Explain to me, rationally, why/how CP3 is the "best PG in the league".

[Connor B]

**I am not going to troll or respond rudely to any replies on here.

I will say that of all the (non-trolling) beliefs on this forum, I do not disagree with any of them more than I disagree with the one mentioned in the title of this thread. CP3 is talented on both sides of the floor, and he is an all-star in the league, those are facts...but I have no idea why anyone thinks he is the "best" PG in the league. He has proven time and time again that he is not at that superstar level that would take a team over the hump. If he were the best PG in the league, certainly it would have been enough to get past OKC last season (round 2), or Memphis the year before (round 1) on loaded Clippers teams. But he has never made it to the conference finals.

He is very talented on a technical level, an excellent passer, good shooter, and good on-ball defender. But those skills have never translated into any notable playoff success, and I cannot blame that on his current team (you could in NOLA), and neither should you. I would take Westbrook, Parker, Curry over him easily.

So, I'm going to sit back, read your responses, and respect what you have to say. There are enough people who believe he is the best PG to the point where I feel I am missing something.

[JohnFreeman]

CP3 is a career loser, no better than Melo

[bdreason]

Tell me who is better, and I'll tell you why you're wrong.

[navy]

.....

Name a point guard in the league today that has carried his team over the hump as the clear cut best player.

[bdreason]

Oh I see you mentioned a few;

Westbrook - CP3 is a better shooter, better passer, and more composed floor general.

Parker - CP3 is a better shooter, better passer, and better defender.

Curry - CP3 is a better passer, better floor general (A/T), and better defender.

[Legends66NBA7]

The only point guards that I can see match Chris Paul in scoring, passing, rebounding, defense, shooting, etc... Kyle Lowry and Eric Bledsoe (or is he a SG ?). Neither guy is on Paul's level though.

[navy]

Oh I see you mentioned a few;

Westbrook - CP3 is a better shooter, better passer, and more composed floor general.

Parker - CP3 is a better shooter, better passer, and better defender.

Curry - CP3 is a better passer, better floor general (A/T), and better defender.

CP3 is just straight up better than Parker at this point. I dont know why Conner included him.

Westbrook and Curry are at least debatable.

However using the OP's logic Curry has never been past the second round and lost to CP3's team so that goes out the door.

Last is Westbrook, who I believe is right up there with CP3 personally. Westbrook has someone named Kevin Durant, the MVP of the league, but yes let us all attribute the Thunder's success to him individually. (I know KD was scrubbing it up this last postseason)

If you cant see why a team would take CP3 over Westbrook then there is no point in posting the word rational in your thread title.

[fpliii]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=352536

[knickswoman]

because only idiots would chose westbrook who made his team worse and parker whos teams Finals MVP is a role player. LOL how old are you guys.

[bizil]

Oh I see you mentioned a few;

Westbrook - CP3 is a better shooter, better passer, and more composed floor general.

Parker - CP3 is a better shooter, better passer, and better defender.

Curry - CP3 is a better passer, better floor general (A/T), and better defender.

Well said! The most premium asset in bball is alpha dog level scoring EXCEPT at the PG position. At the PG, the most premium asset is dropping those dimes and being a floor general. CP3 is simply the best in this generation AND one of the top 5-7 PG's of all time in that regard. He's up there with Magic, Big O, Isiah, Stock, Kidd, and Nash in that sense. But CP3 ALSO has alpha dog level scoring abilities too and he's one of the best PG defenders as well. So he's a great passer, great scorer, and a great defender in one. Looking at pass first kind of PG's before him, only Payton and Frazier can really make that claim.

In terms of guys like Parker, Rose, and Westbrook, they are scoring minded PG's who are also great players too. But they think often times more like the great SG's such as Kobe, Wade, and Harden. Score first guys who are also great passers. Nothing wrong with that. But guys similar like an Iverson moved to the SG to play to his dominant scoring. AI would have been an icon at either guard spot, but at SG he plays to the premium asset of that position, which is SCORE THE DAMN BALL! If Chris Paul was 6'6, he would still be a point guard. If Parker, Rose, Westbrook, or Curry (who I do feel is growing leaps and bounds as a floor general) were 6'6, they would be SG's.

[masonanddixon]

.....

Name a point guard in the league today that has carried his team over the hump as the clear cut best player.

Dragic

[masonanddixon]

He's the most skilled PG but he doesn't put any pressure on the defense nor get to the line when it matters, and thats why he will never be great.

[bizil]

One reason why Paul isn't as dominant scoring through the duration of the game is because he has a beast in Blake Griffin. He also has Jamal Crawford as well too. It's not like the New Orleans days where he just had David West to take the scoring pressure off. With The Clippers, he has more talent to spread the wealth. It's kind of like Isiah during the Bad Boys once Dantley or Aguirre, Vinnie Johnson, and Dumars joined the squad. Isiah was a pass first PG who had scoring ability on par with the best scorers in the world. But he was a quarterback and HE KNEW his main job was to run the team.

It's called dictating the pace of a game and knowing when to pass and when to take over scoring. If u know bball, u SHOULD KNOW that CP3 is an alpha level scorer. But he'a TRUE PG first! Once reason why Westbrook and KD get into it is because Russ is a score first PG. I'm not saying Russ is selfish, he just see the game like an SG who's talented enough to also play PG. Two different but yet awesome PG's!

[masonanddixon]

One reason why Paul isn't as dominant scoring through the duration of the game is because he has a beast in Blake Griffin. He also has Jamal Crawford as well too. It's not like the New Orleans days where he just had David West to take the scoring pressure off. With The Clippers, he has more talent to spread the wealth. It's kind of like Isiah during the Bad Boys once Dantley or Aguirre, Vinnie Johnson, and Dumars joined the squad. Isiah was a pass first PG who had scoring ability on par with the best scorers in the world. But he was a quarterback and HE KNEW his main job was to run the team.

Yeah but in the modern NBA the most important ability by far is that of getting to the basket and getting fouled--something he doesn't do, and a reason why he and his teams always choke; and a reason why a far less skilled player like Tony Parker is far more valuable.

[bizil]

Yeah but in the modern NBA the most important ability by far is that of getting to the basket and getting fouled--something he doesn't do, and a reason why he and his teams always choke; and a reason why a far less skilled player like Tony Parker is far more valuable.

But still the most premium asset at the PG position is being a floor general and dropping dimes. U seem to be missing that point! Parker, Westbrook, and Rose came into the L as scoring minded PG's. That's WHO THEY ARE! A guy like CP3 can ALSO be a dominant scorer too, but he's a natural pass first PG. Have u watched CP3 in his career? Do u realize the numbers he has put up in his career? I have no problem with somebody thinking Westbrook is a better player that CP3. BUT CP3 is the better PG. It's like Aaron Rodgers or Elway vs. Mike Vick at his best. Vick is the best athlete ever at the QB. But the NUMBER ONE JOB of a QB is to drop dimes and make receivers happy. A guy like Aaron Rodgers or Elway is a great pocket passer first but they are also very athletic and can scramble well for yards. It's the same when comparing CP3 vs. guys like Westbrook and Parker. Two different but yet DOMINANT SKILLSETS.

[masonanddixon]

But still the most premium asset at the PG position is being a floor general and dropping dimes. U seem to be missing that point! Parker, Westbrook, and Rose came into the L as scoring minded PG's. That's WHO THEY ARE! A guy like CP3 can ALSO be a dominant scorer too, but he's a natural pass first PG. Have u watched CP3 in his career? Do u realize the numbers he has put up in his career? I have no problem with somebody thinking Westbrook is a better player that CP3. BUT CP3 is the better PG. It's like Aaron Rodgers or Elway vs. Mike Vick at his best. Vick is the best athlete ever at the QB. But the NUMBER ONE JOB of a QB is to drop dimes and make receivers happy. A guy like Aaron Rodgers or Elway is a great pocket passer first but they are also very athletic and can scramble well for yards. It's the same when comparing CP3 vs. guys like Westbrook and Parker. Two different but yet DOMINANT SKILLSETS.

If the NBA was about who is the most skilled player, then CP3 would be an all time great.

But at the end of the day it's about who puts the most pressure on the opposition and gets them into the resultant foul trouble. CP3 doesn't do this. He also sucks on defense. Thats why he always chokes away games because he leaves the game in the refs hands instead of forcing the issue like a Tony Parker.

[bizil]

If the NBA was about who is the most skilled player, then CP3 would be an all time great.

But at the end of the day it's about who puts the most pressure on the opposition and gets them into the resultant foul trouble. CP3 doesn't do this. He also sucks on defense. Thats why he always chokes away games because he leaves the game in the refs hands instead of forcing the issue like a Tony Parker.

For the record, CP3 is WELL ON HIS WAY to being an all time great. He's EASILY gonna be in the HOF when his career is over:

2005-06 NBA All-Rookie (1st)
2007-08 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2007-08 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2008-09 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2008-09 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2010-11 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2010-11 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2011-12 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2011-12 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2012-13 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2012-13 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2013-14 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2013-14 NBA All-NBA (1st)

So how does his defense SUCK when he made 1st team all defense this year! And he's on track to be a top 5 caliber GOAT PG! And once again u seem not to grasp the number one job of PG. If Paul has a beast like Blake inside to dominate, then Paul doesn't have to get to the line as much. The Clippers have a traditional big frontline at PF and C with Griffin and Jordan. And BOTH are beast finishers who are freak athletes!

It makes A LOT MORE SENSE to utilize those guys strengths and break down the D to GET THEM THE BALL! Paul still puts major pressure on D and gets to the line! In terms of FTA per game, Paul averages more FTA per game than Parker for many seasons. And even though Paul is a pass first PG, he averaged more point that Parker this past year as well as in many seasons. And Paul shoots pretty 85% to 87% every season! Get your facts straight!

[Im so nba'd out]

Not only is he not the best pg in the league.He has never been the best pg in the league parker was always better....Now westbrook is better too.If you consistently get outplayed in the playoffs by a point guard every year you will never be #1 in my rankings

[masonanddixon]

For the record, CP3 is WELL ON HIS WAY to being an all time great. He's EASILY gonna be in the HOF when his career is over:

2005-06 NBA All-Rookie (1st)
2007-08 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2007-08 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2008-09 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2008-09 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2010-11 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2010-11 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2011-12 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2011-12 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2012-13 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2012-13 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2013-14 NBA All-Defensive (1st)
2013-14 NBA All-NBA (1st)

So how does his defense SUCK when he made 1st team all defense this year! And he's on track to be a top 5 caliber GOAT PG! And once again u seem not to grasp the number one job of PG. If Paul has a beast like Blake inside to dominate, then Paul doesn't have to get to the line as much. The Clippers have a traditional big frontline at PF and C with Griffin and Jordan. And BOTH are beast finishers who are freak athletes!

It makes A LOT MORE SENSE to utilize those guys strengths and break down the D to GET THEM THE BALL! Paul still puts major pressure on D and gets to the line! In terms of FTA per game, Paul averages more FTA per game than Parker for many seasons. And even though Paul is a pass first PG, he averaged more point that Parker this past year as well as in many seasons. And Paul shoots pretty 85% to 87% every season! Get your facts straight!

All this and he has never made it out of the 2nd round, despite having the most stacked team in the NBA...so what do all the accolades matter?

[QuebecBaller]

When/if CP3 stop flopping, I'll consider him the best PG

[Pointguard]

Paul confuses me at times. Probably is the most complete PG ever. A true maestro. But if you look hard there are definitely things that have to bug you. The underdevelopment of the Clipper's frontline was weird. Blake was in retro grade until CP3 got injured. Deandre Jordan was a taller K Mart minus some intensity before CP3 arrived. That was the best frontline for a PG a couple of years ago. And perhaps the best team possible for an elite PG.

Chris was definitely outplayed by Westbrook. While less of a PG, Westbrook had more impact and would sometimes do layups without even doing a move to get to the basket. The biggest question with CP3 is does the battery run out. He usually plays two great games in a series and then his aggression falls off. His focus doesn't laser in and you wonder about his drive.

Tony Parker controls the game better than Paul. Parker also gets up for every game better than Paul does and his team offensively runs a lot better when challenged. His games steps up a bit better than Paul's game does. He's noticeably more experienced and wouldn't get suckered into running with Westbrook.

CP3 is the best all around PG for sure. But I wouldn't say he is the best for sure. I definitely know I trust Parker's and Westbrook's resiliency and consistency more. Parker will adapt better and Westbrook will keep coming at you.

[masonanddixon]

Paul confuses me at times. Probably is the most complete PG ever. A true maestro. But if you look hard there are definitely things that have to bug you. The underdevelopment of the Clipper's frontline was weird. Blake was in retro grade until CP3 got injured. Deandre Jordan was a taller K Mart minus some intensity before CP3 arrived. That was the best frontline for a PG a couple of years ago. And perhaps the best team possible for an elite PG.

Chris was definitely outplayed by Westbrook. While less of a PG, Westbrook had more impact and would sometimes do layups without even doing a move to get to the basket. The biggest question with CP3 is does the battery run out. He usually plays two great games in a series and then his aggression falls off. His focus doesn't laser in and you wonder about his drive.

Tony Parker controls the game better than Paul. Parker also gets up for every game better than Paul does and his team offensively runs a lot better when challenged. His games steps up a bit better than Paul's game does. He's noticeably more experienced and wouldn't get suckered into running with Westbrook.

CP3 is the best all around PG for sure. But I wouldn't say he is the best for sure. I definitely know I trust Parker's and Westbrook's resiliency and consistency more. Parker will adapt better and Westbrook will keep coming at you.

Thats exactly it. History has proven that teams don't win when their best player is a PG. Hell, Nash was 2x the player CP3 is and he couldn't make the Finals either.

[el gringos]

He's not. Most of this board has a junior high level understanding of "positions" and what "jobs each position is supposed to do".

Paul just fits what most people think a pg is supposed to look and act and play like.

[Nowitness]

Parker and westbrook have never even been their team's best players.

the spurs were straight up better without him last year.

curry is close, but he's a TO machine and plays no defense. hasn't made it any further than Paul.

[ralph_i_el]

If the NBA was about who is the most skilled player, then CP3 would be an all time great.

