Chris Paul's Career Defining Series

[Ass Dan]

-one year after his playoff choke
-top ten teammate and top 5 center and shooter
-aging stars team that can be beaten
-3 seed vs 6 seed
-made his team the team everyone loves to hate

If Chris Paul doesn't win this first round series we can never discuss him as the best PG in the league ever again, that simply hasn't come to fruition, he is basically a fraud, unless he gets to the WCF, then he can be talked about in the same breath as Curry, Westbrook, Nash, Stockton, Payton, Kidd etc.

If he loses again for the umpteenth time, shut it, I ain't trying to hear it.

BUT

if he wins, especially against the Spurs, he will save his legacy.

OOHWEE DEM STAKES IS HIGH FOR CPtrois!!!!

[SwayDizzle]

CPtrois :lol :lol :lol

[MJistheGOAT]

What happens if he shows up and doesn

[Ass Dan]

[QUOTE=MJistheGOAT]What happens if he shows up and doesn

[MJistheGOAT]

he's supposed to be the Kim Jong Il of this shit (Supreme Leader), floor general, coach on the floor, a leader of men.


NO EXCUSES, win or drop down to Rod Strickland Mark Jackson levels legacywise.

:facepalm only delusional stans think as high as that of him, but you got a point about legacy-wise (not individual play)

And Strickland/Jackson level??? You re being too harsh with poor CP3 :roll:

[Ass Dan]

:facepalm only delusional stans think as high as that of him, but you got a point about legacy-wise (not individual play)

And Strickland/Jackson level??? You re being too harsh with poor CP3 :roll:


Maybe, but I am speaking in hyperbole to get my point across, we cannot keep referencing a guy as one of the great when a decade in he has shit on his resume, and good coaches, teammates and situations that he has bungled.

[HurricaneKid]

This is a patently stupid thread. The Spurs are the one of the two best teams in the NBA. It sucks that one of these teams is going to lose but if it is LAC it doesn't make CP3 a bad postseason player.

Here is the highest career Playoff PER in the history of the game:

1. MJ
2, Mikan
3. LeBron
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. CP3

Thats right. #6 career postseason PER EVER. Higher than Duncan. Higher than Barkley, Dirk, Magic, even Kareem.

[chocolatethunder]

This is a patently stupid thread. The Spurs are the one of the two best teams in the NBA. It sucks that one of these teams is going to lose but if it is LAC it doesn't make CP3 a bad postseason player.

Here is the highest career Playoff PER in the history of the game:

1. MJ
2, Mikan
3. LeBron
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. CP3

Thats right. #6 career postseason PER EVER. Higher than Duncan. Higher than Barkley, Dirk, Magic, even Kareem.

Ok so now PER is the means by which we're to measure a player's impact/success in the playoffs? Great argument. It's always a good idea to just cherry pick one stat and use that as the basis for your position. If you're going to make an alignment for Paul as a prime time playoff performer, you're going to have to try harder than that.

[imdaman99]

I know Curry is everyone's favorite but it's not as if he has much playoff success either. CP3 guards him well, meanwhile it's always Klay covering CP3. CP3 will go mano-e-mano meanwhile Curry will hide himself on some soft guy that can't dribble.

And playing the Spurs, they are hardly a 6th seed. They are capable of beating any team in the NBA in a series. We all were crowning them NBA Champs already before last nights game and now we're calling them a 6th seed? As if they are anything like your ordinary 6th seed :rolleyes:

Listen, I am in the same camp as you. I wanna see CP3 man up in the playoffs before I sing his praises because he really is the best point guard in the regular season. But this is not the career defining series. That's not fair to him. I will not kill him if he loses this series, unless he plays terrible and is a non-factor. However, if he wins I will give him his due because it is a tough championship contender of a competition.

[TheMilkyBarKid]

Can we really hold it against him if he he cannot produce amazing results while being guarded by kawhi in crunch time?

I am just not looking forward to hearing about how parker is better when that is far from the case.

[chazzy]

This is a patently stupid thread. The Spurs are the one of the two best teams in the NBA. It sucks that one of these teams is going to lose but if it is LAC it doesn't make CP3 a bad postseason player.

Here is the highest career Playoff PER in the history of the game:

1. MJ
2, Mikan
3. LeBron
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. CP3

Thats right. #6 career postseason PER EVER. Higher than Duncan. Higher than Barkley, Dirk, Magic, even Kareem.
You don't believe he's actually better than those players though right? His post season numbers come exclusively before the conference finals

[L.A.Showtime]

Everybody knows the pressure is on CP3.

[Big Cheese]

the fact that pple are already putting all of the blame on CP3 days before the playoffs have even started shows you how irrational the hate is for him.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

This is a patently stupid thread. The Spurs are the one of the two best teams in the NBA. It sucks that one of these teams is going to lose but if it is LAC it doesn't make CP3 a bad postseason player.

Here is the highest career Playoff PER in the history of the game:

1. MJ
2, Mikan
3. LeBron
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. CP3

Thats right. #6 career postseason PER EVER. Higher than Duncan. Higher than Barkley, Dirk, Magic, even Kareem.
PER is an efficiency stat. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Paul's efficiency =/= impact ...

Everybody knows he's out of excuses, including me, an avid fan of his. Its put up or shut up :confusedshrug:

[Ass Dan]

This is a patently stupid thread. The Spurs are the one of the two best teams in the NBA. It sucks that one of these teams is going to lose but if it is LAC it doesn't make CP3 a bad postseason player.

Here is the highest career Playoff PER in the history of the game:

1. MJ
2, Mikan
3. LeBron
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. CP3

Thats right. #6 career postseason PER EVER. Higher than Duncan. Higher than Barkley, Dirk, Magic, even Kareem.

not as patently stupid as this response.

so Paul is better than Duncan, Dirk, Magic and Kareem in the playoffs?

Yeah, great stat...

[Ass Dan]

the fact that pple are already putting all of the blame on CP3 days before the playoffs have even started shows you how irrational the hate is for him.


its been a decade cheesey boy, its tinkle or get off the throne time.

[L.Kizzle]

Bad situation.

Going up against the champs who just blew the #2 seed. Spurs I think will come out like gangbusters (wtf is a gangbuster?)

[WadeStan]

How about a more balanced response?

If Paul goes out like a chump like he did against OKC and chokes in crunch time, he's done.

If he leads the Clips in a valiant effort a la his old New Orleans squad but falls short against a better more experienced team, then I think I and many others will respect him.

[HurricaneKid]

You don't believe he's actually better than those players though right? His post season numbers come exclusively before the conference finals

No, I don't. But its more defensible than the absurd levels of hate he gets around here. Last year the world came down on his head because RWB, one of the better defensive PGs in the league when inclined as such, got a silly call on a silly 3 to beat them. And when Paul came down with the ball on the other end the officials swallowed their whistles when a defender grabbed his arm and dislodged the ball.

He is a great PG, and clearly the best over the last 10 years. He, like a lot of other superstars, just isn't a transformative talent like LeBron, Kobe, Duncan, etc.

[JtotheIzzo]

Bad situation.

Going up against the champs who just blew the #2 seed. Spurs I think will come out like gangbusters (wtf is a gangbuster?)

prohibition era Chicago police anti-gang unit?

I think Paul needs to step up, the table is set, if he beats the Spurs (the best team of his generation) it will go a long way to healing a lot of the wounds from his past failures, and give him some necessary cred. If he loses, well there he goes again. I agree with OP though, some/many people see him as a top 5 player in this league, and if he has never won anything, how can we say that?

