially, Russell Westbrook doesn't fit the paradigm that many believe a point guard should be and it's penalized for it.

:oldlol: maybe if history didnt prove that score first cant win and worse is that they are considered cancers by teammates, then maybe i would love to have westbrook/iverson/marbury on my team. But they are cancers. Westbrook made his team from number 1 to almost losing the 2nd seed. Iverson didnt have more than 50+ win throughout his career. So maybe its the reason. Were just not stupid like you brah. Thats why im not a fan of bran coz his impact is nowhere near his stats says.

[wakencdukest]

Because he's one of the few players left that can efficiently run an offense, can score 20 and give you elite playmaking at the same time, can rebound better than most SG's, and can play solid defense in the reg season and the playoffs.

YES he did **** up in that game and cost his team (wouldn't have mattered if the refereeing wasn't horrible) and deserves alot of criticism for it but that's still only one game. It's not like players greater than Paul haven't ****ed up in a similar fashion.

In terms of his lack of deep playoff runs, when has he lost to a team weaker than his?

The media thinks an 19/11/4 player who leads the league in assists and steals on one of the leagues best teams is a top 5 player, nothing ridiculous about that.

And why would you take Curry, Lillard, Aldridge, Rondo and Love above him when none of them got further in the playoffs last season? Doesn't make any sense. You're saying Paul is overrated because he didn't get far in the playoffs yet rank players who made it less further? lol



That's a pretty good argument. Paul runs the point better than any of them. He might not be in Westbrooks class as an athlete, or be in Curry's class as a shooter, but he definitely makes better decisions with the ball and doesn't take a lot of bad shots. His all around game is better than any guard listed.

[tpols]

Equal and better players than Chris Paul have taken more talent and lost in the first and second round with it. If you need to ask who I mean its clear you have little knowledge of history with which to make the "If ___ were ___ then he wouldn't ____" claim to begin with.

All these topics ever are....is people who have a small basketball case to make so they resort to what is basically trivia.

I don't care if you find Paul top 5 or not. I don't care about arbitrary top ____ rankings that act like multiples of 5 or 10 are significant breaks in basketball rankings. Its nothing to me.

What is something to me...is a sound basketball explanation. If you cant explain why all these people are better using between the lines ball in play basketball skills your opinion means next to nothing to me.

And it seems none of you EVER do so when making some "Chris paul isn't ____" argument. Which is very telling.

If you cant explain it...why should I take you serious?

And if you can explain it....why not do that instead of making false assumptions about what top ____ players do that ignores 70 years of top ___ players not doing it time and again?

Like Paul losing to the MVP and Westbrook in disappointing fashion matters but Kareem and Magic taking 2 additional all stars and a DPOY to a second round loss to the MVP and Calvin Murphy...on a 40 win team at that...doesn't.

Chris Paul might not be top 5. He might not be top 10. Whatever.

The way you and others go about explaining it is ridiculous.

What do you want him to say? His skills are top 5 but his performances are not.. he chokes all the time. The skills argument flies out the window when they arent being used for winning.. Joe Johnson might be one of the most skilled players in the league.. way more skilled than, say, westbrook is, but he never performs on his level.

[knicksman]

What do you want him to say? His skills are top 5 but his performances are not.. he chokes all the time. The skills argument flies out the window when they arent being used for winning.. Joe Johnson might be one of the most skilled players in the league.. way more skilled than, say, westbrook is, but he never performs on his level.

why are people expecting too much from pgs anyway? esp for a pg that has been a damaged good. Pgs hasnt won in this league since isiah. And compare cp3 to other pgs.

westbrook-has durant and made his team worse
parker-has pop
rondo-big3 and in the east
rose-his team won the same with him missing almost half the season
curry-he just beat them last playoffs.