But at the end of the day it's about who puts the most pressure on the opposition and gets them into the resultant foul trouble. CP3 doesn't do this. He also sucks on defense. Thats why he always chokes away games because he leaves the game in the refs hands instead of forcing the issue like a Tony Parker.
:facepalm please stop

[ralph_i_el]

Paul confuses me at times. Probably is the most complete PG ever. A true maestro. But if you look hard there are definitely things that have to bug you. The underdevelopment of the Clipper's frontline was weird. Blake was in retro grade until CP3 got injured. Deandre Jordan was a taller K Mart minus some intensity before CP3 arrived. That was the best frontline for a PG a couple of years ago. And perhaps the best team possible for an elite PG.

Chris was definitely outplayed by Westbrook. While less of a PG, Westbrook had more impact and would sometimes do layups without even doing a move to get to the basket. The biggest question with CP3 is does the battery run out. He usually plays two great games in a series and then his aggression falls off. His focus doesn't laser in and you wonder about his drive.

Tony Parker controls the game better than Paul. Parker also gets up for every game better than Paul does and his team offensively runs a lot better when challenged. His games steps up a bit better than Paul's game does. He's noticeably more experienced and wouldn't get suckered into running with Westbrook.

CP3 is the best all around PG for sure. But I wouldn't say he is the best for sure. I definitely know I trust Parker's and Westbrook's resiliency and consistency more. Parker will adapt better and Westbrook will keep coming at you.

Parker routinely doesn't step up in the playoffs, because on the spurs he doesn't have to and they still win :facepalm

[That_Admiral]

I know this maybe blasphemy.. but can we compare CP3 to Wilt. In the case that initially Wilt was not able to win championships but he did carry his team, somewhat like what CP3 is doing now? (but in the case i felt like Blake carried the team)

[coin24]

CP3 is a career loser, no better than Melo

Just like that poster Jameer, life loser :oldlol:

[knicksman]

Thats exactly it. History has proven that teams don't win when their best player is a PG. Hell, Nash was 2x the player CP3 is and he couldn't make the Finals either.

Magic and isiah say hi. Whereas score first pgs hasnt won since the creation of this league as the best player.. LOL These low IQs

[uber]

CP3 is a career loser, no better than Melo

you forgot to mention your boy webber

[masonanddixon]

Magic and isiah say hi. Whereas score first pgs hasnt won since the creation of this league as the best player.. LOL These low IQs

Did you miss where I said the 'MODERN NBA'?

[knicksman]

Did you miss where I said the 'MODERN NBA'?

LOL history is modern now. How old are you?:oldlol:

[BlackWhiteGreen]

**I am not going to troll or respond rudely to any replies on here.

I will say that of all the (non-trolling) beliefs on this forum, I do not disagree with any of them more than I disagree with the one mentioned in the title of this thread. CP3 is talented on both sides of the floor, and he is an all-star in the league, those are facts...but I have no idea why anyone thinks he is the "best" PG in the league. He has proven time and time again that he is not at that superstar level that would take a team over the hump. If he were the best PG in the league, certainly it would have been enough to get past OKC last season (round 2), or Memphis the year before (round 1) on loaded Clippers teams. But he has never made it to the conference finals.

He is very talented on a technical level, an excellent passer, good shooter, and good on-ball defender. But those skills have never translated into any notable playoff success, and I cannot blame that on his current team (you could in NOLA), and neither should you. I would take Westbrook, Parker, Curry over him easily.

So, I'm going to sit back, read your responses, and respect what you have to say. There are enough people who believe he is the best PG to the point where I feel I am missing something.

mmmkay

[masonanddixon]

LOL history is modern now. How old are you?:oldlol:

32.

[turnaroundJ]

Magic and isiah say hi. Whereas score first pgs hasnt won since the creation of this league as the best player.. LOL These low IQs

Okay so 2 PGs in the history of the league. One was listed 6'9 and paired with another GOAT candidate and one won in the transition between the Lakers/Sixers/Celtics era and 90s Bulls era on a stacked team.

This is also because you can have bigger players that can do everything PGs can do and more - Kobe, MJ, LBJ, any all-around superstar wing in NBA history. For superstars who can will teams in the playoffs, any other position is simply superior to the point guard.

[kshutts1]

Has anyone considered that the current NBA is not set up to be a true PGs league, but rather a scoring guard's league?

And while Paul is the best pure point in the league today, he's STILL elite because he can score. It's just not his natural inclination to take 15-20+ shots a game. But when he does, he's quite efficient.

I'm pretty sure Paul has averaged more steals than turnovers for the majority of his career. Not looking it up, but it's close regardless. Add in his solid percentages, and he's one of the most efficient, well-rounded players in the game, at any position.

I personally believe Westbrook is the better player, but CP3 is the better PG.

[knicksman]

Okay so 2 PGs in the history of the league. One was listed 6'9 and paired with another GOAT candidate and one won in the transition between the Lakers/Sixers/Celtics era and 90s Bulls era on a stacked team.

This is also because you can have bigger players that can do everything PGs can do and more - Kobe, MJ, LBJ, any all-around superstar wing in NBA history. For superstars who can will teams in the playoffs, any other position is simply superior to the point guard.

kobe and mj were scorers tho. Ill give you lebron but he had better teammates than magic yet struggled to win 2. if we compare pure pgs(isiah, cp3, nash, stockton, johnson) to score first pgs(westbrook, iverson, rose, marbury) at the same height, it seems like the pure pgs impact more.

[kshutts1]

kobe and mj were scorers tho. Ill give you lebron but he had better teammates than magic yet struggled to win 2. if we compare pure pgs(isiah, cp3, nash, stockton, johnson) to score first pgs(westbrook, iverson, rose, marbury) at the same height, it seems like the pure pgs impact more.
I never considered them "pure" (aka: passing) PGs. More of a scoring guard.
Another scoring guard that was overlooked is Parker.
If we're discussing Kevin Johnson, then Tim Hardaway needs to be mentioned.

So my count is...
Pure: Magic, Stockton, Nash, CP3, Mark Jackson, Kidd, Cousy, Rondo, Price
Scoring: Westbrook, Rose, AI, Marbury, Thomas, Johnson, Hardaway, Parker, Archibald, Oscar, Frazier

I'm sure I missed some, but the bolded players are the ones generally (at least, in my estimation) considered winners, even if they didn't win a title.
An obvious caveat to this is that passing PGs are more difficult to remember, so we only remember the current (Rondo) or truly great (all others). Partially explains why a higher percentage of listed Pure PGs are considered winners than Scoring.

[knicksman]

I never considered them "pure" (aka: passing) PGs. More of a scoring guard.
Another scoring guard that was overlooked is Parker.
If we're discussing Kevin Johnson, then Tim Hardaway needs to be mentioned.

So my count is...
Pure: Magic, Stockton, Nash, CP3, Mark Jackson, Kidd, Cousy, Rondo, Price
Scoring: Westbrook, Rose, AI, Marbury, Thomas, Johnson, Hardaway, Parker, Archibald, Oscar, Frazier

I'm sure I missed some, but the bolded players are the ones generally (at least, in my estimation) considered winners, even if they didn't win a title.
An obvious caveat to this is that passing PGs are more difficult to remember, so we only remember the current (Rondo) or truly great (all others). Partially explains why a higher percentage of listed Pure PGs are considered winners than Scoring.

I guess agree to disagree with isiah, johnson. But if they can average 10+ apg, I consider them pure pgs. I dont consider AI as a winner with his 1 50+ win team throughout his career. Parker won because of pop and him and oscar werent really the best players on the team. Westbrook recently made his team worse and rose's team won the same win % despite him missing almost half the season. And if AI was a winner then jackson and price are too. Those guys had multiple 50+ win teams which is more than AI

[Optimus Prime]

He's the best regular season PG in the league. For whatever that's worth. :kobe:

[navy]

Dragic
Didnt even make the playoffs and choked in the clinching games.

How is that putting his team over the hump? I swear you are one of the dumbest people on this forum.

[navy]

Tony Parker controls the game better than Paul. Parker also gets up for every game better than Paul does and his team offensively runs a lot better when challenged. His games steps up a bit better than Paul's game does. He's noticeably more experienced and wouldn't get suckered into running with Westbrook.

.
What is this nonsense? Parker is a net negative on his team. He doesnt control the game at all.

[Encre92]

He's not. Westbrook is.

1) Westbrook
2) Paul
3) Dragic
4) Lillard
5) Curry

[navy]

He's not. Westbrook is.

1) Westbrook
2) Paul
3) Dragic
4) Lillard
5) Curry
Curry is better than Lillard, but this list is solid.

[FatComputerNerd]

Kyrie should crack back into that top 5 list this season.

In fact, I'm still not sold on either Lillard, Curry, or Dragic being better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABC0BukoeRQ

[Mr Exlax]

He's the best in a traditional PG sense. He's got a super high BBall IQ, makes the right plays most of the time, a good defender and can score. There isn't another PG that can match all that. I think Westbrook is the best player at the position, but CP3 is the best PG if that makes any sense.

[Pointguard]

Originally Posted by Pointguard

Tony Parker controls the game better than Paul. Parker also gets up for every game better than Paul does and his team offensively runs a lot better when challenged. His games steps up a bit better than Paul's game does. He's noticeably more experienced and wouldn't get suckered into running with Westbrook.



Parker routinely doesn't step up in the playoffs, because on the spurs he doesn't have to and they still win :facepalm

He won a FMVP. And his team runs a better offense than the Clippers ever did and they don't have nearly the same type of players for a great offense. Its pretty simple. Parker's teams never give up and he never had a horrible 39 seconds in his much longer playoff career than Paul had in his last series.


What is this nonsense? Parker is a net negative on his team. He doesnt control the game at all.

You don't know what control means. I don't really need to elaborate but I will to give you a chance to respond. SA can beat teams in a slow down game, a fast game, a passing game, defensively or a mix of all of the above. The primary player for all types of adaption on the court is your Point Guard. Parker is part of the winningest duo or trio ever. Why??? Because he's super consistent, adapts better than any player playing and controls the game. You only hear Pop praise point guards that can controll pace - that's why you only heard him crave one player from another team (Jason Kidd).

[bizil]

Has anyone considered that the current NBA is not set up to be a true PGs league, but rather a scoring guard's league?

And while Paul is the best pure point in the league today, he's STILL elite because he can score. It's just not his natural inclination to take 15-20+ shots a game. But when he does, he's quite efficient.

I'm pretty sure Paul has averaged more steals than turnovers for the majority of his career. Not looking it up, but it's close regardless. Add in his solid percentages, and he's one of the most efficient, well-rounded players in the game, at any position.

I personally believe Westbrook is the better player, but CP3 is the better PG.

That's my point EXACTLY! Westbrook or even a healthy Rose, Curry, and Parker for that matter are better in terms of dominating a game scoring. Plus all those guys are very good to great passers too! But their style of play to me is more similar to smaller versions of great SG's such as Kobe, Wade, and Harden. Nothing wrong with that at all!

But historically speaking, who are GENERALLY regarded as the the top 10 GOAT PG's of all time:

Magic
Big O
Isiah
Stockton
Payton
Frazier
Kidd
Cousy
Nash
Tiny

All of these guys were PASS FIRST PG'S! Some were ALSO alpha dog level scorers such as Magic, Big O, Isiah, Payton, Frazier, Nash, and Tiny. Paul is cut from THIS CLOTH of PG's. They fufill the main duties of PG's first which is dropping dimes and floor generalship. So once again if u think a player like Westbrook is better as a player than CP3, I agree. But as a PG, I prefer Paul. He makes his teammates better than Westbrook (who actually was an SG all his life UNTIL the NBA).

[bizil]

Originally Posted by Pointguard

Tony Parker controls the game better than Paul. Parker also gets up for every game better than Paul does and his team offensively runs a lot better when challenged. His games steps up a bit better than Paul's game does. He's noticeably more experienced and wouldn't get suckered into running with Westbrook.




He won a FMVP. And his team runs a better offense than the Clippers ever did and they don't have nearly the same type of players for a great offense. Its pretty simple. Parker's teams never give up and he never had a horrible 39 seconds in his much longer playoff career than Paul had in his last series.



You don't know what control means. I don't really need to elaborate but I will to give you a chance to respond. SA can beat teams in a slow down game, a fast game, a passing game, defensively or a mix of all of the above. The primary player for all types of adaption on the court is your Point Guard. Parker is part of the winningest duo or trio ever. Why??? Because he's super consistent, adapts better than any player playing and controls the game. You only hear Pop praise point guards that can controll pace - that's why you only heard him crave one player from another team (Jason Kidd).


U bring up great points! But once again in terms of the PG facets, Paul is better than Parker. While still maintaining alpha dog level scoring ability. I can agree that Parker is a better player, but I think Paul is the better PG and floor general. It also doesn't hurt for Tony to have a top 2-3 coach of all time, an epic system, and the GOAT PF as well. In terms of handles and getting to the rack, Parker is second to none. And of course Parker is smart as hell too. And I know what u mean by how he paces a game too. But i just think Paul is better dropping dimes and putting his teammates in a position to score. In terms of all the SCORE FIRST PG's, Parker is the best floor general. That's his ace in the hole in my opinion!

[bizil]

He's the best in a traditional PG sense. He's got a super high BBall IQ, makes the right plays most of the time, a good defender and can score. There isn't another PG that can match all that. I think Westbrook is the best player at the position, but CP3 is the best PG if that makes any sense.

Awesome post and that's the point I've been making on this site too! Westbrook is the premier alpha dog at the PG position and he along with Rose redefined the position with their athletic ability. And for as much heat as he catches, he's still a very good passer and easily capable of playing the PG spot. However, many great SG's could ALSO play the PG spot just as well like MJ, Kobe, Wade, T-Mac, West, Pistol Pete, Monroe, and AI. But why did all those epic legends play SG? Because they were scorers by nature first who were still great passers! At this point, that's how Westbrook sees the game too, but he plays the PG mostly.

CP3's style of PG is timeless in my book. If CP3 was 6'6, he would still be a PG. It's just the way he's sees the game and he's a natural facilitator. It Westbrook or Parker were 6'6, they would be dominant SG's who could also swing to PG. So the better player is Westbrook, but the better PG-floor general is Paul. He's a natural PG who ALSO can takeover scoring.