[Young X]

If he leads the Clips in a valiant effort a la his old New Orleans squad but falls short against a better more experienced team, then I think I and many others will respect him.This isn't true at all. You're saying this now but years down the line all you'll remember is "CP3 had that stacked team and couldn't deliver".

If he averages 22/12/5 or something in a loss, no ones gonna care. They didn't care when he did it against this same Spurs team 7 years ago, against OKC last season, or against the Lakers in 2011. He's had "valiant efforts" for pretty much his whole career.

Truth is, it doesn't matter how CP plays. Whether he plays well or not is completely irrelevant at this point because no one will remember or care if they still lose. Winning is the only thing that matters.

Doc, Blake, DJ, Redick, Barnes, Crawford, Austin Rivers, etc are far more important to CP's "legacy" than CP himself.

[JtotheIzzo]

Doc(championship coach), Blake(top ten player), DJ(will get 3rd team all NBA and all defensive consideration), Redick(top 5 marksman in the L), Barnes(rabble rouser and dirty work guy extraordinaire), Crawford(perennial 6moy candidate)

hardly working with spare parts.

#noexcuses

[greatest-ever]

[QUOTE=MJistheGOAT]What happens if he shows up and doesn

[greatest-ever]

It will hurt his legacy if he goes home in the 1st round again. If he ever wants to crack my top 30 he'll need to make at least make one Wcf, maybe even finals.

[L.Kizzle]

Those things happen, but superstars have to put a team on their back and carry them to victory at some point.
Even of your 1st round match up is the defending champs? No excuses right.

[Kblaze8855]

People have been saying if Chris Paul doesn't such and such this year in the playoff then he can't be called such and such for like 5 years. Then he's called such and such anyway because people have common sense.

If he loses to the Spurs and the Spurs have a generally Spurs like postseason where they beat everybody he's not going to look bad to anyone who has a drop of common sense.

Bringing us back to the start where next year everyone will say if he doesn't such and such.....

At this point Chris Paul is who he is. He will not get any better at basketball no matter what happens. If there are some unusual circumstances like an injury or someone playing usually bad and he gets further in the playoffs he doesn't get better.

Some people will just say he did because they don't evaluate basketball by how well someone is capable of playing it.

[L.Kizzle]

People have been saying if Chris Paul doesn't such and such this year in the playoff then he can't be called such and such for like 5 years. Then he's called such and such anyway because people have common sense.

If he loses to the Spurs and the Spurs have a generally Spurs like postseason where they beat everybody he's not going to look bad to anyone who has a drop of common sense.

Bringing us back to the start where next year everyone will say if he doesn't such and such.....

At this point Chris Paul is who he is. He will not get any better at basketball no matter what happens. If there are some unusual circumstances like an injury or someone playing usually bad and he gets further in the playoffs he doesn't get better.

Some people will just say he did because they don't evaluate basketball by how well someone is capable of playing it.
If Paul and the Clippers lost to Portland or something like that he can get heat. Not for losing to the defending champs. Unless he puts up some terrible numbers like 11 pts and 4 assist.

[J Shuttlesworth]

LOL @ the idea that losing to the defending champs is supposed to be a shitstain on your legacy

[BigNBAfan]

..has all happened in the first round.

am i doing this right?

[bballnoob1192]

Bad situation.

Going up against the champs who just blew the #2 seed. Spurs I think will come out like gangbusters (wtf is a gangbuster?)
actually, the fact that they blew the number two seed just goes to show this spurs team is not as good as last year. I can see the clippers winning game 7 at home

[qrich]

So everyone is picking the Spurs, but if the Clippers lose, its an upset and due to Paul being overrated.

Quite interdasting.

[Wade's Rings]

I know Curry is everyone's favorite but it's not as if he has much playoff success either. CP3 guards him well, meanwhile it's always Klay covering CP3. CP3 will go mano-e-mano meanwhile Curry will hide himself on some soft guy that can't dribble.

And playing the Spurs, they are hardly a 6th seed. They are capable of beating any team in the NBA in a series. We all were crowning them NBA Champs already before last nights game and now we're calling them a 6th seed? As if they are anything like your ordinary 6th seed :rolleyes:

Listen, I am in the same camp as you. I wanna see CP3 man up in the playoffs before I sing his praises because he really is the best point guard in the regular season. But this is not the career defining series. That's not fair to him. I will not kill him if he loses this series, unless he plays terrible and is a non-factor. However, if he wins I will give him his due because it is a tough championship contender of a competition.

His overall numbers increase in the Playoffs.


This isn't true at all. You're saying this now but years down the line all you'll remember is "CP3 had that stacked team and couldn't deliver".

If he averages 22/12/5 or something in a loss, no ones gonna care. They didn't care when he did it against this same Spurs team 7 years ago, against OKC last season, or against the Lakers in 2011. He's had "valiant efforts" for pretty much his whole career.

Truth is, it doesn't matter how CP plays. Whether he plays well or not is completely irrelevant at this point because no one will remember or care if they still lose. Winning is the only thing that matters.

Doc, Blake, DJ, Redick, Barnes, Crawford, Austin Rivers, etc are far more important to CP's "legacy" than CP himself.

Agreed:applause:

[greatest-ever]

Even of your 1st round match up is the defending champs? No excuses right.
There really is no excuses. Great players are judged by their playoff success largely, and if you want to be mentioned as say a top 20 or 25 guy you have to beat great teams. Kobe has done it, Dirk has done it, the Malones have done it etc etc. People are acting like Paul has a scrub team or something, if you are a superstar that is surrounded with a decent supporting cast you are expected to deliver. We can't treat Cp3 as an exception.

[DMAVS41]

People have been saying if Chris Paul doesn't such and such this year in the playoff then he can't be called such and such for like 5 years. Then he's called such and such anyway because people have common sense.

If he loses to the Spurs and the Spurs have a generally Spurs like postseason where they beat everybody he's not going to look bad to anyone who has a drop of common sense.

Bringing us back to the start where next year everyone will say if he doesn't such and such.....

At this point Chris Paul is who he is. He will not get any better at basketball no matter what happens. If there are some unusual circumstances like an injury or someone playing usually bad and he gets further in the playoffs he doesn't get better.

Some people will just say he did because they don't evaluate basketball by how well someone is capable of playing it.

But we don't know exactly how good Paul is though. That is the huge problem with your outlook.

You think a bunch of regular season games with no pressure and a players' skill set is all that is needed to know exactly.

Doesn't work that way. Everything a player does on the court should be part of determining how good said player actually is.

I agree he won't get better or worse, but that misses the point.

The point is we don't know exactly how good he is and whether he plays great or terrible matters.

Under your thinking... How Paul plays in the playoffs this year doesn't matter at all. And that should show you that line of thinking is flawed.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

But it doesn't matter though. If the Spurs do to the Clippers what they did to Miami last season despite Paul playing extremely well, can you honestly he won't get shitted on?
Actually it does matter.

The Clippers have home court and heaps of talent. How he plays and the Clippers perform in these playoffs absolutely matters.

[Young X]

Under your thinking... How Paul plays in the playoffs this year doesn't matter at all. And that should show you that line of thinking is flawed.But it doesn't matter though. If the Spurs do to the Clippers what they did to Miami last season despite Paul playing extremely well, can you honestly say he won't get shitted on?

[Kblaze8855]

Chris Paul has played 750 games of NBA basketball playoffs/regular season combined, 3 international tournaments, and 2 seasons of fairly high profile college ball.