[tpols]

why are people expecting too much from pgs anyway? esp for a pg that has been a damaged good. Pgs hasnt won in this league since isiah. And compare cp3 to other pgs.

westbrook-has durant and made his team worse
parker-has pop
rondo-big3 and in the east
rose-his team won the same with him missing almost half the season
curry-he just beat them last playoffs.

eh.. PG's can still win it as the best. Chris Paul has an amazing supporting cast and coaching around him.. the clippers should have won against the thunder in the playoffs this year. Paul choked like no other.. if his name was Lebron that series wouldve been 2011. He threw it away. Theres really no excuse.. His stats are top 5 PG of all time worthy and you have guys who stan him on his efficiency and orating and per etc but he doesnt bring it when it counts. Who knows tho, maybe hell pull a 2011 dirk one year

[masonanddixon]

He's the most skilled offensive PG I have seen since Nash but his style of play doesn't make anyone better and he doesn't have the ability to take over games.

Thats why he's overrated and will never lead a team to a championship.

[Young X]

To everybody saying "hell never lead a team to a championship". How many players in their current forms are good enough to do that then? If you can't name more than 5 players how is he overrated?

[CelticBalla32]

maybe because if you have knowledge about this game, you would realize that score first pgs are cancerous like iverson, marbury, robertson while pass first are impactful like nash, stockton, magic, isiah. So if you really think that westbrook, who made his team from the number 1 in the league to almost losing the 2nd seed to pauls clippers when he came back, is better than paul. Then you clearly dont understand this game.

Oscar Robertson is cancerous :facepalm

:biggums:

You don't understand the game either, big fella lol

[oarabbus]

maybe because if you have knowledge about this game, you would realize that score first pgs are cancerous like iverson, marbury, robertson while pass first are impactful like nash, stockton, magic, isiah. So if you really think that westbrook, who made his team from the number 1 in the league to almost losing the 2nd seed to pauls clippers when he came back, is better than paul. Then you clearly dont understand this game.


Robertson? Oscar Robertson? The guy who averaged a triple double over his entire career, is cancerous. :biggums:

Bro, are you:
-Off your meds
-Mentally challenged
-Just stupid

:confusedshrug:

[MastaKilla]

Equal and better players than Chris Paul have taken more talent and lost in the first and second round with it. If you need to ask who I mean its clear you have little knowledge of history with which to make the "If ___ were ___ then he wouldn't ____" claim to begin with.

All these topics ever are....is people who have a small basketball case to make so they resort to what is basically trivia.

I don't care if you find Paul top 5 or not. I don't care about arbitrary top ____ rankings that act like multiples of 5 or 10 are significant breaks in basketball rankings. Its nothing to me.

What is something to me...is a sound basketball explanation. If you cant explain why all these people are better using between the lines ball in play basketball skills your opinion means next to nothing to me.

And it seems none of you EVER do so when making some "Chris paul isn't ____" argument. Which is very telling.

If you cant explain it...why should I take you serious?

And if you can explain it....why not do that instead of making false assumptions about what top ____ players do that ignores 70 years of top ___ players not doing it time and again?

Like Paul losing to the MVP and Westbrook in disappointing fashion matters but Kareem and Magic taking 2 additional all stars and a DPOY to a second round loss to the MVP and Calvin Murphy...on a 40 win team at that...doesn't.

Chris Paul might not be top 5. He might not be top 10. Whatever.

The way you and others go about explaining it is ridiculous.

If we look deep into league history we see a telling story of highly skilled players who are considered to be ranked in the top ___ of the league because they haven't accomplished ___ or ___.

Just because a player doesn't ___ with ___ when he has ___ does that really mean he's not __ in the league?

I mean if a person doesn't know the origin of that trivial tidbit of basketball assumption that it's clear he or she has absolutly no knowledge on the history of the game. "You have to ___ before you can ___" as they say..