[HOoopCityJones]

Paul confuses me at times. Probably is the most complete PG ever. A true maestro. But if you look hard there are definitely things that have to bug you. The underdevelopment of the Clipper's frontline was weird. Blake was in retro grade until CP3 got injured. Deandre Jordan was a taller K Mart minus some intensity before CP3 arrived. That was the best frontline for a PG a couple of years ago. And perhaps the best team possible for an elite PG.

Chris was definitely outplayed by Westbrook. While less of a PG, Westbrook had more impact and would sometimes do layups without even doing a move to get to the basket. The biggest question with CP3 is does the battery run out. He usually plays two great games in a series and then his aggression falls off. His focus doesn't laser in and you wonder about his drive.

Tony Parker controls the game better than Paul. Parker also gets up for every game better than Paul does and his team offensively runs a lot better when challenged. His games steps up a bit better than Paul's game does. He's noticeably more experienced and wouldn't get suckered into running with Westbrook.

CP3 is the best all around PG for sure. But I wouldn't say he is the best for sure. I definitely know I trust Parker's and Westbrook's resiliency and consistency more. Parker will adapt better and Westbrook will keep coming at you.

Thread.

[Pointguard]

U bring up great points! But once again in terms of the PG facets, Paul is better than Parker. While still maintaining alpha dog level scoring ability. I can agree that Parker is a better player, but I think Paul is the better PG and floor general. It also doesn't hurt to have a top 2-3 coach of all time, an epic system, and the GOAT PF as well. In terms of handles and getting to the rack, Parker is second to none in terms of getting to the rack. And of course Parker is smart as hell too. And I know what u mean by how he paces a game too. But i just think Paul is better dropping dimes and putting his teammates in a position to score. In terms of all the SCORE FIRST PG's, Parker is the best floor general. That's his ace in the hole in my opinion!
I agree. Parker's main value is his control of the game. He's not a great second best player if you leave out this quality. As a floor general, Parker is way more battle tested and does control the game better. He isn't the passer or make plays for other players as clean as Paul does. Paul is more creative and creates for others better.

However, Westbrook had more control of the game flow in that series against Paul. Paul did the cardinal sin of playing wild when Westbrook wanted chaos. "The general" lost the game/series right there. As a general, the worse thing you can do is run the team into trenches where the opposition has the advantage. So I'm not giving Paul the advantage there. That's something Parker would have never done.

SA could only beat Miami through control of the game. They didn't have the talent, they had to play together and make Miami play their game. Lebron, while an all time GOAT, can't dictate pace and plays a reactionary type of game. Parker kept the Heat on him while still playing SA ball.

I have Paul as the third best pure PG in the history of the game. He and Isiah have pretty similar games. Except Isiah, had another gear in his beast mode and Isiah's desire to win was a bit more pronounced. Isiah could go in and out of scoring PG to pure PG better than anybody and nobody is even close. Isiah's handle is also among the best I ever seen. He could adapt and be among the best in a running game, half court game, play pick and role, be the best supporting player or lead player. Only Magic was similar in this regards.

[Nowitness]

spurs looked and performed better with parker out in the playoffs last year

explain that4

[SamuraiSWISH]

He's easily the best PG. He has sick handle, can shoot, can score at will when needed, court vision, can pass, doesn't turn the ball over, is clutch, great leadership, highly competitive, and most importantly is the best defender of the elite PGs in the league. He can play a transition game, or half court game. He does all this with skill, intelligence, savy, and doesn't have near the athleticism of other contemporaries at his position.

[Pointguard]

spurs looked and performed better with parker out in the playoffs last year

explain that4

Lead the team in ppg, assist and was very efficient. Possessions aren't as important as to how the game is won.

[magic chiongson]

50+ comments and still no 'weak era for PGs'? nba forum i'm disappointed

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Only Steph is arguably better on offense
and only Rubio is arguably better on defense
:confusedshrug: :confusedshrug:
hes the most complete PG by far. No one is close when u take everything into account:no: :no:

[PsychoBe]

Only Steph is arguably better on offense
and only Rubio is arguably better on defense
:confusedshrug: :confusedshrug:
hes the most complete PG by far. No one is close when u take everything into account:no: :no:

the most complete to never make it out of the second round when you take everything into account. his style just doesn't translate into the playoffs when the game slows down and he has to consistently make plays in a half-court set.

[Young X]

the most complete to never make it out of the second round when you take everything into account. his style just doesn't translate into the playoffs when the game slows down and he has to consistently make plays in a half-court set.Why did the Clippers have a top 3 offense in the playoffs then? Paul's whole style of play is half court based.

[PsychoBe]

Why did the Clippers have a top 3 offense in the playoffs then? Paul's whole style of play is half court based.

the clippers are at their best when they can get out in transition and force the tempo, which they have all the time in the world to do in the regular season. that's why teams like the grizzlies are their anti-thesis, and if they had happened to had faced them again in the first round this past year, they might have lost again.

pg's will not lead your team to the promised land anymore and cp3 is no exception to this rule.

[Young X]

the clippers are at their best when they can get out in transition and force the tempo, which they have all the time in the world to do in the regular season. that's why teams like the grizzlies are their anti-thesis, and if they had happened to had faced them again in the first round this past year, they might have lost again.

pg's will not lead your team to the promised land anymore and cp3 is no exception to this rule.LAC was 2nd in pace in the playoffs and 3rd overall on offense. Their offense was great. They lost because they couldn't keep OKC off the FT line which is a defensive problem, their offense was fine.

You say PG's won't lead a team to the promised land anymore, cool. What players playing right now in their current forms are capable of doing that then?

[PsychoBe]

LAC was 2nd in pace in the playoffs and 3rd overall on offense. Their offense was great. They lost because they couldn't keep OKC off the FT line which is a defensive problem, their offense was fine.

You say PG's won't lead a team to the promised land anymore, cool. What players playing right now in their current forms are capable of doing that then?

i still feel that watching blake griffin jack jumpers from the elbow or matt barnes force one too many three-pointer bricks in a half-court setting doesn't constitute as "fine" offense but that's a debate for a different story.

and the only transcendent players we have today are durant, bran, and melo. wade and kobe are near the twilight, haren plays no "d", big-men like dwight, blake, and bosh can't close games consistently enough, and every pg in the league currently is fool's gold.

the league nowadays feels more or less like a "system" league now with all the rule changes and emphasis on ball-movement to break down zone defenses before they can react. you take players like derozan and lowry and amir johnson and put them under the right system and suddenly you have perhaps the best raptors squad of the decade (aside from the vince era). then you have other great offensive systems such as the hawks, the spurs, the grizzlies, and etc.

but the last thing to get it done will be your pg. this entire "pg era" is fool's gold.

[Graviton]

He is the best PG "on paper" but playoff games aren't won on calculators and stat-sheets. Paul just doesn't put much pressure on defenses, he plays "in the flow" and does everything by the book. Dribbles around, finds the open man, shoots when he is open, etc. The problem with that is you let the opposing team set their defense and figure you out over the course of the series. You become predictable. In close games you have no gameplan, you don't close them out. Just watch their collapse vs OKC.

Someone like Curry and Westbrook will keep coming at you and will force you to spend your focus on them, which opens up the floor for the rest of their teammates. Regardless if they succeed or fail, they will always TRY to pressure. Paul meanwhile is content getting his 20 "efficient" points, 10 assists and deferring to scrubs like Crawford, Barnes and Reddick at the end of games. All while losing when he could be winning if he just didn't play so passive. He has the talent to take over, but he never does it consistently.

Now that's just when he plays a predictable ISO based team like OKC, when we start talking about a disciplined team like Spurs it gets even worse. San Antonio completely picked them apart in the playoffs and got a sweep. That's what Spurs do to teams that don't have any pressure. Compare how OKC played Spurs. Westbrook and Durant kept attacking them before they could set their defense, they didn't play by the book. And they ended up almost taking them to Game 7.

[Young X]

and the only transcendent players we have today are durant, bran, and melo. wade and kobe are near the twilight, haren plays no "d", big-men like dwight, blake, and bosh can't close games consistently enough, and every pg in the league currently is fool's gold.So how is Paul overrated when you can only name 3 other players capable of leading their teams to rings? And why would you list Melo when his teams have had less success than Paul's? I don't get it.

[PsychoBe]

So how is Paul overrated when you can only name 3 other players capable of leading their teams to rings? And why would you list Melo when his teams have had less success than Paul's? I don't get it.

i dont think paul is "overrated" per say, but what irks me is the fact some people claim he's the "unquestionable" best pg in the league when we have players like parker who's a fmvp, or westbrook who scored over 40 points in a finals game.

and i list melo because when he did have that one competent team in his career, he went all the way to the wcf and if he had defeated the lakers, would had most likely won the title (the magic's three-point shooting luck ran out during the finals).

[bizil]

In terms of the best PG in the L, I think Paul, Westbrook, a healthy Rose, Parker, and Curry all have a case. But of the group, Paul is the only true pass first PG. But he's also an alpha dog level scorer. Rose, Westbrook, Parker, and Curry are score first PG's who can also pass well. So as I've said before, I have no problem with somebody saying those four are better than Paul. But historically, the top 10 GOAT's ever with the exception of Kidd, Stockton, and Cousy were pass first PG's who combined alpha dog scoring perfectly of the position. This new breed of PG is revolutionizing the game and it's great to watch. But u can't underestimate the things Paul brings to the table. Or sleep on his scoring ability. Even Lebron James is actually a pass first player who's an alpha dog scorer as well. It just so happens he plays the SF and PF.

[knicksman]

I laugh at people who cant see why cp3 is the best. Theyre just exposing their knowledge of this game. Same idiots who thinks westbrook is better are same idiots who thinks iverson is a superstar.

[masonanddixon]

Didnt even make the playoffs and choked in the clinching games.

How is that putting his team over the hump? I swear you are one of the dumbest people on this forum.

His supporting cast was terrible and his 2nd best player missed most of the season, and they still won 48 games.

[masonanddixon]

He is the best PG "on paper" but playoff games aren't won on calculators and stat-sheets. Paul just doesn't put much pressure on defenses, he plays "in the flow" and does everything by the book. Dribbles around, finds the open man, shoots when he is open, etc. The problem with that is you let the opposing team set their defense and figure you out over the course of the series. You become predictable. In close games you have no gameplan, you don't close them out. Just watch their collapse vs OKC.

Someone like Curry and Westbrook will keep coming at you and will force you to spend your focus on them, which opens up the floor for the rest of their teammates. Regardless if they succeed or fail, they will always TRY to pressure. Paul meanwhile is content getting his 20 "efficient" points, 10 assists and deferring to scrubs like Crawford, Barnes and Reddick at the end of games. All while losing when he could be winning if he just didn't play so passive. He has the talent to take over, but he never does it consistently.

Now that's just when he plays a predictable ISO based team like OKC, when we start talking about a disciplined team like Spurs it gets even worse. San Antonio completely picked them apart in the playoffs and got a sweep. That's what Spurs do to teams that don't have any pressure. Compare how OKC played Spurs. Westbrook and Durant kept attacking them before they could set their defense, they didn't play by the book. And they ended up almost taking them to Game 7.

THIS. This is exactly it. You need to be able to force the refs to make a call. He doesn't do that. He's passive and thats why he never gets the benefit of the whistle down the stretch and always chokes.

[navy]

His supporting cast was terrible and his 2nd best player missed most of the season, and they still won 48 games.
And yet when he had a chance to make the playoffs he choked.

Only a fool would call the supporting cast terrible. That was a solid cast. Everyone was contributing and the Coach did an excellent job.


If we are going to hold players accountable for losing in the playoffs, then they should also be held accountable for missing the playoffs and losing the clinching games.

All of which were winnable had Dragic played like they best point guard in the NBA.

Logically of course. Choking in the second round >>>>>>> Choking in the regular season.

[navy]

Goran Dragic vs Dallas to get into the playoffs

6-18 shooting, 13 points team lost by 3.

Goran Dragic vs Memphis to get into the playoffs

6-14 shooting ,14 points team lost by 6.

Best point guard in the nba. Chokes in the regular season, not held accountable.


You were saying?

[masonanddixon]

Goran Dragic vs Dallas to get into the playoffs

6-18 shooting 13 points team lost by 3.

Goran Dragic vs Memphis to get into the playoffs

6-14 shooting 14 points team lost by 6.

Best point guard in the nba. Chokes in the regular season, not held accountable.


You were saying?

He was injured though, right?

And I thought the Memphis game was meaningless.

And Dallas was the 2nd game off a back to back

[navy]

He was injured though, right?

And I thought the Memphis game was meaningless.

And Dallas was the 2nd game off a back to back

He shot the ball 18 and 14 times and played 37-40 minutes. No excuses.

It might have been, I thought it was a meaningful, but maybe they needed to win both vs Dallas and Memphis to get in.

This is the best point guard in the nba we are talking about. Back to back? lol. :oldlol:

[PsychoBe]

dragic wasnt even the best pg on his own team :facepalm

[bizil]

I agree. Parker's main value is his control of the game. He's not a great second best player if you leave out this quality. As a floor general, Parker is way more battle tested and does control the game better. He isn't the passer or make plays for other players as clean as Paul does. Paul is more creative and creates for others better.

However, Westbrook had more control of the game flow in that series against Paul. Paul did the cardinal sin of playing wild when Westbrook wanted chaos. "The general" lost the game/series right there. As a general, the worse thing you can do is run the team into trenches where the opposition has the advantage. So I'm not giving Paul the advantage there. That's something Parker would have never done.

SA could only beat Miami through control of the game. They didn't have the talent, they had to play together and make Miami play their game. Lebron, while an all time GOAT, can't dictate pace and plays a reactionary type of game. Parker kept the Heat on him while still playing SA ball.

I have Paul as the third best pure PG in the history of the game. He and Isiah have pretty similar games. Except Isiah, had another gear in his beast mode and Isiah's desire to win was a bit more pronounced. Isiah could go in and out of scoring PG to pure PG better than anybody and nobody is even close. Isiah's handle is also among the best I ever seen. He could adapt and be among the best in a running game, half court game, play pick and role, be the best supporting player or lead player. Only Magic was similar in this regards.

I agree and well said! CP3 can dominate scoring, but he shouldn't have tried to do it like Westbrook. Westbrook can just overwhelm opponents with his athletic ability, which is a reason why freak athletes seem out of control at times. But in reality they are so explosive they really aren't a lot of the times. I think CP3 may have got caught up in that and tried to go full blast like Westbrook. CP3 just had some bad moments in that series. Plus he can't overwhelm u athletically like Rose and Westbrook.