If you dont know him now you never will. Anyone who cant form a reasonable opinion after 30 thousand minutes of him on TV just isnt gonna form one. If 800 games of varying importance dont show you who he is you just dont care to look.

I'll know nothing about Chris Pauls game next sunday I dont know now. All that will have happened is the sample size going from 808 to 812. Maybe its a week of brilliant play..maybe awful. All of it will be something ive seen him do before.

Hes likely going downhill soon. Everyone does. The time to evaluate who he is as a player will soon be who he was. That "We dont know how good he is yet" talk just doesnt fly for a 10 year veteran who has been high profile the entire time. You dont decide how good a player used to be when hes 34.

If you cant see any way of evaluating a player as we go along I dont see why you would even discuss an active player.

Fans of the future will be discussing a Paul who has already come and will soon be gone when they discuss the best points ever.

Its pretty much over and done with far as...who he is as a player.

All thats left is the "legacy" shit usually obsessed over by people who couldnt tell me what a down screen is if I asked but are absolutely certain who the best pointguard in the league is.

Greatness is left to determine. Standing in history. Long term bragging rights.

The basketball observations? How good someone is? That doesnt take 800 games.

[DMAVS41]

Chris Paul has played 750 games of NBA basketball playoffs/regular season combined, 3 international tournaments, and 2 seasons of fairly high profile college ball.

If you dont know him now you never will. Anyone who cant form a reasonable opinion after 30 thousand minutes of him on TV just isnt gonna form one. If 800 games of varying importance dont show you who he is you just dont care to look.

I'll know nothing about Chris Pauls game next sunday I dont know now. All that will have happened is the sample size going from 808 to 812. Maybe its a week of brilliant play..maybe awful. All of it will be something ive seen him do before.

Hes likely going downhill soon. Everyone does. The time to evaluate who he is as a player will soon be who he was. That "We dont know how good he is yet" talk just doesnt fly for a 10 year veteran who has been high profile the entire time. You dont decide how good a player used to be when hes 34.

If you cant see any way of evaluating a player as we go along I dont see why you would even discuss an active player.

Fans of the future will be discussing a Paul who has already come and will soon be gone when they discuss the best points ever.

Its pretty much over and done with far as...who he is as a player.

All thats left is the "legacy" shit usually obsessed over by people who couldnt tell me what a down screen is if I asked but are absolutely certain who the best pointguard in the league is.

Greatness is left to determine. Standing in history. Long term bragging rights.

The basketball observations? How good someone is? That doesnt take 800 games.

You don't know exactly how good he is if you haven't seen him play in certain situations. What you do actually matters. Your arbitrary cutoff of when you know exactly how good a player doesn't mean much.

Just like you don't know exactly how good Love is like you've claimed.

I seriously doubt you thought Lebron would do what he did on 11 or Paul choking last year... Hence you don't know.

Good idea? Sure, but it all does and should matter.


Again... I question your ability to analyze skill sets anyway as you've claimed Dirk and Frye are identical outside of jump shooting.

You don't know, nobody does, until you see these guys actually do things.


How on earth can you claim it doesn't matter if a player plays great or terrible?

One series or year shouldn't define a player, but it still matters.

[DMAVS41]

But it doesn't matter though. If the Spurs do to the Clippers what they did to Miami last season despite Paul playing extremely well, can you honestly say he won't get shitted on?

I said it matters how he plays.

I find it beyond dumb that people are saying it doesn't matter how players play in the playoffs.

Again, it doesn't define a player, but everything matters.

There is more to the game than playing pressure free regular season games against players/teams not all in...and skill set.

Paul choking again this year would matter... Hed simply be a worse player than I thought if he does.

Conversely, if he plays great and wins the title... He'd be a better player than I thought because I don't think he can do that with this team and obviously I'd be wrong at that point.

One thing Blaze said is right. He won't actually get better or worse, but we will have more information... And that information matters.

How much it matters should be the debate. We shouldn't be debating if it even matters how well a player plays in the most important games of the year.

[Young X]

I'm talking mostly about the general consensus. Whether the Clippers win or lose is the only thing that matters. He's not judged on his individual play, he's judged on what his teams do in the playoffs.

95% of the time when people criticize CP3 it's either because of his teams' lack of success in the playoffs or his on court antics.

Obviously the Clippers as a team will need him to play well to beat a juggernaut like the Spurs. But in terms of his legacy, it won't matter much.

You don't get sh!tted on for averaging 20/10 in the playoffs while losing to teams equally as good and better mostly without homecourt if how you play matters.

[Kblaze8855]

Someone playing poorly at an unexpected time doesnt mean you dont know their game. It means...they played poorly. When someone plays well...it doesnt mean you didnt know their game. It means....they played well. People play better or worse over the course of hundreds of games. They dont become different people on off nights....nor during off weeks.

Having watched some portion of every game of Noahs career doesnt mean I know what hes gonna do on Saturday. Having a good grasp on how someone plays does not and was never claimed to make anyone a fortune teller. This is too simple a concept for me to devote the time im sure you would take with this asking how I believe things I never said and taking out of context things from 4 years ago with no relevance.


One thing Blaze said is right. He won't actually get better or worse

Its clear you see that all that changes is perception.

He is what he is...hes a for the most part finished product.

Hes static.

The opinions of others about him...are dynamic.

But nothing about him changes next week.

I have no problem with that and will return to making this video while im bored as hell.......

[gts]

There really is no excuses. Great players are judged by their playoff success largely, and if you want to be mentioned as say a top 20 or 25 guy you have to beat great teams. Kobe has done it, Dirk has done it, the Malones have done it etc etc. People are acting like Paul has a scrub team or something, if you are a superstar that is surrounded with a decent supporting cast you are expected to deliver. We can't treat Cp3 as an exception.

This is about right

[ImKobe]

empty stats when it comes to the Playoffs.

[DMAVS41]

Someone playing poorly at an unexpected time doesnt mean you dont know their game. It means...they played poorly. When someone plays well...it doesnt mean you didnt know their game. It means....they played well. People play better or worse over the course of hundreds of games. They dont become different people on off nights....nor during off weeks.

Having watched some portion of every game of Noahs career doesnt mean I know what hes gonna do on Saturday. Having a good grasp on how someone plays does not and was never claimed to make anyone a fortune teller. This is too simple a concept for me to devote the time im sure you would take with this asking how I believe things I never said and taking out of context things from 4 years ago with no relevance.



Its clear you see that all that changes is perception.

He is what he is...hes a for the most part finished product.

Hes static.

The opinions of others about him...are dynamic.

But nothing about him changes next week.

I have no problem with that and will return to making this video while im bored as hell.......


Yes, but again...we don't know exactly how good he is.

You could chalk up everything to a player playing "poorly" or "well"...but we don't know what Paul's ceiling as a player is.

We have a good idea of how good certain players are, but everything the on the court is actually a reflection of how good that player is.

For example.

Take a look at Dirk's series in 06 against the Spurs. It just simply matters that he played great and had a legendary road game 7 to will his team to victory.

Does it or should it define is whole career? Absolutely not, but it should matter that he played like that.

It actually matters that he went on the court and proved something. And it makes him a better player than a similar guy that never proved that or never did something like that in a similar situation.

If Dirk had played like shit and we lost in 5...I think of him as a slightly worse player because he would be. It wouldn't be perception at that point. The version of Dirk that plays like shit in that series would just factually be a worse basketball player all else equal than the version of Dirk we see before us.