Break down his shooting form, his ability to dribble without looking, his footwork, the way he keeps his dribble low in traffic,,etc etc if somebody wants to judge a player and rank them among their peers in the league

who cares about playoff wins, rings, coming up big when it matters, Magic Johnson & Shaq have both lost in the 2nd round with good teams, what makes them different than Paul? Because they have won multiple rings and FMVPS? pshh, can Shaq dribble without looking down? Have you seen how unskilled Magics jumpshot looked?

i'm so damn tired of player ___ having to do ___ to be considered ___

please people, learn the history of the ___

[BrownEye007]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.
Unless your factoring in age you'd be making a big mistake in taking any of the bold over Paul. And taking Rondo over Paul would be a terrible choice even if you do factor in age.

[masonanddixon]

To everybody saying "hell never lead a team to a championship". How many players in their current forms are good enough to do that then? If you can't name more than 5 players how is he overrated?
'This is very true. If he were listed along with those guys I wouldnt mind. What pissed me off the most was how ESPN ranked him #4, above Dirk, after the 10-11 playoffs. I'll never recover from that insult.

[BoutPractice]

It's difficult to explain why CP3 is the best PG in the league... he just sort of is, you can tell by watching him he's in the different class than the others.

It's the way he controls the game, the basketball IQ, the leadership, the total package of skills used in complete mastery, the equal threat as a passer and scorer, and yes, the ability to take over down the stretch (just because he "choked" this one time doesn't mean he isn't one of the best closers in the game).

Parker is THE scoring maestro at the PG position (it's not as fancy as Steph or Kyrie but he's seemingly able to score at will) though not quite the playmaker Paul is... although the system doesn't work the same way, it's telling about both the Spurs and Parker that he is not the best passer on his own team (Diaw, Ginobili). Rondo and Rubio are maestros at setting up the offense, but aren't real scoring threats. Russell Westbrook has an intimidating presence on the game and fills up the stat sheet, but he's less in control of his own talents and abilities, making him a lot more mistake prone.

Only Paul has the whole package.

[knicksman]

eh.. PG's can still win it as the best. Chris Paul has an amazing supporting cast and coaching around him.. the clippers should have won against the thunder in the playoffs this year. Paul choked like no other.. if his name was Lebron that series wouldve been 2011. He threw it away. Theres really no excuse.. His stats are top 5 PG of all time worthy and you have guys who stan him on his efficiency and orating and per etc but he doesnt bring it when it counts. Who knows tho, maybe hell pull a 2011 dirk one year

Yup but considering that the last time it won was during isiah then maybe we should really consider lowering the expectations. 2nd, ever since the injury, cp3 hardly give it all during playoffs. But its not his role to take over. As a pg, his role is to pass and hes still the best at it. And besides that thunder series was blatantly rigged.

[knicksman]

Oscar Robertson is cancerous :facepalm

:biggums:

You don't understand the game either, big fella lol

I guess the article of him being called a cancer by his teammates isnt true:rolleyes:

[ralph_i_el]

He's the most skilled offensive PG I have seen since Nash but his style of play doesn't make anyone better and he doesn't have the ability to take over games.

Thats why he's overrated and will never lead a team to a championship.
:facepalm CP3 has shown his take-over gear so many times its not funny.

[ralph_i_el]

eh.. PG's can still win it as the best. Chris Paul has an amazing supporting cast and coaching around him.. the clippers should have won against the thunder in the playoffs this year. Paul choked like no other.. if his name was Lebron that series wouldve been 2011. He threw it away. Theres really no excuse.. His stats are top 5 PG of all time worthy and you have guys who stan him on his efficiency and orating and per etc but he doesnt bring it when it counts. Who knows tho, maybe hell pull a 2011 dirk one year
I hate this argument. If the clippers had won everyone would have said Durant choked. One bad series of plays and all the sudden you're a choker :facepalm

I don't believe anyone who has watched 10 cp3 games wouldn't take him over every pg in the league. Nobody can stop his dribble. He's the best pull up elbow shooter in the league. Insane court vision and D.

If he wins a chip next year he's still the same player. I don't get how you can throw out an entire body of work for a player because of resume....especially when the people you put ahead of him have worse resumes :facepalm