I think a huge part of Parker's success is Pop's coaching and the way Pop wants things run. But Parker, didn't have those pace elements early on in his career. But he kept getting better and better at them as time went on. In terms of Isiah vs. Paul, I do agree Isiah has an even higher gear in terms of scoring. As u stated Isiah could be as pure a PG as Stockton BUT take over a game scoring like Iverson all in one!

[Dro]

CP3 is just straight up better than Parker at this point. I dont know why Conner included him.

Westbrook and Curry are at least debatable.

However using the OP's logic Curry has never been past the second round and lost to CP3's team so that goes out the door.

Last is Westbrook, who I believe is right up there with CP3 personally. Westbrook has someone named Kevin Durant, the MVP of the league, but yes let us all attribute the Thunder's success to him individually. (I know KD was scrubbing it up this last postseason)

If you cant see why a team would take CP3 over Westbrook then there is no point in posting the word rational in your thread title.
Be careful of the Thunder police Graviton and Russ...you know they snitch on anyone who doesn't think Westbrook>>>>>>CP3, lol.....

Of course, I agree with you.......

[Graviton]

Be careful of the Thunder police Graviton and Russ...you know they snitch on anyone who doesn't think Westbrook>>>>>>CP3, lol.....

Of course, I agree with you.......
You still so butthurt jeez. :oldlol:

[SamuraiSWISH]

CP3 is better than Westbrook. Obviously.

[Dro]

You still so butthurt jeez. :oldlol:
I was actually about to edit it because it was pretty petty......Of course I really don't care that much..I'm a Pacer fan, I'm pretty indifferent to OKC and LAC and those 2 players also. I just think Paul is a better overall player but not by much......

[ralph_i_el]

He is the best PG "on paper" but playoff games aren't won on calculators and stat-sheets. Paul just doesn't put much pressure on defenses, he plays "in the flow" and does everything by the book. Dribbles around, finds the open man, shoots when he is open, etc. The problem with that is you let the opposing team set their defense and figure you out over the course of the series. You become predictable. In close games you have no gameplan, you don't close them out. Just watch their collapse vs OKC.

Someone like Curry and Westbrook will keep coming at you and will force you to spend your focus on them, which opens up the floor for the rest of their teammates. Regardless if they succeed or fail, they will always TRY to pressure. Paul meanwhile is content getting his 20 "efficient" points, 10 assists and deferring to scrubs like Crawford, Barnes and Reddick at the end of games. All while losing when he could be winning if he just didn't play so passive. He has the talent to take over, but he never does it consistently.

Now that's just when he plays a predictable ISO based team like OKC, when we start talking about a disciplined team like Spurs it gets even worse. San Antonio completely picked them apart in the playoffs and got a sweep. That's what Spurs do to teams that don't have any pressure. Compare how OKC played Spurs. Westbrook and Durant kept attacking them before they could set their defense, they didn't play by the book. And they ended up almost taking them to Game 7.
I love Curry and Westbrook, and they're great players, but they lose you games with their recklessness.

For years CP3 has shown he can take over games. He also knows that in the long run playing good team basketball is going to produce the best results. Not everyone can win a championship every year. He's not LeBron or Durant, but idk how you can have him out of your top 5. He's an absolute wizard with the ball but he always seems under control. He has a great pull up jumper but he doesn't force it. He plays great aggressive defense. Great and creative finisher too. He has to be the most purely skilled player in the past decade.

He finally has an elite team and coaching staff, and he's had moderate success. New Orleans had some decent squads, but how high were the expectations there, really?


When did this myth start that the difference between winning and losing in the playoffs is having one player who always shoots at the end of games? Nobody inexplicably hits more clutch shots in the long run. Why would you scrap your offense at the end of games? You play like you always play in the half court to get the best shot possible.
And that doesn't even matter in this situation, because CP3 made so many clutch plays in his career when he's needed to start throwing up shots.

[coin24]

Cp3 is the best at choking away games and never making it past the second round.. He's second to bran in flopping..

Career loser and always gets a pass. The only one I'll give him is this years blatantly rigged OKC series, those asswipes should have lost in the first round also:oldlol:

[Graviton]

I love Curry and Westbrook, and they're great players, but they lose you games with their recklessness.

For years CP3 has shown he can take over games. He also knows that in the long run playing good team basketball is going to produce the best results. Not everyone can win a championship every year. He's not LeBron or Durant, but idk how you can have him out of your top 5. He's an absolute wizard with the ball but he always seems under control. He has a great pull up jumper but he doesn't force it. He plays great aggressive defense. Great and creative finisher too. He has to be the most purely skilled player in the past decade.

He finally has an elite team and coaching staff, and he's had moderate success. New Orleans had some decent squads, but how high were the expectations there, really?

And Paul loses you games with his passiveness, how exactly is that any different. Is it better to try and fail or not try at all?

Who said I don't have him in my top 5? I just would like for him to be a little more aggressive, he has the talent. I just hate seeing him defer to role players like Crawford, Barnes and Reddick.

Point is in the playoffs you need that other gear to win games on your own, Paul has it in him. I want to see that guy not the CP3 going through the motions.

[ralph_i_el]

And Paul loses you games with his passiveness, how exactly is that any different. Is it better to try and fail or not try at all?

Who said I don't have him in my top 5? I just would like for him to be a little more aggressive, he has the talent. I just hate seeing him defer to role players like Crawford, Barnes and Reddick.

Point is in the playoffs you need that other gear to win games on your own, Paul has it in him. I want to see that guy not the CP3 going through the motions.

I don't really care about this enough to look up the stats, but I believe in NO his teams consistently were tops in the league in clutch scoring efficiency. JJ reddick shooting a wide open 3 is one of the best shots you can manufacture :confusedshrug: he also plays with two other GREAT shot creators in BG and Crawford, no need to marginalize them if they're in a good position or have a favorable matchup.

Very few games are won by one man taking over down the stretch. Those games just happen to be memorable.

[tpols]

When did this myth start that the difference between winning and losing in the playoffs is having one player who always shoots at the end of games? Nobody inexplicably hits more clutch shots in the long run. Why would you scrap your offense at the end of games? You play like you always play in the half court to get the best shot possible.

This just isnt true.. a lot of teams abandon their halfcourt team offense to an extent at the end of games to allow an iso scorer a chance to take over.

Kobe's done it.. Dirk's done it.. Melo's done it.. you dont want to iso your best scorer all game long because hell tire out by the end of the first if you go to him over and over.. but if you save him for the last 5 minutes of the game or so he can give max effort and possibly close the game out.

Im not saying a PG like Chris Paul should be isoing, but the clutchest ive ever seen CP3 was in 2011 against the lakers when he just dominated individually with PnR switches and he was pretty unstoppable. Nowadays hed rather just pass the ball off than takeover..


Westbrook is way better at sparking runs and creating momentum than CP3 is.. CP3 has one moderately high level he operates at steadily.. WB can turn on a switch and overwhelm.

[Young X]

I love Curry and Westbrook, and they're great players, but they lose you games with their recklessness.

For years CP3 has shown he can take over games. He also knows that in the long run playing good team basketball is going to produce the best results. Not everyone can win a championship every year. He's not LeBron or Durant, but idk how you can have him out of your top 5. He's an absolute wizard with the ball but he always seems under control. He has a great pull up jumper but he doesn't force it. He plays great aggressive defense. Great and creative finisher too. He has to be the most purely skilled player in the past decade.

He finally has an elite team and coaching staff, and he's had moderate success. New Orleans had some decent squads, but how high were the expectations there, really?


When did this myth start that the difference between winning and losing in the playoffs is having one player who always shoots at the end of games? Nobody inexplicably hits more clutch shots in the long run. Why would you scrap your offense at the end of games? You play like you always play in the half court to get the best shot possible.
And that doesn't even matter in this situation, because CP3 made so many clutch plays in his career when he's needed to start throwing up shots.Good post.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Did someone really argue that Chris Paul "loses" the Clippers games? :facepalm

Here's what the facts say: With CP3 on the court, the Clippers are +11 in ORtg and .59+% in eFG. Off the court, the Clippers are +2 in ORtg and only .21+% in eFG. Pretty big disparity.

With Westbrook on the court, OKC has a +7.9 in ORtg and a .35% in eFG. Off the court, OKC has a +6.1 in ORtg and a .31% in eFG. In other words, the difference is negligible.

Now, I'm not saying these stats are the end all be all, but please miss me with that "Chris Paul loses the Clippers games hur durr" drivel. Probably the most idiotic thing I've seen spewed on these forums, and that's saying a lot.

[Graviton]

Did someone really argue that Chris Paul "loses" the Clippers games? :facepalm

Here's what the facts say: With CP3 on the court, the Clippers are +11 in ORtg and .59+% in eFG. Off the court, the Clippers are +2 in ORtg and only .21+% in eFG. Pretty big disparity.

With Westbrook on the court, OKC has a +7.9 in ORtg and a .35% in eFG. Off the court, OKC has a +6.1 in ORtg and a .31% in eFG. In other words, the difference is negligible.

Now, I'm not saying these stats are the end all be all, but please miss me with that "Chris Paul loses the Clippers games hur durr" drivel. Probably the most idiotic thing I've seen spewed on these forums, and that's saying a lot.


Are those his regular season numbers? Because I have this for the postseason.

2014 Playoffs:

Westbrook On Court - 110.9 ORTG (+18.9 )
Westbrook Off Court - 92.0 ORTG

Negligible difference indeed. :oldlol:

And if you wanna see Paul "losing a game" go watch last 40 seconds of Game 5 vs OKC, his offensive rating sure helped him there. Thank God they play basketball on the court and not on your calculator.

[bizil]

I love Curry and Westbrook, and they're great players, but they lose you games with their recklessness.

For years CP3 has shown he can take over games. He also knows that in the long run playing good team basketball is going to produce the best results. Not everyone can win a championship every year. He's not LeBron or Durant, but idk how you can have him out of your top 5. He's an absolute wizard with the ball but he always seems under control. He has a great pull up jumper but he doesn't force it. He plays great aggressive defense. Great and creative finisher too. He has to be the most purely skilled player in the past decade.

He finally has an elite team and coaching staff, and he's had moderate success. New Orleans had some decent squads, but how high were the expectations there, really?


When did this myth start that the difference between winning and losing in the playoffs is having one player who always shoots at the end of games? Nobody inexplicably hits more clutch shots in the long run. Why would you scrap your offense at the end of games? You play like you always play in the half court to get the best shot possible.
And that doesn't even matter in this situation, because CP3 made so many clutch plays in his career when he's needed to start throwing up shots.

Great post! Paul for sure is an alpha dog level scorer who can take over a game. But the beauty of Paul's game (like Big O, Isiah, and Magic) is the fact that they ARE pass first players. For those knocking Paul, I don't think u really understand the greatness of that. For me, Paul is the PERFECT PG! If u put Westbrook at SG full time, then his passing and floor generalship wouldn't be a much of a factor. But at PG, those two elements are the most important at that position. Once again, Westbrook and Parker see the game more in a combo guard or SG kind of sense. Not knocking that at all and for me it's a matter of taste. Westbrook is a more dominant scorer, but CP3 is a more dominant assist guy-floor general. For all intensive purposes, Westbrook is like David Thompson playing the PG but with better passing ability.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Are those his regular season numbers? Because I have this for the postseason.
Yes. The regular season. You know, where an infinitely bigger sample size occurs and games determine your postseason placement??


2014 Playoffs:

Westbrook On Court - 110.9 ORTG (+18.9 )
Westbrook Off Court - 92.0 ORTG
Chris Paul On Court - +7.1
Chris Paul Off Court - -15.7

Westbrook On Court - +2.3
Westbrook Off Court - -15.0

:confusedshrug:


And if you wanna see Paul "losing a game" go watch last 40 seconds of Game 5 vs OKC, his offensive rating sure helped him there. Thank God they play basketball on the court and not on your calculator.

Right because Westbrook has never shot the Thunder out of series. Derp.

Luckily posters with a 4th grade education can go back where I said these stats aren't to be taken at face value.

Not only does Paul beat Westbrook via "the calculator", but he also has more MVP votes in the last 2 seasons. Basically, the media agree he is more valuable to his teams success.

[BasedTom]

This overrating of Parker needs to stop.

[Warfan]

Lets not forget Westbrook shot a horrific 1-21 in OT's this past playoffs :oldlol:

[Graviton]

Yes. The regular season. You know, where an infinitely bigger sample size occurs and games determine your postseason placement?

Right because Westbrook has never shot the Thunder out of series. Derp.

Luckily posters with a 4th grade education can go back where I said these stats aren't to be taken at face value.

Not only does Paul beat Westbrook via "the calculator", but he also has more MVP votes in the last 2 seasons. Basically, the media agree he is more valuable to his teams success.

Regular season>playoffs, ok.

I gave you an example, the fact is all players make mistakes. Westbrook from 2010-2012 did do a lot of stupid shit, luckily lately he has been more focused.

Oh the media agree? That must be a big win for you, ESPN is the end all be all of basketball indeed. They also agree that Rose is more valuable to his team's success than Paul, right?

All that matters is the games played, and last time Paul played Westbrook we saw what happened. Guess that needs to repeat couple more times before people's perception changes. You can find solace in calculators and stat sheets though that's what's important.

[russwest0]

Lets not forget Westbrook shot a horrific 1-21 in OT's this past playoffs :oldlol:

yeah that was awful but thats just the regular for cp3.

russ still played some clutch ass defense and clutch 4th quarter ball. he literally SLAYED conley, paul, and parker in the playoffs.

the clippers were forced to double him every time he went to the post after like game 2 where he post raped the fukk out of them which opened OKC's whole offense up.

Russ is so underrated, it's unreal. He's the best PG in transition, at posting up, still a good passer, a great pull up shooter, a great defender, an epic rebounder, the list goes on and on...

so who gives a shit if he chooses to shoot a contested shot over a pass to perkins?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

So all objective measures < your opinion

That's basically what it comes down to :confusedshrug:

[Graviton]

So all objective measures < your opinion

That's basically what it comes down to :confusedshrug:
Westbrook had a better PER in the playoffs than Paul, he had better numbers and clutch performance in their series, he had overall better playoffs than Paul.