I totally agree that Paul won't actually just randomly get better or worse, but that is not the point of this.

It's about evaluating how good he is. And unless you know everything about everything...nobody can claim to know exactly how good a player is or what will happen.

What I do know...is that whatever happens...it will be a reflection of how good Paul actually is at playing the damn game of basketball.

Again, the debate should be about how much weight do we put on Lebron's 11 finals, Paul's choke last year, Dirk's 07 series, Kobe's 04 series...and the other side...Paul's great playoff play overall, Dirk's great playoff play and 11 run, Kobe's great play, Lebron's amazing 12 playoffs and his legendary game 6 against the Celtics...etc.

The debate is not whether those moments, series, or years matter...it should be about how much those matter when evaluating how good said player is overall.

Call me crazy, but it matters to me whether or not Lebron played amazing in game 6 against the Celtics in 12 rather than playing horrible. It was a reflection of how good at basketball he was/is...and while it's not defining...it certainly mattered what happened on the court that night.

[DMAVS41]

I'm talking mostly about the general consensus. Whether the Clippers win or lose is the only thing that matters. He's not judged on his individual play, he's judged on what his teams do in the playoffs.

95% of the time when people criticize CP3 it's either because of his teams' lack of success in the playoffs or his on court antics.

Obviously the Clippers as a team will need him to play well to beat a juggernaut like the Spurs. But in terms of his legacy, it won't matter much.

You don't get sh!tted on for averaging 20/10 in the playoffs while losing to teams equally as good and better mostly without homecourt if how you play matters.


This just seems to be attacking a "hater" or going after easy targets.

I'm simply saying that how Paul (or any other player plays) matters. How much it matters in the grand scheme of things is the debate.

One could always look at an isolated thing and say what Blaze said:

Chris Paul has played x number of games and x number of playoff games and x number of international games...what does 1 series matter?

But that misses the point.

I'm not claiming that this series is do or die. I'm saying that this series and year will absolutely factor into how good Paul is at basketball.

Unless you are Blaze...I'm assuming you are humble enough to admit you don't know exactly how good a said player is and exactly what will entail on the court.

So if that is true...then we all need more evidence and information...as much as possible. And this upcoming series/games/year will provide us with more evidence. How Paul plays and to a lesser extent how his team performs around him should be part of the formula of Chris Paul the basketball player.

I'll keep saying it...what happens on the court is generally a reflection of how good someone is at the game.

Where I think Blaze misses key data points is that he thinks it all comes down to skill set. I think that is far too narrow.

Things like playoff pressure, getting older pressure, performing well in a variety of different circumstances, having enough left in the tank to close a series or finish a playoff run...

Those things are part of being good at basketball to me. And that is why I think the playoffs are so telling about players.

It's just too easy in the regular season. I want to see how these guys play when it is all on the line and they are playing great teams trying their hardest.

It's why I can't say I know exactly how good a guy like Kevin Love is like Blaze claims to know. We haven't seen him react to anything yet...

[notatop29pg]

I'm talking mostly about the general consensus. Whether the Clippers win or lose is the only thing that matters. He's not judged on his individual play, he's judged on what his teams do in the playoffs.

95% of the time when people criticize CP3 it's either because of his teams' lack of success in the playoffs or his on court antics.

Obviously the Clippers as a team will need him to play well to beat a juggernaut like the Spurs. But in terms of his legacy, it won't matter much.

You don't get sh!tted on for averaging 20/10 in the playoffs while losing to teams equally as good and better mostly without homecourt if how you play matters.

Lets be honest here... even if he wins a ring this year, and never again.. the narrative will change.

It will then become "CP3 only got past the second round once and only won one ring out of 6/7/8 attempts etc etc".

[gts]

Where I think Blaze misses key data points is that he thinks it all comes down to skill set. I think that is far too narrow.

Things like playoff pressure, getting older pressure, performing well in a variety of different circumstances, having enough left in the tank to close a series or finish a playoff run...

Those things are part of being good at basketball to me. And that is why I think the playoffs are so telling about players.



Great points


The reason how a player performs in the post season and how his teams perform is a viable topic is because that's why they get paid the big bucks..

owners don't hire players and give them max amounts of money so one day we can all sit back and say "aha... what a skill set he had" no fans pay to see the games, owners pay the players, the TV networks pays the NBA and subsequently the owners and players for one reason to see a player and the team he leads win games... if you except the big contract as a player you're saying "i'm the guy, i'm the guy who will lead us to victory" not "i'm the guy, i'm the guy with the skillset, we might not win a lot of games but it's fun to watch me play"

i guarantee if we start ranking players on skills alone and only skills everyone's top 20 all time list starts looking a bunch different

[sp6r=underrated]

Chris Paul is his generation's Dirk Nowitzki. Dirk outside of two series (07 Finals, 08 WC1R) was a monster playoff performer. However because his teams failed to win a title people attacked the best player rather than his teammates for underperforming. He finally received the credit for how great of a playoff performer when his team finally won a title.

I wish fans were smart enough to give credit to players on non-title teams but we aren't there yet. Chris Paul's playoff stats are great. He isn't quite at Dirk level but he has very few playoff black marks.

In the 08 WCSF he slaughtered the Spurs. Anyone who blames him for that loss is an idiot who didn't watch the series.

In 2011 he was the best player on the court against a still strong laker team.

In 13 he played great against an excellent Memphis defense. His team lost a close series against a team that has a strong playoff record while they were injured.
In 14, he was the best player in last year's epic series against OKC.

He only has two bad series in his entire career and in both of them he was playing hurt.

The only reason his teams haven't made more noise in the playoffs is the quality of his teammates and how strong the Western Conference has been.

[DMAVS41]

Chris Paul is his generation's Dirk Nowitzki. Dirk outside of two series (07 Finals, 08 WC1R) was a monster playoff performer. However because his teams failed to win a title people attacked the best player rather than his teammates for underperforming. He finally received the credit for how great of a playoff performer when his team finally won a title.

I wish fans were smart enough to give credit to players on non-title teams but we aren't there yet. Chris Paul's playoff stats are great. He isn't quite at Dirk level but he has very few playoff black marks.

In the 08 WCSF he slaughtered the Spurs. Anyone who blames him for that loss is an idiot who didn't watch the series.

In 2011 he was the best player on the court against a still strong laker team.

In 13 he played great against an excellent Memphis defense. His team lost a close series against a team that has a strong playoff record while they were injured.
In 14, he was the best player in last year's epic series against OKC.

He only has two bad series in his entire career and in both of them he was playing hurt.

The only reason his teams haven't made more noise in the playoffs is the quality of his teammates and how strong the Western Conference has been.

I agree with much of this.

And I don't want to come off like I don't like Paul. I do...I love his game and think he's great.

I just don't think he's quite as good as some of the pro Paul crowd does I guess.

But it's really not even that...it's just that I need to see a bit more. Some of that is on Paul and some of that is on his teams/coaches...etc. Much like Dirk like you said.

Is this a career defining series? Perhaps...I don't think it's crazy at all. If the Clippers win and Paul goes pseudo Dirk 2011...then why not? It would be an amazing feat and would answer a lot of questions (some fair some not as usual)...

So this isn't me (and sound minded others I can speak for) questioning whether or not Paul is a great player.

It's about figuring just how great he is.

And to me, that question is answered in the playoffs...and it matters how players play.