That's not objective? What do you want Westbrook to do? Beat Paul while averaging a triple double on 70% shooting?

[navy]

yeah that was awful but thats just the regular for cp3.


It really isnt.


I think Westbrook was better than CP3 last year, but I hate how disengonues people are when it comes to players. It's ridiculous the shit yall will cherry pick and ignore. In any case, I have no problem with someone picking CP3 over Westbrook as the gap isnt massive.

Nobody else is in the conversation besides Curry maybe.

[russwest0]

russ takes a lot of heat from the media in large part because he never once tries to counter it by building himself up.

notice players like lebron routinely say shit like "thats why I'm DPOY" and a bunch of other shit.

find me ONE clip of Westbrook ever saying shit like that lol, it doesn't happen.

Hell, here's another challenge. Find just ONE clip of any one of Westbrooks teammates or coaches EVER saying ANY bad thing about him. For all this talk about he's selfish and shit, everyone he's ever played with or for has nothing but amazing things to say about him, his character, his work ethic, his passion, his leadership, how great of a teammate he is... the list goes on...

[navy]

Russ takes a lot of Heat because he can visibly be seen chucking his team out of games while waiving off Kevin Durant.

This past playoff run was probably his best one and his fourth quarter and overtime numbers where some of the all time worst. You are gonna take Heat for chucking like that, luckily Durant wasnt much better so it was absolved abit. But Russ has always been an inconsistent playoff perforer to this point.

It's not like Westbrook is out here winning chips.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Westbrook had a better PER in the playoffs than Paul, he had better numbers and clutch performance in their series, he had overall better playoffs than Paul.

And Paul had better winshares per 48 minutes / with a far less usage rate.

But more importantly, what are you doing using "PER"? Isn't that an advanced metric conjured up by John Hollinger, a calculator number puncher?

:oldlol:

[Graviton]

And Paul had better winshares per 48 minutes / with a far less usage rate.

But what are you doing using "PER"? Isn't that an advanced metric conjured up by John Hollinger, a calculator number puncher?

:oldlol:

I am using your own logic, you love the media, I am using the tools used by the media. :confusedshrug:

And PER is the best to use, who the **** ever uses "win shares per 48". Paul sure channeled those numbers to WIN THE SERIES. :roll:

[BasedTom]

russ takes a lot of heat from the media in large part because he never once tries to counter it by building himself up.

notice players like lebron routinely say shit like "thats why I'm DPOY" and a bunch of other shit.

find me ONE clip of Westbrook ever saying shit like that lol, it doesn't happen.

Hell, here's another challenge. Find just ONE clip of any one of Westbrooks teammates or coaches EVER saying ANY bad thing about him. For all this talk about he's selfish and shit, everyone he's ever played with or for has nothing but amazing things to say about him, his character, his work ethic, his passion, his leadership, how great of a teammate he is... the list goes on...
I think the reason why the media shits on westbrook is because of his volatile unpredictable playstyle and the way he screams on the court. It's easy to paint him as the villain but when he opens his mouth and gives interviews he's more like Tim Duncan than Richard Sherman.

But the criticism isn't totally unfounded. You really do get the sense that the Westbrook to KD connection should look different than the product you see on TV. It feels more like they're taking turns rather than working together at times.

To be fair though, the blunder have very little options who can consistently get a good shot and the coach sucks ass. Westbrook has a lot of responsibility.

[JohnFreeman]

you forgot to mention your boy webber
I like Melo, it wasn't an attack

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I am using your own logic, you love the media, I am using the tools used by the media. :confusedshrug:

And PER is the best to use, who the **** ever uses "win shares per 48". Paul sure channeled those numbers to WIN THE SERIES. :roll:

You're "using" logic I provided in my first post? Okay :hammerhead:

[Graviton]

I think the reason why the media shits on westbrook is because of his volatile unpredictable playstyle and the way he screams on the court. It's easy to paint him as the villain but when he opens his mouth and gives interviews he's more like Tim Duncan than Richard Sherman.

But the criticism isn't totally unfounded. You really do get the sense that the Westbrook to KD connection should look different than the product you see on TV. It feels more like they're taking turns rather than working together at times.

To be fair though, the blunder have very little options who can consistently get a good shot and the coach sucks ass. Westbrook has a lot of responsibility.

Watching OKC's offensive "system" at the end of games is rather painful. Durant/Westbrook literally bring the ball up and try to go 1 on 1. There is no off ball body movement, no multiple screens, no plays, just some ugly streetball. That's on Brooks.

I still remember vs the Spurs I think it was Game 6, Brooks calls a timeout. His play out of the timeout was a straight pass to Durant for a contested 3 pointer. No screens, nothing. That was his plan. Give it to Durant right away and pray. Like seriously. :wtf:

[russwest0]

I think the reason why the media shits on westbrook is because of his volatile unpredictable playstyle and the way he screams on the court. It's easy to paint him as the villain but when he opens his mouth and gives interviews he's more like Tim Duncan than Richard Sherman.

But the criticism isn't totally unfounded. You really do get the sense that the Westbrook to KD connection should look different than the product you see on TV. It feels more like they're taking turns rather than working together at times.

To be fair though, the blunder have very little options who can consistently get a good shot and the coach sucks ass. Westbrook has a lot of responsibility.

Durant has led the league in total points for 5 straight years....

and we all saw just how hard scoring became for him in the playoffs once Russ went down....

blame the lack of a 2 man game and the ISO ball on Brooks. In the spurs series in 2012 the jackass pulled his head out of his ass because his job was on the line and russ and KD ran a 2 man game to fukking perfection to BURY the spurs.

aside from that all OKC runs is iso ball, and this is while starting 2 completely inept offensive players and a 3rd in Ibaka who is solely the product of what others create for him....

kd takes ill advised shots all the damn time too, but because he isn't a "point guard" and doesn't have to match these bullshit standards (which are completely relative to era and teammates) that basically no point guard matches anymore, no one cares.

[Graviton]

You're "using" logic I provided in my first post? Okay :hammerhead:
What you don't like PER? It's used by ESPN man, the same people that vote for MVP. Cmon now you looking like a real hypocrite. :hammerhead:

[JT123]

russ takes a lot of heat from the media in large part because he never once tries to counter it by building himself up.

notice players like lebron routinely say shit like "thats why I'm DPOY" and a bunch of other shit.

find me ONE clip of Westbrook ever saying shit like that lol, it doesn't happen.

Hell, here's another challenge. Find just ONE clip of any one of Westbrooks teammates or coaches EVER saying ANY bad thing about him. For all this talk about he's selfish and shit, everyone he's ever played with or for has nothing but amazing things to say about him, his character, his work ethic, his passion, his leadership, how great of a teammate he is... the list goes on...
Well Westbrook can't guard 1-5 like Lebron can. :confusedshrug:
Also, Westbrook doesn't say things like that because the media never asks him that stuff. If he was asked if he thought he was the best point guard in the league do you really think he would say no? :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What you don't like PER? It's used by ESPN man, the same people that vote for MVP. Cmon now you looking like a real hypocrite. :hammerhead:

I don't mind using PER. In fact, I welcome it.

I'm just kinda mythed you're using it. It's calculator mumbo jumbo, remember?

[russwest0]

Well Westbrook can't guard 1-5 like Lebron can. :confusedshrug:
Also, Westbrook doesn't say things like that because the media never asks him that stuff. If he was asked if he thought he was the best point guard in the league do you really think he would say no? :oldlol:

you're a dumbass, so it's not worth the response but whatever.

I've followed okc closely ever since their location here. westbrook has gotten criticized an assload from draft day to now. he's been pelted with tons of questions, many of them bullshit, and not ONCE have I ever seen the guy once resort to the completely justifiable "I take those shots because I ain't passing the fukking rock to Sefolosha or Perkins" excuse. Nor has he ever once critcized our shithead of a "coach" who basically puts the ball in westbrook and kd's hands and tells them to "go play," and "win the ballgame."

the whole KD/Westbrook media drama dynamic is total bullshit. KD has led the league in total points like 5 years in a row and has done nothing but praise and support Westbrook from day one. Hell, just from observation I can say that whenever Westbrook has a moment on the court where he is defending himself and gets pissed and fired up, KD almost always performs better as a result... It's a great dynamic really. It'd be epic if our starting center wasn't as offensively inept as a 50 year old YMCA baller and if our (former) starting shooting guard wasn't so shitty on offense that he pump faked 3 times whenever given a wide open 3 pointer. Having a dumbass coach only makes matters worse.

[Graviton]

I don't mind using PER. In fact, I welcome it.

I'm just kinda mythed you're using it. It's calculator mumbo jumbo, remember?

My main important stats aside from raw stats are PPP, TS% and eFG%, PER is like distant 4th. But it helped my case the most. :oldlol:

Anyway, I don't have issue with people seeing Paul as better. I have them as 1A/1B. I just want Westbrook to get his credit. He is basically 2011 Rose with better defense. I think on any given day Paul or Westbrook can be the best PG and outplay the other, there isn't a huge gap. The gap is between those 2 and every other PG, since only they have an impact in multiple areas.

[russwest0]

and fyi, I've seen westbrook do more "coaching" during his time in OKC than Brooks ever has.

you know that gif where westbrook punches the chair and storms into the tunnel?

dude passed the ball to sefolosha who was WIDE OPEN on the perimeter and still refused to shoot the ball and somehow fukked the play up... so in turn Westbrook tells sefolosha to "shoot the fukking ball!!!" and starts going apeshit because our dumbass coach doesn't run any designed plays for anyone other than KD which is basically just to get him open and the ball to do what he wants...

this in turn lets the players do whatever the fukk they want with zero consequences.... sefolosha and perkins both played like total ass all last season and guess whose dumbass kept trotting them out as starters?

in the Rose/Westbrook debates, for all this talk of "Rose doesn't have Durant," you also have to note that Rose has a competent coach and two competent bigs who can score inside, along with generally better 3pt shooters to support him in the past, like Dunleavey, Korver, etc...

yeah, Durant is a badass, but him just standing on the perimiter with his hands on his knees while westbrook runs a designated iso into a clogged paint (because no defender is scared of perkins or sefolosha) and has to make SOMETHING happen sucks too

[Nick Young]

Tony Parker is the best PG in the league.

CP3 can't even get to the finals and has been playing on one of the most stacked teams in the league the past few seasons.

OVERRATED LIKE NO OTHER.

He also lost by 59 at home in the playoffs TO CARMELO'S DENVER.

His New Orleans teams were pretty good too. David West, Tyson Chandler formed one of the best front courts in the league and he was surrounded by great outside shooters, still he went nowhere with them.

Plus he is constantly injured.

Stats nerds are the only ones who think CP3 is better then perennial winner Tony Parker.

[oarabbus]

Well Westbrook can't guard 1-5 like Lebron can. :confusedshrug:
Also, Westbrook doesn't say things like that because the media never asks him that stuff. If he was asked if he thought he was the best point guard in the league do you really think he would say no? :oldlol:


Lebron can guard 1-4 and get rained on by 5.

[ralph_i_el]

Tony Parker is the best PG in the league.

CP3 can't even get to the finals and has been playing on one of the most stacked teams in the league the past few seasons.

OVERRATED LIKE NO OTHER.

He also lost by 59 at home in the playoffs TO CARMELO'S DENVER.

His New Orleans teams were pretty good too. David West, Tyson Chandler formed one of the best front courts in the league and he was surrounded by great outside shooters, still he went nowhere with them.

Plus he is constantly injured.

Stats nerds are the only ones who think CP3 is better then perennial winner Tony Parker.

Why bother watching the games and forming a real opinion. It's much easier to just assume everyone who won a championship is better than anyone who hasn't. Parker really does nothing better than Paul.

[Kblaze8855]

CP3 has one moderately high level he operates at steadily..


He does not have Isiah Thomas saying he was never as good as Paul because he plays on a "moderately high level".

You dont have guys like Derrick Fisher with 18 years of nba ball saying the only guy who approaches John Stockton as far as how hard it is to play them is Chris Paul.....when a guy is on a "moderately high level".

Chris Paul is about as good at basketball as any point guard born after the 50s has ever been.

I doubt any real basketball people ever get anything but a laugh out of reading the kinds of bullshit posted in topics like this. I dont mean your post exactly since its easily more thought out than most.

But these topics are mostly:


Cp3 is the best at choking away games and never making it past the second round.. He's second to bran in flopping..

Which does nothing but make this forum look like a bunch of idiots.

Rarely does ISH look so uninformed and downright stupid as in a topic full of people using middle school logic to hate on Chris Paul in ways you wont see a single respectable basketball person do...ever.

If we could wipe out Chris Paul, Wilt Chamberlain, Kobe, and Lebron topics the rate of "This dude cant be serious...." posts would drop 90%.

[Dro]

Regular season>playoffs, ok.

I gave you an example, the fact is all players make mistakes. Westbrook from 2010-2012 did do a lot of stupid shit, luckily lately he has been more focused.

Oh the media agree? That must be a big win for you, ESPN is the end all be all of basketball indeed. They also agree that Rose is more valuable to his team's success than Paul, right?

All that matters is the games played, and last time Paul played Westbrook we saw what happened. Guess that needs to repeat couple more times before people's perception changes. You can find solace in calculators and stat sheets though that's what's important.
You know its funny that I admitted that I was being petty with that other post but it seems like basically you just don't like anyone's opinion if they don't think Westbrook>>>>>>>>>>>>All.

Dude isn't even coming at you in a disrespectful way, he's just presenting his case and using some stats to back it up in addition to what he's seem and you still have to say stuff like "ok, well your calculator", blah, blah. I mean, its obvious the only one who gets offended in this debate is you.

[Graviton]

You know its funny that I admitted that I was being petty with that other post but it seems like basically you just don't like anyone's opinion if they don't think Westbrook>>>>>>>>>>>>All.