But again, that's just me. I don't care too much about winning 14 out of 15 regular season games. Impressive no doubt, but it's just not the same as playing great and dominating a key playoff series or game against a team as good or better.

[DMAVS41]

Great points


The reason how a player performs in the post season and how his teams perform is a viable topic is because that's why they get paid the big bucks..

owners don't hire players and give them max amounts of money so one day we can all sit back and say "aha... what a skill set he had" no fans pay to see the games, owners pay the players, the TV networks pays the NBA and subsequently the owners and players for one reason to see a player and the team he leads win games... if you except the big contract as a player you're saying "i'm the guy, i'm the guy who will lead us to victory" not "i'm the guy, i'm the guy with the skillset, we might not win a lot of games but it's fun to watch me play"

i guarantee if we start ranking players on skills alone and only skills everyone's top 20 all time list starts looking a bunch different

Well...

I agree and disagree with this.

I think what happens on the court is a reflection of how said player is at basketball.

Now, that doesn't mean team performance should all be heaped onto one player. That clearly should not be the case.

But how a team performs does have something to do with a star player. No way around that, but that is a bit tougher to get into.

I think what matters most is how well a player plays. Then all the other stuff can be debated.

I'm not going to go hard on Paul if he plays great and they lose. I'm not doing that...

But...he falls apart in the critical game like he did last year as the leader of the team? Hell yes he deserves some heat.

So it just matters what he does on the court...not what he possibly could do on paper because of his "skill set"

[sundizz]

It's pretty simple - he has all the pieces he needs for a championship. As the best player on the team/one of the best in the league does he have what it takes to get the most out of his teammates and get his team to the next level.

If he passes them the ball and they miss shots....that's on him too...it means he should pick up the scoring aggression. If they are doubling him, he's gotta get his teammates confident enough to know what to do once they get the ball.

I think that's usually his biggest problem. He plays a VERY ball dominant style of basketball and when the defense changes in the playoffs (e.g., body him up) it makes other players worse cuz it ends up being a lot of CP3 running around with the ball in his hand.

[navy]

The Clippers have no bench and no players to guard the positions 2-4. Lol at them having everything they need to win a championship.

Will it really be Chris Paul's fault if Deandre Jordan is missing freethrows so Doc Rivers has to take him out giving the Spurs a layup line at the rim vs Spencer Hawes or Big Baby Davis? You already know it's gonna happen.

[NuggetsFan]

The year he faced Denver in the playoffs was a massive choke. He was lighting the regular season up and you could easily argue having the best year of his career. He had some brutal games and Denver kept trapping him. Really inefficient which is not like Paul at all.

Never got the hate like alot of players would for a series like that. He had a 4 point game with 6 assists and 6 turnovers. They lost that game by 58 points. 12 points on 16 shots in the close out game. Looked worse than the numbers would show too.

After his regular season, that has to be one of the worse playoff outings by a superstar.

[L.Kizzle]

Chris Paul is his generation's Dirk Nowitzki. Dirk outside of two series (07 Finals, 08 WC1R) was a monster playoff performer. However because his teams failed to win a title people attacked the best player rather than his teammates for underperforming. He finally received the credit for how great of a playoff performer when his team finally won a title.

I wish fans were smart enough to give credit to players on non-title teams but we aren't there yet. Chris Paul's playoff stats are great. He isn't quite at Dirk level but he has very few playoff black marks.

In the 08 WCSF he slaughtered the Spurs. Anyone who blames him for that loss is an idiot who didn't watch the series.

In 2011 he was the best player on the court against a still strong laker team.

In 13 he played great against an excellent Memphis defense. His team lost a close series against a team that has a strong playoff record while they were injured.
In 14, he was the best player in last year's epic series against OKC.

He only has two bad series in his entire career and in both of them he was playing hurt.

The only reason his teams haven't made more noise in the playoffs is the quality of his teammates and how strong the Western Conference has been.
Dirk and CP3 are of the same generation.

[sd3035]

didn't he make it to the second round at least once? must be that series

[Milbuck]

This is so stupid. If we're trashing CP3 for losing to the Spurs, then we have to admit that the West isn't one of the toughest conferences in history, where seeding doesn't tell the whole story. And we also have to admit that the Spurs aren't that great of a team, and aren't capable of dominating the league when they're on their game. Both of which are just dumb.

What if the Spurs go on to win the championship and WRECK the other 3 teams they play? What if the Spurs face Houston in round 2 and Harden shits himself, Curry disappears in the WCF, and Lebron has another 2011 in the finals...with the Clippers putting up the best fight out of all 4 opponents, and CP3 having a monster series?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

This is so stupid. If we're trashing CP3 for losing to the Spurs, then we have to admit that the West isn't one of the toughest conferences in history, where seeding doesn't tell the whole story. And we also have to admit that the Spurs aren't that great of a team, and aren't capable of dominating the league when they're on their game. Both of which are just dumb.

What if the Spurs go on to win the championship and WRECK the other 3 teams they play? What if the Spurs face Houston in round 2 and Harden shits himself, Curry disappears in the WCF, and Lebron has another 2011 in the finals...with the Clippers putting up the best fight out of all 4 opponents, and CP3 having a monster series?
Are you insinuating the Clippers don't have homecourt and cannot hang with the Spurs?

I don't get how CP3 continuously goes blameless every year. I mean, assuming the Clippers lose, I'm not saying he should get flak for playing well, but what if he plays terrible? What are you even saying right now?

[Milbuck]

Are you saying the Clippers don't have homecourt and can't hang with the Spurs?

I don't get how CP3 continuously goes blameless every year. I mean, assuming the Clippers lose, I'm not saying he should get flak for playing well, but what if he plays terrible?
Well yeah, if he plays terrible then he obviously deserves to be clowned. I was talking about just blindly criticizing CP for the sake of criticizing him, even if he plays a hell of a series, his teammates underperform significantly, or the Spurs are in one of those zones where they just cannot be stopped whatsoever. Are we really gonna act like the Spurs haven't beaten teams before even with the opposing best player doing nearly everything he could?

[Leroy Jetson]

Every year we hear the same thing, if he gets beaten by a better team it's not on him. Well if he is really the #1 pg, he has a top 3 pf, a top 10 center and a multiple 6th man winner then why is his team never the better one? The all time greats elevate their games when it matters most and find a way to win. If he goes his entire career never making it past round 2 does he still get a pass? Once he retires his legacy is seriously going to be hindered by his lack of playoff success, no one is going to see him as a historically great pg because he has no playoff legacy to speak of.

[sp6r=underrated]

Dirk and CP3 are of the same generation.

The dividing line for generations in sport is really hard to define. Chris Paul is seven years younger than Dirk. Athletes careers are very short. Seven years is enough to make someone a member of a different generation.

[JohnFreeman]

**** CP3

[sp6r=underrated]

Are you insinuating the Clippers don't have homecourt and cannot hang with the Spurs?

I don't get how CP3 continuously goes blameless every year. I mean, assuming the Clippers lose, I'm not saying he should get flak for playing well, but what if he plays terrible? What are you even saying right now?

I don't think anyone disagrees that he should get flak if he plays poorly. The disagreement is over two points.

First, the false perception that Paul has been a poor playoff performer over his career. It just isn't true. His stats are extremely strong in the post-season.

Second, that the best player on a team should be blamed if he plays well and his team still loses. There are a lot of people in basketball forums who just rip star players to shreds even if they played well. Basketball isn't tennis as much as ESPN tries to make it so in the promos.