Dude isn't even coming at you in a disrespectful way, he's just presenting his case and using some stats to back it up in addition to what he's seem and you still have to say stuff like "ok, well your calculator", blah, blah. I mean, its obvious the only one who gets offended in this debate is you.
I was being sarcastic and trolling a bit in that response, not everything I post is dead serious. :cheers:

[Nowitness]

parker had his chance to lead the spurs when duncan was at his worst and manu was injured.

result- second round sweep and a loss to the 8th seed.

yeah, hes so much better than paul. :facepalm

[Dro]

Watching OKC's offensive "system" at the end of games is rather painful. Durant/Westbrook literally bring the ball up and try to go 1 on 1. There is no off ball body movement, no multiple screens, no plays, just some ugly streetball. That's on Brooks.

I still remember vs the Spurs I think it was Game 6, Brooks calls a timeout. His play out of the timeout was a straight pass to Durant for a contested 3 pointer. No screens, nothing. That was his plan. Give it to Durant right away and pray. Like seriously. :wtf:
This is where I think your argument fails in the Westbrook>>>Paul debate. Do you think the offense would still look like that if Paul was playing for Scott Brooks? No, because Paul would be directing traffic himself, he would be telling players what to do and where to be to get the best shot. Even if they were freelancing on the court, not running any plays, Paul would still generally get guys the ball in the best position for a good shot. Thats why he's the best PG in the league IMO. He doesn't have to have a good x's and o's coach, he's the coach on the floor. He doesn't need a coach to tell him what needs to be done because he is a natural leader, he already knows what needs to be done to get the offense flowing.

Now, in your opinion, is Westbrook capable of this?

[Dro]

I was being sarcastic and trolling a bit in that response, not everything I post is dead serious. :cheers:
I mean I feel you on this, it just doesn't come across like that in your posts.....Trust me, if I knew you were just being sarcastic, I definitely wouldn't have responded to you the way I did. I've seen you post in other topics and you're obviously a good poster. I just think when Westbrook is involved, it gets a bit more personal for you. Understandable, no different than when I hear people sh*tting on Paul George saying (oh his defense is only good because he has Hibbert behind him). And then those same people will turn right around and sh*t on Hibbert:lol

[Graviton]

This is where I think your argument fails in the Westbrook>>>Paul debate. Do you think the offense would still look like that if Paul was playing for Scott Brooks? No, because Paul would be directing traffic himself, he would be telling players what to do and where to be to get the best shot. Even if they were freelancing on the court, not running any plays, Paul would still generally get guys the ball in the best position for a good shot. Thats why he's the best PG in the league IMO. He doesn't have to have a good x's and o's coach, he's the coach on the floor. He doesn't need a coach to tell him what needs to be done because he is a natural leader, he already knows what needs to be done to get the offense flowing.

Now, in your opinion, is Westbrook capable of this?


Paul will be directing offensively inept players like Perkins and Thabo? You need to watch Thunder a lot more if you want to see how bad their overall offense is. One guy isn't gonna fix that, not even Paul. Westbrook does enough to put guys in position to score, they just mess up wide open shots and layups. Perkins especially blows wide open dunks multiple times every game and costs Durant/Wetsbrook assists on his own. Thabo as well is completely useless at times and can't even hit a wide open 3.

Paul has the best frontcourt finishers in Griffin/Jordan, great outside shooter like Reddick, 6th man Crawford that can score as well. Westbrook only has Durant who doesn't need to be set up since he can create on his own. You are telling me if Paul was on OKC he will magically make people hit shots?

You are also ignoring the fact Westbrook had couple seasons of 8APG and was playing more of a traditional PG role, but Brooks himself told him to "be more aggressive" and take more of a scoring load after 2011. In every interview you hear Brooks say "We want Westrook to be aggressive and keep attacking, he is our motor, etc." Dude is doing exactly what his coach wants. :confusedshrug:

[Graviton]

I mean I feel you on this, it just doesn't come across like that in your posts.....Trust me, if I knew you were just being sarcastic, I definitely wouldn't have responded to you the way I did. I've seen you post in other topics and you're obviously a good poster. I just think when Westbrook is involved, it gets a bit more personal for you. Understandable, no different than when I hear people sh*tting on Paul George saying (oh his defense is only good because he has Hibbert behind him). And then those same people will turn right around and sh*t on Hibbert:lol

Yea I may be defensive about Westbrook, but I don't honestly think Paul is shit or anything. Ima PG guy, I like most of them, aside from that fggt Beverly of course.

Yall shoulda let Hibbert go instead of matching the max contract, now you stuck with the 0/0/0 wonder. :lol

[Dro]

Yea I may be defensive about Westbrook, but I don't honestly think Paul is shit or anything. Ima PG guy, I like most of them, aside from that fggt Beverly of course.

Yall shoulda let Hibbert go instead of matching the max contract, now you stuck with the 0/0/0 wonder. :lol
:lol

He better bring it next year.....

[Pointguard]

He does not have Isiah Thomas saying he was never as good as Paul because he plays on a "moderately high level".

You dont have guys like Derrick Fisher with 18 years of nba ball saying the only guy who approaches John Stockton as far as how hard it is to play them is Chris Paul.....when a guy is on a "moderately high level".

Chris Paul is about as good at basketball as any point guard born after the 50s has ever been.

I doubt any real basketball people ever get anything but a laugh out of reading the kinds of bullshit posted in topics like this. I dont mean your post exactly since its easily more thought out than most.

I was one who has several people ahead of Paul so I don't know if this is you being indirect??? And Graviton basically did mimic my post in the one you quoted.

In no part of my imagination is Chris Paul on Magic Johnson's level. And I chose the word level. And I was the one that said Westbrook outplayed Paul and had more impact than him in that series. Isiah in his peak, could go from a typical Chris Paul type of game for three quarters and burst into a beast mode that is comparable to anybody's in the current history of the game. And he would hit that beast mode in the playoffs/finals.

I don't know if you were coming at me or not, but I'm all for the discussion if so.

[Bigsmoke]

Steph Curry might be the best this season.

[imdaman99]

I have no problem with people thinking CP3 is the best PG in the league.

However, it just proves to me that they don't watch the playoffs, or they don't think it matters.

[Kblaze8855]

Magic Johnson was born in the 50s.

Chris Paul is great...elite...but hes not Magic Johnson.

But everyone short of Magic and Oscar are fair game.

Would I rank Paul over Isiah? Maybe not. But its not a dumb discussion to have if you are talking basketball and not bullshit 17 year olds pull out of their ass online to hide that they have nothing to say.

There is a reason people involved in the game wouldnt speak on Paul the way know nothings on the internet do. Most of them...like me but to a greater extent.....remember when everyone thought Tiny, Oscar, Walt, Cousy, and Lenny Wilkins were the best points ever and only one of them played so much as a finals game on a team they were the best player on.

They played on some good teams(cousy was one of three all nba first teamers losing yearly before russell..Oscar had a HOF sidekick and other all stars)...they played on bad teams they made respectable(Tiny). Some won as one of many great players. Whatever.

But the question was...who the best is? It was a discussion about basketball.

It wasnt a generation of fans ruined by media coverage and empty suits like Skip Bayless assigning them opinions on what constitutes greatness so they pop up online acting like a guy is actually better if someone twists an ankle and it lands them in the WCF.

It bugs me at times because I know these people would...were they around at the time...heap the same bullshit on people they will now act like are untouchable.

I watched Isiah when he was running with Kelly Tripuka scoring 120 and losing early.

Hated on by idiots with all the respect in the world from the people playing.

Few things change...suddenly hes next to Cousy.

Chris Paul is who he is. He wins next year...he wont be better...but people who dont even know what they are seeing are gonna act like it.

I am so sick of it. In every sport. John Elway, Lebron, Steve Young, Jordan, Wilt, Peyton Manning, Chris Paul, and dozens of others.

True all time greats in their field(for Paul im talking point guards not being all time elite period).

Thousands of idiots claiming "If ___ were really so great then he would ___".

Somehow it all falls right for them....some opponent gets hurt at the right time....a great teammate arrives....whatever.

Most if not all of them play just as well while losing...but they win...and now we act like they became great.

It just happens over and over and over...

And then the same people hating on the guy...just move the bar so its still out of reach. You can even win a few rings(Wilt...Lebron). they just shuffle the standards around and call you out anyway.

Its an endless circle of hate blinding people to basketball.

If we would think basketball and put the bullshit aside and then evaluate careers when they are at least nearly finished....a lot of people wouldnt end up looking like idiots making grandiose claims that are laughable in retrospect.

Shit like this from more than 25 years ago(Old newsgroup forums)


I recently watched three pistons games and I've decide one thing. The
worst loser in the league is the Isiah Thomas.

Of course this is before he damn near won 3 in a row....

Its just like....

**** it.

Nobody learns a lesson.

Fans...do not learn.

[Young X]

I have no problem with people thinking CP3 is the best PG in the league.

However, it just proves to me that they don't watch the playoffs, or they don't think it matters.Paul averaged 20/10 in the playoffs.... His team was +22 with him on the floor.

[Dro]

Magic Johnson was born in the 50s.

Chris Paul is great...elite...but hes not Magic Johnson.

But everyone short of Magic and Oscar are fair game.

Would I rank Paul over Isiah? Maybe not. But its not a dumb discussion to have if you are talking basketball and not bullshit 17 year olds pull out of their ass online to hide that they have nothing to say.

There is a reason people involved in the game wouldnt speak on Paul the way know nothings on the internet do. Most of them...like me but to a greater extent.....remember when everyone thought Tiny, Oscar, Walt, Cousy, and Lenny Wilkins were the best points ever and only one of them played so much as a finals game on a team they were the best player on.

They played on some good teams(cousy was one of three all nba first teamers losing yearly before russell..Oscar had a HOF sidekick and other all stars)...they played on bad teams they made respectable(Tiny). Some won as one of many great players. Whatever.

But the question was...who the best is? It was a discussion about basketball.

It wasnt a generation of fans ruined by media coverage and empty suits like Skip Bayless assigning them opinions on what constitutes greatness so they pop up online acting like a guy is actually better if someone twists an ankle and it lands them in the WCF.

It bugs me at times because I know these people would...were they around at the time...heap the same bullshit on people they will now act like are untouchable.

I watched Isiah when he was running with Kelly Tripuka scoring 120 and losing early.

Hated on by idiots with all the respect in the world from the people playing.

Few things change...suddenly hes next to Cousy.

Chris Paul is who he is. He wins next year...he wont be better...but people who dont even know what they are seeing are gonna act like it.

I am so sick of it. In every sport. John Elway, Lebron, Steve Young, Jordan, Wilt, Peyton Manning, Chris Paul, and dozens of others.

True all time greats in their field(for Paul im talking point guards not being all time elite period).

Thousands of idiots claiming "If ___ were really so great then he would ___".

Somehow it all falls right for them....some opponent gets hurt at the right time....a great teammate arrives....whatever.

Most if not all of them play just as well while losing...but they win...and now we act like they became great.

It just happens over and over and over...

And then the same people hating on the guy...just move the bar so its still out of reach. You can even win a few rings(Wilt...Lebron). they just shuffle the standards around and call you out anyway.

Its an endless circle of hate blinding people to basketball.

If we would think basketball and put the bullshit aside and then evaluate careers when they are at least nearly finished....a lot of people wouldnt end up looking like idiots making grandiose claims that are laughable in retrospect.

Shit like this from more than 25 years ago(Old newsgroup forums)



Of course this is before he damn near won 3 in a row....

Its just like....

**** it.

Nobody learns a lesson.

Fans...do not learn.
:applause:

[fourkicks44]

Magic Johnson was born in the 50s.

Chris Paul is great...elite...but hes not Magic Johnson.

But everyone short of Magic and Oscar are fair game.

Would I rank Paul over Isiah? Maybe not. But its not a dumb discussion to have if you are talking basketball and not bullshit 17 year olds pull out of their ass online to hide that they have nothing to say.

There is a reason people involved in the game wouldnt speak on Paul the way know nothings on the internet do. Most of them...like me but to a greater extent.....remember when everyone thought Tiny, Oscar, Walt, Cousy, and Lenny Wilkins were the best points ever and only one of them played so much as a finals game on a team they were the best player on.

They played on some good teams(cousy was one of three all nba first teamers losing yearly before russell..Oscar had a HOF sidekick and other all stars)...they played on bad teams they made respectable(Tiny). Some won as one of many great players. Whatever.

But the question was...who the best is? It was a discussion about basketball.

It wasnt a generation of fans ruined by media coverage and empty suits like Skip Bayless assigning them opinions on what constitutes greatness so they pop up online acting like a guy is actually better if someone twists an ankle and it lands them in the WCF.

It bugs me at times because I know these people would...were they around at the time...heap the same bullshit on people they will now act like are untouchable.

I watched Isiah when he was running with Kelly Tripuka scoring 120 and losing early.

Hated on by idiots with all the respect in the world from the people playing.

Few things change...suddenly hes next to Cousy.

Chris Paul is who he is. He wins next year...he wont be better...but people who dont even know what they are seeing are gonna act like it.

I am so sick of it. In every sport. John Elway, Lebron, Steve Young, Jordan, Wilt, Peyton Manning, Chris Paul, and dozens of others.

True all time greats in their field(for Paul im talking point guards not being all time elite period).

Thousands of idiots claiming "If ___ were really so great then he would ___".

Somehow it all falls right for them....some opponent gets hurt at the right time....a great teammate arrives....whatever.

Most if not all of them play just as well while losing...but they win...and now we act like they became great.

It just happens over and over and over...

And then the same people hating on the guy...just move the bar so its still out of reach. You can even win a few rings(Wilt...Lebron). they just shuffle the standards around and call you out anyway.

Its an endless circle of hate blinding people to basketball.

If we would think basketball and put the bullshit aside and then evaluate careers when they are at least nearly finished....a lot of people wouldnt end up looking like idiots making grandiose claims that are laughable in retrospect.

Shit like this from more than 25 years ago(Old newsgroup forums)



Of course this is before he damn near won 3 in a row....

Its just like....

**** it.

Nobody learns a lesson.

Fans...do not learn.

I do agree with you what you have said however the fact remains the goal of the game is to win. While basketball is a team sport, winning makes one truly great.

[bizil]

If I was an elite scorer in the L, I would rather play with CP3 instead of Westbrook. The reason why is because CP3 is gonna enhance my ability to score the rock and make my game even better. Once again, Westbrook is actually more of a great SG who can play the PG well too. For example, I think most of us agree that Jordan is a better player than Magic. And Jordan also played lots of PG in his career. But in terms of a PG, Magic is a better player than Jordan in terms of the mentality for the position. And Magic was ALSO a great scorer too. Westbrook plays PG, so HE HAS to be held to the facets than entail being a great PG. Paul has the mentality of the great pass first PG's and can dominate scoring when called upon!