[L.Kizzle]

The dividing line for generations in sport is really hard to define. Chris Paul is seven years younger than Dirk. Athletes careers are very short. Seven years is enough to make someone a member of a different generation.
Ten years I would say. Curry is of a different era from Dirk. CP3 and Dirk played in like 8 all star games together.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I don't think anyone disagrees that he should get flak if he plays poorly. The disagreement is over two points.

First, the false perception that Paul has been a poor playoff performer over his career. It just isn't true. His stats are extremely strong in the post-season.

Second, that the best player on a team should be blamed if he plays well and his team still loses. There are a lot of people in basketball forums who just rip star players to shreds even if they played well. Basketball isn't tennis as much as ESPN tries to make it so in the promos.


Well yeah, if he plays terrible then he obviously deserves to be clowned. I was talking about just blindly criticizing CP for the sake of criticizing him, even if he plays a hell of a series, his teammates underperform significantly, or the Spurs are in one of those zones where they just cannot be stopped whatsoever. Are we really gonna act like the Spurs haven't beaten teams before even with the opposing best player doing nearly everything he could?
He shouldn't get crap for playing well, but its a legit concern that dude hasn't been able to make one Conference Finals. This despite playing on loaded teams, along with having homecourt in a couple of series.

As I said, assuming the Clips lose, people claiming that he can't win as a number one option would be a real discussion.

[knicksman]

You know youre a dumbass if you place high expectations on a pg. The last time they won as the man? In the 80's. And worse, cp3 is already a damaged goods. I dont even think curry could win against the spurs yet cp3 should. LOL The stupidity of OP knows no bounds.

[dubeta]

You know youre a dumbass if you place high expectations on a pg. The last time they won as the man? In the 80's. And worse, cp3 is already a damaged goods. I dont even think curry could win against the spurs yet cp3 should. LOL The stupidity of OP knows no bounds.

weak argument. 2/5

[knicksman]

weak argument. Bran

fixed

[knicksman]

He shouldn't get crap for playing well, but its a legit concern that dude hasn't been able to make one Conference Finals. This despite playing on loaded teams, along with having homecourt in a couple of series.

As I said, assuming the Clips lose, people claiming that he can't win as a number one option would be a real discussion.
then rose, curry should too coz they havent sniffed the conference finals in the west. :confusedshrug:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

then rose, curry should too coz they havent sniffed the conference finals in the west. :confusedshrug:
Dumb post. Rose and Curry haven't been in the league as long as CP; once they play ~10 years and people want to excuse them for their lack of playoff success? Yes, that will be talked about as well.

[navy]

He shouldn't get crap for playing well, but its a legit concern that dude hasn't been able to make one Conference Finals. This despite playing on loaded teams, along with having homecourt in a couple of series.

As I said, assuming the Clips lose, people claiming that he can't win as a number one option would be a real discussion.
Loaded teams? :biggums:

Bruh. The biggest failure of CP3s career was losing in 6 games to the MVP Kevin Durant and Russell most dominant player in the league Westbrook.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Loaded teams? :biggums:

Bruh. The biggest failure of CP3s career was losing in 6 games to the MVP Kevin Durant and Russell most dominant player in the league Westbrook.

Huh? Paul's Clippers have been loaded since their inception. The 08 and 09 Hornets were above average as well.

[Ass Dan]

My premise is pretty simple.

If we are going to call Paul great, or one of if not the best PG of his generation, we need to see him play meaningful games, we need to let him (at least ONCE) ply his trade under extreme pressure and scrutiny.

Not winning is what separates Barkley, Malone and Stockton from the highest echelons, I am asking how we can even put Paul in the discussion of the all time PGs when he hasn't ever won two playoff series in one season, and has had some of the most talent laiden teams in the league.

Its not the old days of the pesky Hornets making waves, he's in the big market, with the studs on HIS side, sure the Spurs draw is a rough one, but I have the Clippers advancing in my pool, I just think asking an old team to go to the finals YET AGAIN is too much and Khawi's impact on the Clippers is minimized as he won't be guarding their 3 best players.

DeAndre and Blake will frustrate Duncan and Tiago, and CP3 will neutralize Parker, the Clippers SHOULD be favorites, that is why it is Paul's time.

And though much of what he said is bunk, Spidey Avy Guy was right in that Chris Paul will start to decline.

#pissorgetofffthepotcptrois

[navy]

Huh? Paul's Clippers have been loaded since their inception. The 08 and 09 Hornets were above average as well.
:biggums:

Not really. Blake really didnt take the jump into anything special till last year, DeAndre Jordan this year.

Who was the next best player on those Hornets teams?

[Big Cheese]

He shouldn't get crap for playing well, but its a legit concern that dude hasn't been able to make one Conference Finals. This despite playing on loaded teams, along with having homecourt in a couple of series.

As I said, assuming the Clips lose, people claiming that he can't win as a number one option would be a real discussion.

well the only time he has had homecourt advantage in the 2nd round was in 2008 and that series was a game 7 series against the spurs in his 1st playoff run.

aside from that 2nd seed in 2008 and 3rd seed last season, all of the teams he has been on have been mostly middle of the pack or lower standing wise.

[knicksman]

Dumb post. Rose and Curry haven't been in the league as long as CP; once they play ~10 years and people want to excuse them for their lack of playoff success? Yes, that will be talked about as well.

Well paul is damaged goods since his 3rd yr. Do you really think he could still win a ring? Theres a reason why his best yr was his 3rd when it shouldnt be. And hes now ring chasing instead of winning in NO. And besides, the last pg that won was in the 80's. Just because hes the best pg doesnt mean hes the best player. LOL I guess dumbass will always be dumbass

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

:biggums:

Not really. Blake really didnt take the jump into anything special till last year, DeAndre Jordan this year.

Who was the next best player on those Hornets teams?
It wasn't just Blake. The Clippers were like 8 or 9 deep with heaps of swingmen. Enough to win a ring? Probably not. But certainly enough talent to make a conference finals.

As for the Hornets?

I mean.. West/Chandler/Peja/Posey = above average, which is what I've said.

It definitely ain't Kwame Brown, Smush Parker and a group of misfits. :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Well paul is damaged goods since his 3rd yr. Do you really think he could still win a ring? Theres a reason why his best yr was his 3rd when it shouldnt be. And hes now ring chasing instead of winning in NO. And besides, the last pg that won was in the 80's. Just because hes the best pg doesnt mean hes the best player. LOL I guess dumbass will always be dumbass
:crazysam:

You're gonna have to translate this son. I don't speak 'Knicks fan'.

[Young X]

It wasn't just Blake. The Clippers were like 8 or 9 deep with heaps of swingmen. Enough to win a ring? Probably not. But certainly enough talent to make a conference finals.

As for the Hornets?

I mean.. West/Chandler/Peja/Posey = above average, which is what I've said.

It definitely ain't Kwame Brown, Smush Parker and a group of misfits. :oldlol:So in what years specifically should his team have gone further and why? '08 and '14 were his only real chances. He's 0/2 in my book.

[LoneyROY7]

So in what years specifically should his team have gone further and why? '08 and '14 were his only real chances. He's 0/2 in my book.

Last year for me. But it wasn't just CP. While he had an awful last few minutes in game 5, Blake only played up to his standards in 3 out of the 6 games against OKC.

It's tough find a single playoff series in which the bulk of the blame could be laid at CP's lap.