[Graviton]

If I was an elite scorer in the L, I would rather play with CP3 instead of Westbrook. The reason why is because CP3 is gonna enhance my ability to score the rock and make my game even better. Once again, Westbrook is actually more of a great SG who can play the PG well too. For example, I think most of us agree that Jordan is a better player than Magic. And Jordan also played lots of PG in his career. But in terms of a PG, Magic is a better player than Jordan in terms of the mentality for the position. And Magic was ALSO a great scorer too. Westbrook plays PG, so HE HAS to be held to the facets than entail being a great PG. Paul has the mentality of the great pass first PG's and can dominate scoring when called upon!

Dirk plays PF, so HE HAS to be held to the facets that entail being a great PF, so he shouldn't shoot 3s and stick to the post right?

That mentality is so outdated, you can't assign arbitrary conditions to NBA positions. That is all irrelevant, the goal of the game is to win. Doesn't matter how you get it done, just because someone plays differently doesn't make them any less of a great player. The game evolves, players develop their own unique playstyle, do you want everyone to play the exact same "traditional" way?

If that's the case Lebron shouldn't be handling the ball and should allow Kyrie to execute his "PG duties". Love should never try to space the floor and needs to play in the post, Waiters should stand at the 3 point line and wait. Westbrook should dribble around the perimeter for 15 seconds then pass it to Durant instead of attacking the defense.

[Kblaze8855]

Being great makes one truly great. Which should be obvious considering how many greats never win....and how many greats didnt win for huge stretches of their careers until something happened that allowed their previous/current level to be enough to win.

But if 100 years of that happening over and over and over in every sport doesnt clear it up...it isnt becoming clear because I pointed it out now.

[Budadiiii]

Russell Westbrook is almost as good as prime Kobe. I don't even look at him like I look at a traditional PG. Just a guy who happens to bring the ball up to initiate the offense.

If he had Kobes shot/touch, he would be the best player in the league. Instead he has terrible touch so he stuck being the 3rd best behind Durant and LeBron

[La Frescobaldi]

I do agree with you what you have said however the fact remains the goal of the game is to win. While basketball is a team sport, winning makes one truly great.

True only to a point though. You get L James on the Bucks and no matter how good that dude is they ain't going to the Finals.

I don't remember the Warriors with Chamberlain, but I remember a lot of those players he had on his team and they were scrubbish for the most part. You could easily look at a guy like Al Attles or Tom Meschery or Wayne Hightower (who did do pretty good later on with the Denver Rockets in the ABA) and think "how did the Warriors EVER get that far in the playoffs??" Then you'd watch Chamberlain and you'd know exactly how.

Same thing with Calvin Murphy. If that dude had been on the Lakers - same exact dude with the same exact skills - if he was on the Lakers with Kareem in the paint the whole league would have been clear different.... and the view of Murph would be entirely different by all these people who only count rings.

This OP about Chris Paul is another good example. Let's get Paul over on the Heat instead of Norris Cole and see what he can do. Get him on those recent season Pacers teams and see if he doesn't scorch Miami something fierce.

The Clips have a good squad but Doc Rivers isn't ever fixing the coaching problems that team has. They do some pure stupid things and it ain't because of the players

[La Frescobaldi]

Russell Westbrook is almost as good as prime Kobe. I don't even look at him like I look at a traditional PG. Just a guy who happens to bring the ball up to initiate the offense.

If he had Kobes shot/touch, he would be the best player in the league. Instead he has terrible touch so he stuck being the 3rd best behind Durant and LeBron

come on man.................... Westbrook has got a brain the size and value of a walnut.

[Budadiiii]

People don't give enough credit to KD and Westbrook for carrying the load they have to carry. They played with two of the worst offensive players in the league, had absolutely NO post presence, and a limited washed up bench with names like Caron Butler and Derek Fisher seeing big minutes.

And maybe the worst coach among the contending teams.

How the hell did KD average 5 assists with nobody down low and no 3 point shooters on the wing? Westbrook is an ISO player and doesn't even help KD get his. These guys are monster ISO guys who somehow manage to win a shit ton of games because that's what they are..... winners

[Budadiiii]

come on man.................... Westbrook has got a brain the size and value of a walnut.
That is one valuable walnut we're talking about here. Is is a golden walnut that can cure cancer? If so, I agree with everything you said

[La Frescobaldi]

That is one valuable walnut we're talking about here. Is is a golden walnut that can cure cancer? If so, I agree with everything you said
lol

go watch his playoff films again. That dude does the meltdown at all critical times. Overheated brain.

Watch him with Durant standing wide open and Derek Fisher - one of the most clutch team-killers of all time - standing wide open ...... and see what Westbrook does. Basketball IQ plunges straight into the negative realms.

[Graviton]

The Clips have a good squad but Doc Rivers isn't ever fixing the coaching problems that team has. They do some pure stupid things and it ain't because of the players

But according to some Paul is an on court coach and would fix OKC's issues when he can't even fix his own team's problems as you said. Players aren't responsible for the plays run in close games, for the offensive or defensive system or the gameplan. That's all on the coach.

Thunder have their own issues when they come out of timeouts and run idiotic ISO sets, Brooks has his usual "Cmon guys just play hard! We just need to get a score!" speech and literally gives it to Durant and prays for the best.

Like if you put Paul or Westbrook under Pop with that system and coaching, with years of tutelage and refining, how wouldn't they succeed just as much if not more? Against OKC Pop benched Parker and went with Mills/Joseph and they performed even better. That's one well oiled machine doing work under the guidance of a great coach.

[La Frescobaldi]

But according to some Paul is an on court coach and would fix OKC's issues when he can't even fix his own team's problems as you said. Players aren't responsible for the plays run in close games, for the offensive or defensive system or the gameplan. That's all on the coach.

Thunder have their own issues when they come out of timeouts and run idiotic ISO sets, Brooks has his usual "Cmon guys just play hard! We just need to get a score!" speech and literally gives it to Durant and prays for the best.

Like if you put Paul or Westbrook under Pop with that system and coaching, with years of tutelage and refining, how wouldn't they succeed just as much if not more? Against OKC Pop benched Parker and went with Mills/Joseph and they performed even better. That's one well oiled machine doing work under the guidance of a great coach.

Yeah. Coaching is incredibly undervalued by Ish.

[Pointguard]

Magic Johnson was born in the 50s.

Chris Paul is great...elite...but hes not Magic Johnson.

But everyone short of Magic and Oscar are fair game.

Would I rank Paul over Isiah? Maybe not. But its not a dumb discussion to have if you are talking basketball and not bullshit 17 year olds pull out of their ass online to hide that they have nothing to say.

There is a reason people involved in the game wouldnt speak on Paul the way know nothings on the internet do. Most of them...like me but to a greater extent.....remember when everyone thought Tiny, Oscar, Walt, Cousy, and Lenny Wilkins were the best points ever and only one of them played so much as a finals game on a team they were the best player on.

They played on some good teams(cousy was one of three all nba first teamers losing yearly before russell..Oscar had a HOF sidekick and other all stars)...they played on bad teams they made respectable(Tiny). Some won as one of many great players. Whatever.

But the question was...who the best is? It was a discussion about basketball.

It wasnt a generation of fans ruined by media coverage and empty suits like Skip Bayless assigning them opinions on what constitutes greatness so they pop up online acting like a guy is actually better if someone twists an ankle and it lands them in the WCF.

It bugs me at times because I know these people would...were they around at the time...heap the same bullshit on people they will now act like are untouchable.

I watched Isiah when he was running with Kelly Tripuka scoring 120 and losing early.

Hated on by idiots with all the respect in the world from the people playing.

Few things change...suddenly hes next to Cousy.

Chris Paul is who he is. He wins next year...he wont be better...but people who dont even know what they are seeing are gonna act like it.

I am so sick of it. In every sport. John Elway, Lebron, Steve Young, Jordan, Wilt, Peyton Manning, Chris Paul, and dozens of others.

True all time greats in their field(for Paul im talking point guards not being all time elite period).

Thousands of idiots claiming "If ___ were really so great then he would ___".

Somehow it all falls right for them....some opponent gets hurt at the right time....a great teammate arrives....whatever.

Most if not all of them play just as well while losing...but they win...and now we act like they became great.

It just happens over and over and over...

And then the same people hating on the guy...just move the bar so its still out of reach. You can even win a few rings(Wilt...Lebron). they just shuffle the standards around and call you out anyway.

Its an endless circle of hate blinding people to basketball.

If we would think basketball and put the bullshit aside and then evaluate careers when they are at least nearly finished....a lot of people wouldnt end up looking like idiots making grandiose claims that are laughable in retrospect.

Shit like this from more than 25 years ago(Old newsgroup forums)

Of course this is before he damn near won 3 in a row....

Its just like....

**** it.

Nobody learns a lesson.

Fans...do not learn.

I hear what you are saying. But I don't think Chris Paul gets an unfair shake from the critical couch potato groups now that are storming the boards. Could you imagine the heat Rose would have gotten if he had the collapse that Paul had? Paul barely got heat for it all - I don't recall a thread about it. I think all superstars get the excess, outside of Paul. Westbrook outplayed Paul, in a critical series - not one thread about it. Paul senses Rose is a threat and puts on a dribble exhibition that angered Rose and Rose responded, heavy handed - not one thread about it. Paul is not held to the standard that Westbrook or Rose is yet he is near the end of his prime and they are just entering theirs.

Btw, Walt Frazier, was the best player on his second championship team and nobody was close in the regular season or post season. And he ran a great offense as well.

[Budadiiii]

I hear what you are saying. But I don't think Chris Paul gets an unfair shake from the critical couch potato groups now that are storming the boards. Could you imagine the heat Rose would have gotten if he had the collapse that Paul had? Paul barely got heat for it all - I don't recall a thread about it. I think all superstars get the excess, outside of Paul. Westbrook outplayed Paul, in a critical series - not one thread about it. Paul senses Rose is a threat and puts on a dribble exhibition that angered Rose and Rose responded, heavy handed - not one thread about it. Paul is not held to the standard that Westbrook or Rose is yet he is near the end of his prime and they are just entering theirs.

Btw, Walt Frazier, was the best player on his second championship team and nobody was close in the regular season or post season. And he ran a great offense as well.
In what world is Rose entering his prime?

He's done. Mentally and physically DONE.

Stop grouping Rose and Westbrook together, they are two different breeds of human and it is a major insult to Westbrook.

[La Frescobaldi]

I hear what you are saying. But I don't think Chris Paul gets an unfair shake from the critical couch potato groups now that are storming the boards. Could you imagine the heat Rose would have gotten if he had the collapse that Paul had? Paul barely got heat for it all - I don't recall a thread about it. I think all superstars get the excess, outside of Paul. Westbrook outplayed Paul, in a critical series - not one thread about it. Paul senses Rose is a threat and puts on a dribble exhibition that angered Rose and Rose responded, heavy handed - not one thread about it. Paul is not held to the standard that Westbrook or Rose is yet he is near the end of his prime and they are just entering theirs.

Btw, Walt Frazier, was the best player on his second championship team and nobody was close in the regular season or post season. And he ran a great offense as well.
That man got robbed blind of fmvp in '70.

[bizil]

Dirk plays PF, so HE HAS to be held to the facets that entail being a great PF, so he shouldn't shoot 3s and stick to the post right?

That mentality is so outdated, you can't assign arbitrary conditions to NBA positions. That is all irrelevant, the goal of the game is to win. Doesn't matter how you get it done, just because someone plays differently doesn't make them any less of a great player. The game evolves, players develop their own unique playstyle, do you want everyone to play the exact same "traditional" way?

If that's the case Lebron shouldn't be handling the ball and should allow Kyrie to execute his "PG duties". Love should never try to space the floor and needs to play in the post, Waiters should stand at the 3 point line and wait. Westbrook should dribble around the perimeter for 15 seconds then pass it to Durant instead of attacking the defense.

Wow! The most premium asset of a PG is to run a team and drop the dimes. At PF AND EVERY OTHER POSITION the most premium asset is alpha dog scoring. So Dirk fulfills that at PF and was a very good rebounder in his prime. It doesn't matter to me that he was a stretch PF because points are points and Dirk is a 7 footer so size wise it makes sense to play him at PF.

Secondly, the things Lebron does at SF in terms of passing is A BONUS and not a premium asset to have at SF. Most of the great SF's HISTORICALLY weren't point forward type guys. U just have Bron, Bird, Hondo, Barry, and Pippen who were point forwards or had PG level passing skills. All the other legendary SF's are legends like Dr. J, Baylor, Nique, English, Dantley, King, Durant, and Melo who are epic scorers but not point forward kind of players. So the things Bron does is a bonus at SF.

If many prefer Westbrook to Paul, then that's fine. Russ is a great player and one of the top ten players in the world. But Paul is ALSO one of the top 10 players in the world too. Ideally at the PG, I want a pass first guy who can ALSO DOMINATE scoring! So for my PG I want Paul. But if your preference is more of an SG who is score first and talented enough to play PG then Russ is your guy.

Keep mind a guy similar to Russ, Rose, and Parker but BETTER in my book moved to SG because he was such a dominant scorer and that's how he was wired. He could play PG great but he could play SG even better! That guy is The Answer Allen Iverson. He was a better player than Rose, Parker,and Westbrook EVER WERE and Larry Brown had the vision to move him off the ball and let SCORING be his number one objective!

[Graviton]

Wow! The most premium asset of a PG is to run a team and drop the dimes. At PF AND EVERY OTHER POSITION the most premium asset is alpha dog scoring. So Dirk fulfills that at PF and was a very good rebounder in his prime. It doesn't matter to me that he was a stretch PF because points are points and Dirk is a 7 footer so size wise it makes sense to play him at PF.

Secondly, the things Lebron does at SF in terms of passing is A BONUS and not a premium asset to have at SF. Most of the great SF's HISTORICALLY weren't point forward type guys. U just have Bron, Bird, Hondo, Barry, and Pippen who were point forwards or had PG level passing skills. All the other legendary SF's are legends like Dr. J, Baylor, Nique, English, Dantley, King, Durant, and Melo who are epic scorers but not point forward kind of players. So the things Bron does is a bonus at SF.

If many prefer Westbrook to Paul, then that's fine. Russ is a great player and one of the top ten players in the world. But Paul is ALSO one of the top 10 players in the world too. Ideally at the PG, I want a pass first guy who can ALSO DOMINATE scoring! So for my PG I want Paul. But if your preference is more of an SG who is score first and talented enough to play PG then Russ is your guy.

Keep mind a guy similar to Russ, Rose, and Parker but BETTER in my book moved to SG because he was such a dominant scorer and that's how he was wired. He could play PG great but he could play SG even better! That guy is The Answer Allen Iverson. He was a better player than Rose, Parker,and Westbrook EVER WERE and Larry Brown had the vision to move him off the ball and let SCORING be his number objective!

So if points are points why does it matter if Westbrook scores them himself or assists on them? And it's not like he doesn't average lot of assists on top of scoring either, I bet you didn't know Westbrook lead the 2014 playoffs in assists, and was 3rd in APG. He is performing is PG duties on top of SG duties, that's what OKC needs considering they have a black hole at SG position.

And the things Russ does is a bonus too, he is athletically gifted unlike many past PGs. So he can do things they can not. His ability to break down a defense is a BONUS.

Westbrook is a passing PG that can dominate by scoring, it's not like he is out there doing nothing but shooting. You are trying to label him with no regard to the actual facts.

[Pointguard]

That is one valuable walnut we're talking about here. Is is a golden walnut that can cure cancer? If so, I agree with everything you said
You think WB (not Warner Brothers) intelligence is on the level of a cure for cancer. And you would align all of your thoughts with someone who shares such a fantasy







.

[Graviton]

You think WB (not Warner Brothers) intelligence is on the level of a cure for cancer. And you would align all of your thoughts with someone who shares such a fantasy
WB's intelligence is underrated actually. In an interview he gave to ESPN magazine...



Let me tell you something else I've heard. I knew you were sharp, but this blew me away: Is it true you could've gone to Stanford for academics?

Yeah, I was about to go to Stanford out of high school.

For basketball, too?

No, for academics. Stanford didn't recruit me for basketball. In high school, I was honor roll, sixth or seventh in my class GPA-wise, a 3.90 overall, but I got 4.0s all the time. And I wanted to go to Stanford. I mean, I wanted to play basketball, but my parents would always say, 'Without school, you'll be stuck.' So I started paying more attention to school, and I played basketball along with it. But I was just getting noticed in basketball and I had to figure out what made sense in basketball, so I put a hold on school stuff. I wanted to go to Stanford, and my dean told me with my grades I was in good shape. But they didn't want me for basketball.



Who knows, maybe if he didn't pursue basketball he coulda been a world renowned scientist now, one that found the cure for cancer. His determination and relentless attitude would sure help in that quest. :lol

[Nick Young]

Why bother watching the games and forming a real opinion. It's much easier to just assume everyone who won a championship is better than anyone who hasn't. Parker really does nothing better than Paul.
Parker runs an offense better. He is not a ball stopper like CP3 is. Parker is a better defender then CP3. Parker is more unstoppable going in to the lane, and a better finisher down low.


CP3 does nothing better then Parker, except flashy passes.

Parker doesn't need to make flashy passes, his passing is just as effective as CP3 if not more so.

[bizil]

So if points are points why does it matter if Westbrook scores them himself or assists on them? And it's not like he doesn't average lot of assists on top of scoring either, I bet you didn't know Westbrook lead the 2014 playoffs in assists, and was 3rd in APG. He is performing is PG duties on top of SG duties, that's what OKC needs considering they have a black hole at SG position.

And the things Russ does is a bonus too, he is athletically gifted unlike many past PGs. So he can do things they can not. His ability to break down a defense is a BONUS.

Westbrook is a passing PG that can dominate by scoring, it's not like he is out there doing nothing but shooting. You are trying to label him with no regard to the actual facts.

Your lost BIG TIME! I'm not knocking Russ AND i know what he brings to the table. I said in an earlier post that he REDEFINED the PG position along with Rose. But he still is a SCORE FIRST PG and not a pass first PG. U can listen to ANY ANALYST they will tell u what I'm telling. Westbrook is awesome and a freak athlete. And i'm aware that OKC needs his scoring, but HE STILL is a score first PG. I NEVER said he sucked at passing.

And by the way, is Russ a better scorer than he is a passer? Hell YES! Sure he gets a lot of assists but it's THROUGH THE PRISM of being a great scorer first. Jordan and Kobe could play the PG position better than most actual point guards due to impact. But does that mean I want their primary position to be PG? Hell no! I want them off the ball and dominating scoring the rock! Westbrook's mentality actually reminds more of guys like Jordan, Kobe, and Wade than it does PG's like Paul, Isiah, or Magic.

U have guys who are great scorers BUT ALSO great passers (like a Westbrook, Rose, or Parker style PG). Then u have guys who are great passers but ALSO great scorers (guys like Paul, Magic, Isiah). I'm not saying Westbrook has to move to SG, but there are advantages in my opinion to moving him to SG if it could be worked out. Or u can keep him at PG and he will dominate too. Now if u DON'T understand what the HELL I'm saying, I gotta question your baskebtall acumen!

[ImKobe]

He puts up cute statistical numbers in the regular season. He's pretty much the Dwight Howard of point guards when the Playoffs come around. He'll have a dominating series here or there against some weaker teams in the first round and then a contender takes his cookie in the Semis(he chokes).

But who would you really put above CP3? The only guy that has a case is Westbrook, and he was indeed a better player in the Playoffs.

[Nick Young]

parker had his chance to lead the spurs when duncan was at his worst and manu was injured.

result- second round sweep and a loss to the 8th seed.

yeah, hes so much better than paul. :facepalm
All that shows is that Parker is at the very least equal to CP3. His titles and finals MVP show he is better.

CP3 has had a team with Blake Griffin (MVP candidate power forward Griffin according to many on this board last season :lol ) and surrounded by experienced title winning veterans and could not even get them to the conference finals.


HE LEAD HIS TEAM TO A 59 POINT LOSS VS CARMELO AT HOME IN THE PLAYOFFS

Tony Parker is clutch and a winner, and has championship experience.

CP3 is anti-clutch and experience losing in the second round.

[bizil]

Parker runs an offense better. He is not a ball stopper like CP3 is. Parker is a better defender then CP3. Parker is more unstoppable going in to the lane, and a better finisher down low.


CP3 does nothing better then Parker, except flashy passes.

Parker doesn't need to make flashy passes, his passing is just as effective as CP3 if not more so.

No way in hell is Parker a better defender than Paul. Paul made the All Defensive First Team this past season as he has many times! Parker can score better than Paul AND THAT'S the only advantage he has on Paul. But if u are going by numbers, Paul is an alpha dog PG and JUST as good of a scorer as Parker.

[Darius]

Don't bother with these fools.

What you are describing literally just happened with Dirk but they still don't learn.


Magic Johnson was born in the 50s.

Chris Paul is great...elite...but hes not Magic Johnson.

But everyone short of Magic and Oscar are fair game.

Would I rank Paul over Isiah? Maybe not. But its not a dumb discussion to have if you are talking basketball and not bullshit 17 year olds pull out of their ass online to hide that they have nothing to say.

There is a reason people involved in the game wouldnt speak on Paul the way know nothings on the internet do. Most of them...like me but to a greater extent.....remember when everyone thought Tiny, Oscar, Walt, Cousy, and Lenny Wilkins were the best points ever and only one of them played so much as a finals game on a team they were the best player on.

They played on some good teams(cousy was one of three all nba first teamers losing yearly before russell..Oscar had a HOF sidekick and other all stars)...they played on bad teams they made respectable(Tiny). Some won as one of many great players. Whatever.

But the question was...who the best is? It was a discussion about basketball.

It wasnt a generation of fans ruined by media coverage and empty suits like Skip Bayless assigning them opinions on what constitutes greatness so they pop up online acting like a guy is actually better if someone twists an ankle and it lands them in the WCF.

It bugs me at times because I know these people would...were they around at the time...heap the same bullshit on people they will now act like are untouchable.

I watched Isiah when he was running with Kelly Tripuka scoring 120 and losing early.

Hated on by idiots with all the respect in the world from the people playing.

Few things change...suddenly hes next to Cousy.

Chris Paul is who he is. He wins next year...he wont be better...but people who dont even know what they are seeing are gonna act like it.

I am so sick of it. In every sport. John Elway, Lebron, Steve Young, Jordan, Wilt, Peyton Manning, Chris Paul, and dozens of others.

True all time greats in their field(for Paul im talking point guards not being all time elite period).

Thousands of idiots claiming "If ___ were really so great then he would ___".

Somehow it all falls right for them....some opponent gets hurt at the right time....a great teammate arrives....whatever.

Most if not all of them play just as well while losing...but they win...and now we act like they became great.

It just happens over and over and over...

And then the same people hating on the guy...just move the bar so its still out of reach. You can even win a few rings(Wilt...Lebron). they just shuffle the standards around and call you out anyway.

Its an endless circle of hate blinding people to basketball.

If we would think basketball and put the bullshit aside and then evaluate careers when they are at least nearly finished....a lot of people wouldnt end up looking like idiots making grandiose claims that are laughable in retrospect.

Shit like this from more than 25 years ago(Old newsgroup forums)



Of course this is before he damn near won 3 in a row....

Its just like....

**** it.

Nobody learns a lesson.

Fans...do not learn.

[knicksman]

It seems for westbrook fans, all they see is stats. The fact is, westbrook made his team worse. From being the best to almost the 3rd seed. From destroying miami to being destroyed w/ him in the lineup. Yet what they see is stats. LOL This is the same reason why iverson was a superstar, despite him being considered a cancer and thus a loser. But no iverson was a superstar so Ill vote for him as the MVP same for westbrook as a top 5 player because well he has stats. LOL If not for durant having the refs on his side. OKC wouldve been eliminated in the first round.

[knicksman]

westbrook is to cp3 what lebron is to magic. Stat says westbrook/lebron wins it by a landslide but result speaks otherwise.

[navy]

I hear what you are saying. But I don't think Chris Paul gets an unfair shake from the critical couch potato groups now that are storming the boards. Could you imagine the heat Rose would have gotten if he had the collapse that Paul had? Paul barely got heat for it all - I don't recall a thread about it. I think all superstars get the excess, outside of Paul. Westbrook outplayed Paul, in a critical series - not one thread about it. Paul senses Rose is a threat and puts on a dribble exhibition that angered Rose and Rose responded, heavy handed - not one thread about it. Paul is not held to the standard that Westbrook or Rose is yet he is near the end of his prime and they are just entering theirs.

Btw, Walt Frazier, was the best player on his second championship team and nobody was close in the regular season or post season. And he ran a great offense as well.

You are lying. ISH crashed from the amount of threads made about Chris Paul after that Game 5 Blunder. Go back and check.

[ralph_i_el]

Parker runs an offense better. He is not a ball stopper like CP3 is. Parker is a better defender then CP3. Parker is more unstoppable going in to the lane, and a better finisher down low.


CP3 does nothing better then Parker, except flashy passes.

Parker doesn't need to make flashy passes, his passing is just as effective as CP3 if not more so.
If you actually think parker is a better defender there is no point in arguing the rest of this.

Parker is a nice player. He's quick but under control. Elite finisher. Excellent ball mover. Besides that, he's an average shooter and defender, and plays for the greatest coach of our time.

CP3 is elite in ALL of those areas. Until BG he never played with anyone else on his level. The best coach hes had is Doc (who is soooo overrated). Nobody protects the ball while getting anywhere he wants like Paul. He and parker are both great shooters from the elbow. Paul's floater has surpasses TP's IMO.

One bad series of plays on national TV and everybody thinks they can talk shit on the point gawd

[Pointguard]

You are lying. ISH crashed from the amount of threads made about Chris Paul after that Game 5 Blunder. Go back and check.

Ish crashed because it was an incredible game in the playoffs. Seven point lead with 39 seconds? to go will crash ish no matter what.

Here is the Ish page that night. http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2&page=324&order=desc Amazingly, Rose is mentioned as much as Chris Paul is. :lol This is without really playing in two years!!! But if you go to thru the pages there are about four impulse threads made up about CP3 debacle with only a total of like 30 post in total.

Go five or six pages back right now and see what Rose got for his FIBA play last week for one game. Remind you MJ had a 4 point FIBA game in his absolute prime. In contrast Rose got 8 threads for his 15 minutes of play in a blow out win - and well over 4 times the amount of CP3 blunder post. Are you really trying to compare?

[Pointguard]

WB's intelligence is underrated actually. In an interview he gave to ESPN magazine...

Let me tell you something else I've heard. I knew you were sharp, but this blew me away: Is it true you could've gone to Stanford for academics?

Yeah, I was about to go to Stanford out of high school.

For basketball, too?

No, for academics. Stanford didn't recruit me for basketball. In high school, I was honor roll, sixth or seventh in my class GPA-wise, a 3.90 overall, but I got 4.0s all the time. And I wanted to go to Stanford. I mean, I wanted to play basketball, but my parents would always say, 'Without school, you'll be stuck.' So I started paying more attention to school, and I played basketball along with it. But I was just getting noticed in basketball and I had to figure out what made sense in basketball, so I put a hold on school stuff. I wanted to go to Stanford, and my dean told me with my grades I was in good shape. But they didn't want me for basketball.

Who knows, maybe if he didn't pursue basketball he coulda been a world renowned scientist now, one that found the cure for cancer. His determination and relentless attitude would sure help in that quest. :lol
Whoop de dam doo. I certainly never said he wasn't intelligent. Most people have an exceptional intelligence. Hopefully they aren't dribbling a ball instead of curing cancer if they have that ability. That would, ironically, be criminally stupid, if he did.

[b0bab0i]

He puts up cute statistical numbers in the regular season. He's pretty much the Dwight Howard of point guards when the Playoffs come around. He'll have a dominating series here or there against some weaker teams in the first round and then a contender takes his cookie in the Semis(he chokes).

But who would you really put above CP3? The only guy that has a case is Westbrook, and he was indeed a better player in the Playoffs.

Dwight led his team to the finals.
You are obviously a butthurt lakers fanboy still mad about him leaving.