[knicksman]

:crazysam:

You're gonna have to translate this son. I don't speak 'Knicks fan'.

ohhh really. Even simple english, cant understand? I guess you hate logic so much:lol

Not a surprise your posts are illogical

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

So in what years specifically should his team have gone further and why? '08 and '14 were his only real chances. He's 0/2 in my book.

Last year vs OKC? Guy went MIA for huge stretches and was outplayed by Westbrook for the most part (late in games, WB was clearly better). How about vs San Antonio in 2012? Despite the sweep, the last 2 games of that series were definitely winnable. CP just played like hot ****en garbage.

2009 for losing by 60 at home? I don't place full blame on dude, but to be a leader of a team that gets run outta the gym in a playoff game...at home...like that? That ish would be career suicide for most guys. Hell, 2008 for losing a game 7 at home? CP was an MVP candidate and arguably the best player in basketball so the "3rd year in the league" nonsense isn't a legit excuse.

As I said, I'm all for defending CP against those who think he's some perennial playoff choker. But again, he ain't a saint either.

Dude has his share of f*ck ups too.

[notatop29pg]

Last year vs OKC? Guy went MIA for huge stretches and was outplayed by Westbrook for the most part (late in games, WB was clearly better). How about vs San Antonio in 2012? Despite the sweep, the last 2 games of that series were definitely winnable. CP just played like hot ****en garbage.

2009 for losing by 60 at home? I don't place full blame on dude, but to be a leader of a team that gets run outta the gym in a playoff game...at home...like that? That ish would be career suicide for most guys. Hell, 2008 for losing a game 7 at home? CP was an MVP candidate and arguably the best player in basketball so the "3rd year in the league" nonsense isn't a legit excuse.

As I said, I'm all for defending CP against those who think he's some perennial playoff choker. But again, he ain't a saint either.

Dude has his share of f*ck ups too.

Sucks to be Anthony Davis then. Dude is about to get swept in the 1st round as an MVP candidate in his 3rd year.

Forever to be blocked from being considered great.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Sucks to be Anthony Davis then. Dude is about to get swept in the 1st round as an MVP candidate in his 3rd year.

Forever to be blocked from being considered great.
Anthony Davis doesn't have homecourt and is going up against the #1 seed.

Nice strawman though.

[notatop29pg]

Anthony Davis doesn't have homecourt and is going up against the #1 seed.

Nice strawman though.

But where and who you play don't matter?

If you're number one that stuff doesn't mean shit right?

Win or lose, that's all there is.

No excuses.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

But where and who you play don't matter?

If you're number one that stuff doesn't mean shit right?

Win or lose, that's all there is.

No excuses.
Who said that? You can continue to be a little bitch and put words in my mouth, or you can read the detailed explanations of which series Paul should've played better in, and could have won.

Up to you.

[Young X]

Last year vs OKC? Guy went MIA for huge stretches and was outplayed by Westbrook for the most part (late in games, WB was clearly better). How about vs San Antonio in 2012? Despite the sweep, the last 2 games of that series were definitely winnable. CP just played like hot ****en garbage.

2009 for losing by 60 at home? I don't place full blame on dude, but to be a leader of a team that gets run outta the gym in a playoff game...at home...like that? That ish would be career suicide for most guys. Hell, 2008 for losing a game 7 at home? CP was an MVP candidate and arguably the best player in basketball so the "3rd year in the league" nonsense isn't a legit excuse.

As I said, I'm all for defending CP against those who think he's some perennial playoff choker. But again, he ain't a saint either. Dude has share of f*ck ups too.So you really think the 2012 Clippers had a shot at beating that Spurs team? Same Spurs team that won 20 straight games at one point? That would be like this years Mavs team beating the Warriors. Clippers were a much inferior team that year. Same thing with the injured '09 Hornets who were completely outmatched against the same Nuggets squad that took the Lakers to 6 games.

I agree with '08 and '14. So far, those are the only 2 years of his career where he had a relatively healthy team capable of getting deeper in the playoffs and didn't. Ended up losing to the defending champ Spurs and the MVP-led Thunder without HCA. He's 0/2. That's not bad.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

So you really think the 2012 Clippers had a shot at beating that Spurs team? Same Spurs team that won 20 straight games at one point? That would be like this years Mavs team beating the Warriors. Clippers were a much inferior team that year. Same thing with the injured '09 Hornets who were completely outmatched against the same Nuggets squad that took the Lakers to 6 games.

Not sure, but I think CP should get criticism for playing awful in that series. You don't get a pass because you weren't favored to win. That's silly to me.


I agree with '08 and '14. So far, those are the only 2 years of his career where he had a relatively healthy team capable of getting deeper in the playoffs and didn't. Ended up losing to the defending champ Spurs and the MVP-led Thunder without HCA. He's 0/2. That's not bad.
We can agree to disagree, but good to see I'm not the only one who feels that way about 2008.

[Big Cheese]

Cp3 and Blake Griffin were both hobbled during that whole series in 2012 due to the injuries they suffered late in that grizzlies series and they were facing a number 1 seed spurs team that were on an historic win streak.

That was a recipe for disaster.

[notatop29pg]

Who said that? You can continue to be a little bitch and put words in my mouth, or you can read the detailed explanations of which series Paul should've played better in, and could have won.

Up to you.

I think 08 was a pivotal moment in CP3s development as a player. This was the series that he learnt that he couldn't do it all himself. Up until this series he had a score first mentality with a lot of shooters around him for bailouts, much like Westbrook these days but with a better brain.

The lesson he learnt was that he had to get his team involved early, coz any team could send a bench of role playing defenders like Dahntay Jones etc at you to shut you down, especially when you are a 5'11 PG.

I don't hold o8 against him.

[Smoke117]

I agree with much of this.

And I don't want to come off like I don't like Paul. I do...I love his game and think he's great.

I just don't think he's quite as good as some of the pro Paul crowd does I guess.

But it's really not even that...it's just that I need to see a bit more. Some of that is on Paul and some of that is on his teams/coaches...etc. Much like Dirk like you said.

Is this a career defining series? Perhaps...I don't think it's crazy at all. If the Clippers win and Paul goes pseudo Dirk 2011...then why not? It would be an amazing feat and would answer a lot of questions (some fair some not as usual)...

So this isn't me (and sound minded others I can speak for) questioning whether or not Paul is a great player.

It's about figuring just how great he is.

And to me, that question is answered in the playoffs...and it matters how players play.

But again, that's just me. I don't care too much about winning 14 out of 15 regular season games. Impressive no doubt, but it's just not the same as playing great and dominating a key playoff series or game against a team as good or better.


Except then Chris Paul would be given the respect he rightly deserves and not become overrated like Dirk.

[Spurs m8]

actually, the fact that they blew the number two seed just goes to show this spurs team is not as good as last year.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[3ball]

small point guards that dominate their team's distribution of offensive win share can never win a championship.

said another way, teams whose offense is built around a small PG can't win the championship (said another way - a team won't win a championship if their small point guard wins far more games with his offense than anyone else on the team).

how do i know this?... because it's never happened in history..

Before you bring up Isiah Thomas - he DIDN'T dominate his team's distribution of offensive win share - his offensive win share was between like 3.0-6.0 each year, which is similar to what everyone on the team had, because they were a balanced team.

Otoh, CP3's offensive win share is liike 12.0+ every year, while everyone else's is like 3.0-4.0 (except like one other guy who will be at 7 or so)... So CP3 dominates his team's distribution of offensive win share, and small point guards that do this have never won a championship.
.

[Ass Dan]

small point guards that dominate their team's distribution of offensive win share can never win a championship.

said another way, teams whose offense is built around a small PG can't win the championship (said another way - a team won't win a championship if their small point guard wins more games with his offense than anyone else on the team).

how do i know this?... because it's never happened in history.. the closest thing was the 2004 Pistons with Chauncey Billups - but the Pistons were a VERY well-rounded team - I wouldn't consider the Pistons offense to be based around Chauncey, nor would I consider Chauncey a small point guard - I mean, technically he was a small point guard (6'3" or shorter), but he was borderline and the way he played was not like a small guard - he was bruising and overpowering inside; he wasn't throwing up floaters and a ton of finesse shots.
.

Bad Boys two best players were Zeke and Joe D.

Both under 6'5"

Fail.

[iznogood]

small point guards that dominate their team's distribution of offensive win share can never win a championship.

said another way, teams whose offense is built around a small PG can't win the championship (said another way - a team won't win a championship if their small point guard wins more games with his offense than anyone else on the team).

how do i know this?... because it's never happened in history.. the closest thing was the 2004 Pistons with Chauncey Billups - but the Pistons were a VERY well-rounded team - I wouldn't consider the Pistons offense to be based around Chauncey, nor would I consider Chauncey a small point guard - I mean, technically he was a small point guard (6'3" or shorter), but he was borderline and the way he played was not like a small guard - he was bruising and overpowering inside; he wasn't throwing up floaters and a ton of finesse shots.
.
Paul might be small, but he's extremely physical and doesn't play small. He is one of the toughest guards in the game. His inside game is not based on the floaters and he's posting up all guards his size or even bigger. Just look at the screens he sets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApsC0GTSrqw

Look at how he defends Caron Butler @ 00:52 and Butler is a strong man. Barely gives an inch when Butler gives him the shoulder and doesn't even move on the second bump.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQO9q_oi6B4

Again, gives no ground and forces a move to the baseline.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vxa5uRKDa4

Prevents KD from receiving an entry pass @ 3:07

[Leroy Jetson]

Sucks to be Anthony Davis then. Dude is about to get swept in the 1st round as an MVP candidate in his 3rd year.

Forever to be blocked from being considered great.
When Davis is approaching 30 and assuming he never makes it out of the second round I guarantee he would also be facing the same criticism. Lucky for him he has many years to try to get it done.

[BigNBAfan]

What nba hall of famer had their career defined in their first round? Save your time: none

[Doranku]

What nba hall of famer had their career defined in their first round? Save your time: none

You're right. Future NBA Hall-of-Famer Chris Paul's career is defined in his Conference Finals and Finals performances.

[BigNBAfan]

You're right. Future NBA Hall-of-Famer Chris Paul's career is defined in his Conference Finals and Finals performances.
:applause:

[DMAVS41]

Except then Chris Paul would be given the respect he rightly deserves and not become overrated like Dirk.

Dirk pre 11 did way more than Paul has done to date... It's not close really.

[Guy Dudebro]

What nba hall of famer had their career defined in their first round? Save your time: none

#nosightlineonbigpicture

[FaceBack]

His career was defined when he low blow'd Julius Hodge. CP3 is a flopping punk.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Loaded teams? :biggums:

Bruh. The biggest failure of CP3s career was losing in 6 games to the MVP Kevin Durant and Russell most dominant player in the league Westbrook.

you werent watching in 2008.

[sp6r=underrated]

you werent watching in 2008.

His team took the winner of 3 of the last 5 championships to 7 games in which he annihilated a future HOF PG who was in the middle of his prime. How is that a bad series?

[TheMarkMadsen]

His team took the winner of 3 of the last 5 championships to 7 games in which he annihilated a future HOF PG who was in the middle of his prime. How is that a bad series?

So you just excuse losing b2b elimination games with game 7 being at home?

Follows that up the next get by getting embarrassed by Carnelos nuggets, lost by 60 at home..

[ArbitraryWater]

you werent watching in 2008.

Tell me more about Hornets' stackedness... same year you boast about Kobe beating the "defending champs!!" ...

[Magic 32]

His team took the winner of 3 of the last 5 championships to 7 games in which he annihilated a future HOF PG who was in the middle of his prime. How is that a bad series?

Kobe beat them easy.

And CP3's second option did better than Pau.

http://s21.postimg.org/5aqunbw2v/image.png

http://s2.postimg.org/6rke9o415/image.png

The series would have been over in 6 games if not for David West's greatest game. Paul shot 6-18 in that game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM8c5GI540g

[3ball]

Bad Boys two best players were Zeke and Joe D.

Both under 6'5"

Fail.
Those guys make my point - they DIDN'T dominate their team's distribution of offensive win share - their offensive win share was between like 3-7 each year, which is similar to what everyone on the team had, because they were a balanced team.

Otoh, CP3's offensive win share is liike 12+ every year, while everyone else's is like 3-4 (except like 1 other guy who will be at 7 or so)... So CP3 dominates his team's distribution of offensive win share, and small point guards that do this have never won a championship.

[gts]

Who said that? You can continue to be a little bitch and put words in my mouth, or you can read the detailed explanations of which series Paul should've played better in, and could have won.

Up to you.
I'm putting my money on the bolded

[Wade's Rings]

Chris Paul is his generation's Dirk Nowitzki. Dirk outside of two series (07 Finals, 08 WC1R) was a monster playoff performer. However because his teams failed to win a title people attacked the best player rather than his teammates for underperforming. He finally received the credit for how great of a playoff performer when his team finally won a title.

I wish fans were smart enough to give credit to players on non-title teams but we aren't there yet. Chris Paul's playoff stats are great. He isn't quite at Dirk level but he has very few playoff black marks.

In the 08 WCSF he slaughtered the Spurs. Anyone who blames him for that loss is an idiot who didn't watch the series.

In 2011 he was the best player on the court against a still strong laker team.

In 13 he played great against an excellent Memphis defense. His team lost a close series against a team that has a strong playoff record while they were injured.
In 14, he was the best player in last year's epic series against OKC.

He only has two bad series in his entire career and in both of them he was playing hurt.

The only reason his teams haven't made more noise in the playoffs is the quality of his teammates and how strong the Western Conference has been.

:applause:

[Smoke117]

My man Chris Paul WILL lead the Clippers past the Spurs. If Clippers lose to the Spurs I will leave ISH for the remainder of the playoffs and the off-season. (Milbitch orgasms)

[Graviton]

My man Chris Paul WILL lead the Clippers past the Spurs. If Clippers lose to the Spurs I will leave ISH for the remainder of the playoffs and the off-season. (Milbitch orgasms)
Bookmarked.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Tell me more about Hornets' stackedness... same year you boast about Kobe beating the "defending champs!!" ...

i never said that, moron

Cp3 did have an all star big in David West beside him that year, the same David West who was selected by the coaches to be in the ASG over Pau that year..

Hornets were a talented team, had 2 all stars to the Lakers 1

and yes, Kobe did beat the defending champs that year with his sidekick being the guy who wasn't good enough to make the ASG over Pauls sidekick.., thanks for the reminder

[TheMarkMadsen]

Kobe beat them easy.

And CP3's second option did better than Pau.

http://s21.postimg.org/5aqunbw2v/image.png

http://s2.postimg.org/6rke9o415/image.png

The series would have been over in 6 games if not for David West's greatest game. Paul shot 6-18 in that game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM8c5GI540g

So much ether in this post to idiots like AW

:roll: :roll: