Why does Chris Paul get blamed for the Clippers chokes

[TripleA]

Chris Paul has played well in playoffs while Blake Griffin has shit the bed many times in the post season. They only time I can see that Paul messed up badly was when he turned the ball over flopping against OKC

[GIF REACTION]

Because the players were better in the 80's and 90's

Chris Paul wouldn't even be top 20 in the league

[KembaWalker]

Because it's fun I guess, I see myself as a logical NBA fan and sometimes I'd crack a few CP3 choking jokes to friends who are fans of LAC or him

Same as the whole LeBron 2/6 thing, I KNOW it's not all on him, it's just fun to joke about

[notatop29pg]

The same reason Jordan, Kobe, Lebron etc all get hated on.

[Lebronxrings]

he has a stacked team and still can't get passed the second round. Its not like people are blaming him for not winning a title, but how can you allow your team to blow a 3-1 series lead with you as the self proclaimed best pg.

[inclinerator]

https://j.gifs.com/vVd87D.gif

[R.I.P.]

Watch him during the Rockets come back and you know why. Also CP3 is still touched with kids gloves. Do you see people lay into Steve Nash all the time. At least he could get his teams to conference finals playing against Peak Duncan, Peak Dirk, Peak KG, Peak Kobe and so on. Paul can

[DMAVS41]

its certainly not only his fault, but he's been a part of some absurd chokes the last two years

[Young X]

Because people always wanna blame the best player when things go wrong regardless of what happens. Stupid.

Shit that makes zero sense to me. Like why would you blame the best player when they're the ones positively contributing the most to the team?

By blaming them, you're saying everybody else was fine and THEY were the ones hurting the team when it's literally the exact opposite. How does that make ANY sense?

Now I'm not saying they don't deserve any kind of criticism, but saying the player who played the best is most at fault for a team losing is incredibly stupid.

The only time you'll ever see me blame someone for a team losing is if they either underperform individually or do something that negatively impacts a team.

The only time CP3 deserves serious blame is his game 5 against OKC where he made those stupid mistakes at the end that cost the Clippers the game. That's the only time I've seen him "choke".

[Goro]

Because he is the leader. That is how ISH works.

[Smoke117]

Because so few people know about actual basketball. He carried the clippers on his back on one leg in game 7 vs the reigning champions (and throughout that series in general)...and then was injured during that Rockets series. They lost because they let Jamal Crawford do whatever he wants...and he's an idiot. He's got a lot of talent...but hasn't developed the skill. He can look so great, but he plays the game like a ****ing retard. Then as their starting 2 guard they have the most streaky "great shooter" ever..J.J. "go kill yourself" Reddick who was almost useless half the time. Those two assholes shot them out of the Rockets series.

[T_L_P]

He has had some chokes, but people will always blame the best player on the team when you lose.

[FreezingTsmoove]

He got injured Game 6 against the Rockets

DJ and Blake should have took over but once again we find out..Useless without CP3

The man who operates the #1 offense in the NBA (2 years straight)

[bobopenguin]

U cant blame the white guy (Blake), that would make u look like a racist.

U cant blame on a mental midget kid (DJ), cos u dont jst laugh at disable like that.

U cant blame on a elderly (Doc), cos our society taught us to respect the elder one.

so the best option is to pick on a smallest and brightest black male.

[Fiasco]

Paul is perceived as a leader of the Clippers. He will never escape the criticism losing invites, even though it's flat out naive to blame any one player for a loss in a team sport--especially something as lengthy as arduous as a playoff series.

[LoneyROY7]

He got injured Game 6 against the Rockets

DJ and Blake should have took over but once again we find out..Useless without CP3

The man who operates the #1 offense in the NBA (2 years straight)

What the f*ck are you talking about? Blake led the Clippers to a win by himself in Game 1 vs the Rockets (he had 26/14/13). And had 34/15/4 in game 2 without Paul.

Definitely useless without Paul, RIGHT?

Blake's always been better without CP by the numbers. Sorry to f*ck up your narrative cuz.

[Young X]

What the f*ck are you talking about? Blake led the Clippers to a win by himself in Game 1 vs the Rockets (he had 26/14/13). And had 34/15/4 in game 2 without Paul.

Definitely useless without Paul, RIGHT?

Blake's always been better without CP by the numbers. Sorry to f*ck up your narrative cuz.Neither Blake nor CP should be blamed. They were the ones who held it down the entire time while Barnes and Crawford were useless on both ends.

The only reason the Clippers even got past the Spurs was because of the terrific play from that duo. They got completely outplayed in every other facet of the game. The Spurs' bench DOUBLED the Clippers bench in terms of production.

In the 3 losses to the Rockets, Blake and CP were the only ones who showed up. Why should they be blamed? Makes no sense. So the Clippers would be better off without their contributions?

[warriorfan]

Chris Paul has been lucky to play with offensively gifted power forwards his whole career. That is why his numbers are inflated. It still doesn't change the fact that he has a low ceiling on the overall impact from his game which is why he has never even played in a conference finals game.

[Young X]

David West...the offensively gifted GAWD

[LoneyROY7]

Neither Blake nor CP should be blamed. They were the ones who held it down the entire time while Barnes and Crawford were useless on both ends.

The only reason the Clippers even got past the Spurs was because of the terrific play from that duo. They got completely outplayed in every other facet of the game. The Spurs' bench DOUBLED the Clippers bench in terms of production.

In the 3 losses to the Rockets, Blake and CP were the only ones who showed up. Why should they be blamed? Makes no sense. So the Clippers would be better off without their contributions?

Agreed. Chris and Blake have had the team on their shoulders for the last 4 years with DeAndre really coming into his own the last couple. It's time for some supporting players to step up this year.

[Mr. Jabbar]

Did u guys even watch the houston series last season? geez..

[Young X]

CP3 has such a low impact that over the past 4 seasons he has the highest offensive +/- in the league.

No team has performed better on offense than the Clippers with CP3 on the court, yet...he has a low impact.

He helped turn around the worst franchise in NBA history. Clippers went from missing the playoffs every season to people putting championship expectations on them. Low impact.

[Gileraracer]

Because he's the floor general and has a stacked team. Still not able to reach the WCF :applause:

[masonanddixon]

Because he chokes in the clutch. Turnovers, missed shots, idiotic fouling.

And he has the most stacked team in the league.

Blew 2-0 and 3-1 series leads in the past two postseasons.

The criticism is entirely justified and warranted.

[Genaro]

People always blame the best player but in this case, it's deserved. I love CP3 as a player and I've never been in the "CP is a choker" bus but last season he was disappointing in that Rockets series.
That game 6 in witch they had a enormous lead, Harden was having a terrible game and Rockets were playing with Dwight and reserves, it was ridiculous the Clippers to come up short.
"B-b-b-but Barnes and Reddick were shooting bricks"
It doesn't matter. A great player find ways to win games. If the rest of the team are not hitting, a great player job is to put the team on his back and will them to victory. That what CP did in the Spurs game and because we all know he can do it, it's very frustrating to see him choke like that.

[LikeMike]

CP3 has choked as an individual many times, it isn't just his team.

[aj1987]

I can't think of a player who gets more excuses than CP3. Great player, but just doesn't have the mentality. Heck, even with LeBron's mentality, the dude could've gotten past the Rockets.

[HOoopCityJones]

CP3 has such a low impact that over the past 4 seasons he has the highest offensive +/- in the league.

No team has performed better on offense than the Clippers with CP3 on the court, yet...he has a low impact.

He helped turn around the worst franchise in NBA history. Clippers went from missing the playoffs every season to people putting championship expectations on them. Low impact.

That's supposed to suggest he has the most impact, responsible for a lot of the Teams wins, and great play, right? Then why can't he be criticized likewise when the Team doesn't perform according to his numbers and advance statistics in crucial situations?

It's not like Chris Paul just started doing this when he joined the Clippers, this choking shit at inopportune moments was a staple during his Hornets tenure too.

He's still the best PG, but then again so was Nash for a time and look how people look back on his career.

[All Net]

His has to take some of the blame...you only have to look at the series against the thunder. His late turnover pretty much cost them that series

[Wade's Rings]

Neither Blake nor CP should be blamed. They were the ones who held it down the entire time while Barnes and Crawford were useless on both ends.

The only reason the Clippers even got past the Spurs was because of the terrific play from that duo. They got completely outplayed in every other facet of the game. The Spurs' bench DOUBLED the Clippers bench in terms of production.

In the 3 losses to the Rockets, Blake and CP were the only ones who showed up. Why should they be blamed? Makes no sense. So the Clippers would be better off without their contributions?

In Game 7 Blake didn't really show up. He had nice stats but he didn't have great impact on the Game.

[Wade's Rings]

Because he chokes in the clutch. Turnovers, missed shots, idiotic fouling.

And he has the most stacked team in the league.

:roll:


Blew 2-0 and 3-1 series leads in the past two postseasons.

They weren't up 2-0 on the Thunder.

[Wade's Rings]

That's supposed to suggest he has the most impact, responsible for a lot of the Teams wins, and great play, right? Then why can't he be criticized likewise when the Team doesn't perform according to his numbers and advance statistics in crucial situations?

It's not like Chris Paul just started doing this when he joined the Clippers, this choking shit at inopportune moments was a staple during his Hornets tenure too.

He's still the best PG, but then again so was Nash for a time and look how people look back on his career.

I already know you consider the 2008 Series vs the Spurs a choke but outside of that when did he choke? 2009 & 2011 his teams were outmatched. I don't remember the series before those.

[ClipperRevival]

I've watched about 85-90% of all Clipper games since CP3 has been here and he definitely deserves some blame. His issue is that he overthinks too much in pressure situations, sort of like Peyton Manning. Some of the best players ever in the clutch do the opposite and don't overthink but rather just play the game.

Greatest example of this was his game 5 Thunder debacle. Trying to draw a foul 60 feet from the basket? That was overthinking.

And he should not have let his team give up a 20 point 3rd quarter lead against Houston last year. I know he wasn't directly responsible but as the leader, he should've collected his group and stopped the bleeding.

But he has also been extremely clutch in many playoff games also. So he's had his share of ups and downs in the clutch as a Clipper.

[ClipperRevival]

I already know you consider the 2008 Series vs the Spurs a choke but outside of that when did he choke? 2009 & 2011 his teams were outmatched. I don't remember the series before those.

He was magnificent in the 2011 playoffs versus the Lakers. He was simply outmatched but he did his part, that's for sure.

[Wade's Rings]

He was magnificent in the 2011 playoffs versus the Lakers. He was simply outmatched but he did his part, that's for sure.

Agreed.

[HOoopCityJones]

I already know you consider the 2008 Series vs the Spurs a choke but outside of that when did he choke? 2009 & 2011 his teams were outmatched. I don't remember the series before those.


The Nuggets were good , but they weren't as much of a match up nightmare as we were for them. I'm not faulting Paul for losing to us because we were the better Team ,but at the same time let's not pretend The Lakers weren't on their last legs, The Hornets could've easily upset us like what Dallas eventually did with the talent they still had there. Let's not forget in 2009 David West dropped 24 and 9 in the closeout game so it's not like CP3 didn't have help at all.

[GoatBoy]

Because year after year, he does just that :confusedshrug:

[BoutPractice]

I've never gotten the feeling that Paul individually was a choker. In fact I got the opposite impression.

Whenever he pulls up for that midrange jumper in the 4th quarter, you can pretty much assume it's going in...

Other than that one game against OKC he's been as reliable as they come in pressure situations.

I guess this is somewhat similar to how Dirk was seen (against all evidence) as a choker until he won the title being his usual clutch self. I've even heard some call Carmelo a choker (of all players, they went after the prototypical now-go-get-me-a-bucket star). Paul needs to at least reach the Conference Finals to shake off that undeserved reputation...

[livinglegend]

because he choked when his team needed him against the Rockets

[Young X]

He was magnificent in the 2011 playoffs versus the Lakers. He was simply outmatched but he did his part, that's for sure.Question: What's the difference between that series and the other series like '13 vs. Memphis for example? Or '14 vs. OKC? How did he not "choke" in that Laker series?


That's supposed to suggest he has the most impact, responsible for a lot of the Teams wins, and great play, right? Then why can't he be criticized likewise when the Team doesn't perform according to his numbers and advance statistics in crucial situations?

It's not like Chris Paul just started doing this when he joined the Clippers, this choking shit at inopportune moments was a staple during his Hornets tenure too.

He's still the best PG, but then again so was Nash for a time and look how people look back on his career.No, it's suggesting that he has a high impact on the court. It doesn't automatically = best impact, but you can't have a low impact when you're team plays at that high of a level when you're playing compared to when you're not playing. This shit just doesn't make sense to me.

The Clippers don't make the huge leap as a franchise if CP doesn't have a high impact.

And I never said he shouldn't be criticized when his team doesn't play well. BLAMING him like he was a hindrance to the team though? That's dumb.

In terms of the choking shit, he doesn't have any more chokes than any other high caliber player. Y'all use the choking narrative simply because he hasn't won a championship. He has plenty of clutch moments as well.

[Wade's Rings]

The Nuggets were good , but they weren't as much of a match up nightmare as we were for them. I'm not faulting Paul for losing to us because we were the better Team ,but at the same time let's not pretend The Lakers weren't on their last legs, The Hornets could've easily upset us like what Dallas eventually did with the talent they still had there. Let's not forget in 2009 David West dropped 24 and 9 in the closeout game so it's not like CP3 didn't have help at all.

The Lakers were coming off 3 straight Finals but I felt they were still the better team at the end of the day.

What were West's numbers the 1st 4 Games?

[DMAVS41]

Question: What's the difference between that series and the other series like '13 vs. Memphis for example? Or '14 vs. OKC? How did he not "choke" in that Laker series?

No, it's suggesting that he has a high impact on the court. It doesn't automatically = best impact, but you can't have a low impact when you're team plays at that high of a level when you're playing compared to when you're not playing. This shit just doesn't make sense to me.

The Clippers don't make the huge leap as a franchise if CP doesn't have a high impact.

And I never said he shouldn't be criticized when his team doesn't play well. BLAMING him like he was a hindrance to the team though? That's dumb.

In terms of the choking shit, he doesn't have any more chokes than any other high caliber player. Y'all use the choking narrative simply because he hasn't won a championship. He has plenty of clutch moments as well.

I feel like this is a bit of a straw man. I agree that Paul is usually the best player on his team and playing the best or near the best. So in that sense of course he shouldn't be "blamed" or referred to as a negative.

But I don't think anyone is actually saying that. So I think it's a straw man.

What people mean...and I think you know this...is that as the best player/leader...Paul is going to take heat when his team loses in absurd fashion.

Whether you want to admit it or not...it's simply a fact that the collapse against the Thunder 2 years ago and the all time collapse against the Rockets last playoffs are really bad looks for Paul led teams.

Now, if he had something else to hang his hat on in the playoffs...it wouldn't matter as much. Every player...even all time great players...have black marks on their careers. But most of them have some deep runs or titles or finals appearances...etc...to hang their hats on.

Paul doesn't have that. He has some great moments, but he doesn't have the sustained runs. And that is part of being a great player...being able to sustain a level of play in multiple rounds in the playoffs against the best teams while doing things to prevent your team from collapsing.

I view Paul as clearly one of the best points of all time. I think he's probably the best point since Magic. Anyone questioning his greatness as a player doesn't get it.

However, that doesn't mean we can't talk honestly about his role in two really pathetic collapses these last 2 years combined with never getting out of the 2nd round. Again...it's part of being good at basketball to be able to sustain individual and team play in the playoffs for multiple rounds. At this point...I think it's fair to question Paul's ability to do that given the evidence.

[Smoke117]

I feel like this is a bit of a straw man. I agree that Paul is usually the best player on his team and playing the best or near the best. So in that sense of course he shouldn't be "blamed" or referred to as a negative.

But I don't think anyone is actually saying that. So I think it's a straw man.

What people mean...and I think you know this...is that as the best player/leader...Paul is going to take heat when his team loses in absurd fashion.

Whether you want to admit it or not...it's simply a fact that the collapse against the Thunder 2 years ago and the all time collapse against the Rockets last playoffs are really bad looks for Paul led teams.

Now, if he had something else to hang his hat on in the playoffs...it wouldn't matter as much. Every player...even all time great players...have black marks on their careers. But most of them have some deep runs or titles or finals appearances...etc...to hang their hats on.

Paul doesn't have that. He has some great moments, but he doesn't have the sustained runs. And that is part of being a great player...being able to sustain a level of play in multiple rounds in the playoffs against the best teams while doing things to prevent your team from collapsing.

I view Paul as clearly one of the best points of all time. I think he's probably the best point since Magic. Anyone questioning his greatness as a player doesn't get it.

However, that doesn't mean we can't talk honestly about his role in two really pathetic collapses these last 2 years combined with never getting out of the 2nd round. Again...it's part of being good at basketball to be able to sustain individual and team play in the playoffs for multiple rounds. At this point...I think it's fair to question Paul's ability to do that given the evidence.

We can agree here, at least. The people that talk a whole mess of shit on CP3 just don't understand basketball. He's the best pure point guard in the league, he's the best defensive point guard in the league, he's one of the best scoring pg's in the league...and he's got some huge cajones. He's all grit. He's probably the most talented/skilled basketball player in the league. I think a lot of people forget that he's also only 6'0". If you don't think CP3 is a great basketball player than your opinion on anything basketball related is worthless.

[ClipperRevival]

Question: What's the difference between that series and the other series like '13 vs. Memphis for example? Or '14 vs. OKC? How did he not "choke" in that Laker series?

No, it's suggesting that he has a high impact on the court. It doesn't automatically = best impact, but you can't have a low impact when you're team plays at that high of a level when you're playing compared to when you're not playing. This shit just doesn't make sense to me.

The Clippers don't make the huge leap as a franchise if CP doesn't have a high impact.

And I never said he shouldn't be criticized when his team doesn't play well. BLAMING him like he was a hindrance to the team though? That's dumb.

In terms of the choking shit, he doesn't have any more chokes than any other high caliber player. Y'all use the choking narrative simply because he hasn't won a championship. He has plenty of clutch moments as well.

All about context.

2013 against the Griz, we took a 2-0 lead. Then, their bigs started to rip our bigs a new one, just dominating us. DJ was still a very raw player back then. Blake wasn't ready for the physicality. Gasol and Zo just destroyed us. And Del Negro refused to double their bigs entire series. That is what stood out. And that is what got him fired. CP3 didn't make or break us in that series. It was our bigs getting destroyed by their bigs and Del Negro not doing the right things.

Against the Lakets in 2011, he simply played a clearly superior team and played magnificently. He can only do so much.

In 2014, against OKC, we had game 5 wrapped up. Up 7 with 47 seconds left. But CP3 was directly responsible for the loss. Plain and simple. He gave that game away.

[ClipperRevival]

I want to add that the 2013 loss to Memphis isn't exactly a good look for CP3 either. Anytime you go up 2-0, you shouldn't get swept the next 4 games. I know CP3 did hit the game winner as time expired in game 1 or 2. But again, the main factor in that series was their bigs dominating our bigs and Del Negro not adjusting and playing them straight up the entire series. But as an all time great like CP3 is, you never want to lose a series like that.

[Young X]

I feel like this is a bit of a straw man. I agree that Paul is usually the best player on his team and playing the best or near the best. So in that sense of course he shouldn't be "blamed" or referred to as a negative.

But I don't think anyone is actually saying that. So I think it's a straw man.

What people mean...and I think you know this...is that as the best player/leader...Paul is going to take heat when his team loses in absurd fashion.

Whether you want to admit it or not...it's simply a fact that the collapse against the Thunder 2 years ago and the all time collapse against the Rockets last playoffs are really bad looks for Paul led teams.I don't know how many times I've said that CP3 does deserve a little criticism/heat. Anytime a team loses especially in a disappointing fashion like that, the star player/leader does deserve a little blame. Not arguing against that.

But he doesn't deserve all the blame. When the Clippers lose, CP3 gets all the blame no matter what he does. That's not a straw man, it's the truth. People act like he's the problem with the Clippers which couldn't be further from the truth.


Now, if he had something else to hang his hat on in the playoffs...it wouldn't matter as much. Every player...even all time great players...have black marks on their careers. But most of them have some deep runs or titles or finals appearances...etc...to hang their hats on.

Paul doesn't have that. He has some great moments, but he doesn't have the sustained runs. And that is part of being a great player...being able to sustain a level of play in multiple rounds in the playoffs against the best teams while doing things to prevent your team from collapsing.

I view Paul as clearly one of the best points of all time. I think he's probably the best point since Magic. Anyone questioning his greatness as a player doesn't get it.

However, that doesn't mean we can't talk honestly about his role in two really pathetic collapses these last 2 years combined with never getting out of the 2nd round. Again...it's part of being good at basketball to be able to sustain individual and team play in the playoffs for multiple rounds. At this point...I think it's fair to question Paul's ability to do that given the evidence.See, I don't agree with this at all.

I don't think it's fair to question Paul's ability to sustain great play in multiple rounds. He's been extremely consistent in the playoffs. Out of 11 series, only 2 of them have been bad/disappointing and they were both directly related to injuries ('09 Nuggets, '12 Spurs). Outside of that he's been great.

I also don't think him not getting out of the 2nd round is an indictment on his impact and ability. He's played on 3 teams in his career that were realistically capable of getting to the WCF:

'08 Hornets
'14 Clippers
'15 Clippers

They lost to:

56 win Spurs
59 win Thunder (w/o HCA)
56 win Rockets (w/o HCA)

CP3 averaged a combined 23/11/4 on 59 TS% in these series. 2 of them went all the way to 7 and all the series he's lost were to teams with either the same or more wins than his.

I'm sorry but that's not enough for me to start questioning his ability.

[DMAVS41]

I don't know how many times I've said that CP3 does deserve a little criticism/heat. Anytime a team loses especially in a disappointing fashion like that, the star player/leader does deserve a little blame. Not arguing against that.

But he doesn't deserve all the blame. When the Clippers lose, CP3 gets all the blame no matter what he does. That's not a straw man, it's the truth. People act like he's the problem with the Clippers which couldn't be further from the truth.

See, I don't agree with this at all.

I don't think it's fair to question Paul's ability to sustain great play in multiple rounds. He's been extremely consistent in the playoffs. Out of 11 series, only 2 of them have been bad/disappointing and they were both directly related to injuries ('09 Nuggets, '12 Spurs). Outside of that he's been great.

I also don't think him not getting out of the 2nd round is an indictment on his impact and ability. He's played on 3 teams in his career that were realistically capable of getting to the WCF:

'08 Hornets
'14 Clippers
'15 Clippers

They lost to:

56 win Spurs
59 win Thunder (w/o HCA)
56 win Rockets (w/o HCA)

CP3 averaged a combined 23/11/4 on 59 TS% in these series. 2 of them went all the way to 7 and all the series he's lost were to teams with either the same or more wins than his.

I'm sorry but that's not enough for me to start questioning his ability.

Who is saying it's all his fault though? I don't see anyone consistently claiming that it's all Paul's fault. This just seems like a straw man as I don't see anyone worth responding to actually claiming it's all on Paul.

Your response to my assertion seems kind of like another straw man. There are of course perfectly understandable reasons why Paul's teams lost those series you listed....and Paul absolutely has overall played great.

However, that wasn't my point. My point was that Paul has yet to do something in his entire career. He's had multiple chances at it...great chances...and he and his teams have failed. I'm not saying he can't do it nor projecting he won't.

I'm simply saying that it is fair to question a player that hasn't done something entering year 11 of their career...when there are no deep runs...etc. to hang his hat on. He's likely only going to get worse as a player as well and the conference is only getting tougher. There is a real chance it doesn't happen again this year. I hope it does because I like Paul and love watching the Clippers, but it's a real chance they don't make the WCF yet again.

So I think there are two levels of conversation going on here.

1 is whether or not Paul is a great player. He clearly is and only someone ignorant to the game and it's history would say otherwise in my opinion.

The other conversation is a more nuanced debate about just how great Paul has been to date and whether or not it's fair to hold him accountable for not getting deep into the playoffs.

I think it's fair to hold him accountable to a certain degree (of course not fully blaming him) and question his ability to sustain his play/team deep into the playoffs without having some form of a collapse. I think this is clearly fair as in reality he's yet to prove he can do this.

So maybe I and others are holding Paul to a higher standard than you are, but I'd expect someone of his greatness to win at least one of the series you referenced above. Not only has he not, but he's a large part of some epic collapses.

And I think it's more than fair to mention those...while also pointing out that he's clearly one of the best points ever.

[Young X]

All about context.

2013 against the Griz, we took a 2-0 lead. Then, their bigs started to rip our bigs a new one, just dominating us. DJ was still a very raw player back then. Blake wasn't ready for the physicality. Gasol and Zo just destroyed us. And Del Negro refused to double their bigs entire series. That is what stood out. And that is what got him fired. CP3 didn't make or break us in that series. It was our bigs getting destroyed by their bigs and Del Negro not doing the right things.

Against the Lakets in 2011, he simply played a clearly superior team and played magnificently. He can only do so much.

In 2014, against OKC, we had game 5 wrapped up. Up 7 with 47 seconds left. But CP3 was directly responsible for the loss. Plain and simple. He gave that game away.I don't know if you remember, but against Memphis in 2013 Blake Griffin injured his ankle after game 4 with the series tied 2-2.

He only played 17 MPG in the next 2 games and averaged 7/4. He could barely run and basically wasn't even there.

CP averaged 32/6/5 on 65 TS% in the next 2 games to pick up the slack but the team was too undermanned to beat the Grizzlies.

It was basically CP by himself. He was in the same position he was in against the Lakers in 2011. That's why I asked you that question.

I think he played even better against Memphis and OKC than he did against the Lakers.


...I see what you're saying and I think I've had this debate with you before.

You need to see the Clippers go further in the postseason and maybe win the title to find out how good CP3 really is? Am I right?

I don't. If the Clippers win a championship next season or even get to the conference finals, my opinion on CP won't change at all.

If they win in 2016 it won't be because of anything CP3 does, it will be because they fixed the problems the team has consistently been having keeping them from being a true championship caliber team which has little to do with Chris Paul.

I don't need to see the end result happen to make a conclusion. That's the difference.

I didn't need to see Dirk and the Mavs playoff run in 2011 to know how great he truly was.

I don't measure a player's greatness on playoff success and results. All that matters to me is how consistently they impact the game on both sides of the court.

[DMAVS41]

I don't know if you remember, but against Memphis in 2013 Blake Griffin injured his ankle after game 4 with the series tied 2-2.

He only played 17 MPG in the next 2 games and averaged 7/4. He could barely run and basically wasn't even there.

CP averaged 32/6/5 on 65 TS% in the next 2 games to pick up the slack but the team was too undermanned to beat the Grizzlies.

It was basically CP by himself. He was in the same position he was in against the Lakers in 2011. That's why I asked you that question.

I think he played even better against Memphis and OKC than he did against the Lakers.

I see what you're saying and I think I've had this debate with you before.

You need to see the Clippers go further in the postseason and maybe win the title to find out how good CP3 really is? Am I right?

I don't. If the Clippers win a championship next season or even get to the conference finals, my opinion on CP won't change at all.

If they win in 2016 it won't be because of anything CP3 does, it will be because they fixed the problems the team has consistently been having keeping them from being a true championship caliber team which has little to do with Chris Paul.

I don't need to see the end result happen to make a conclusion. That's the difference.

I didn't need to see Dirk and the Mavs playoff run in 2011 to know how great he truly was.

I don't measure a player's greatness on playoff success and results. All that matters to me is how consistently they impact the game on both sides of the court.

You seem really good a predicting the future. If they win the title this year...it won't be because of anything Paul does or did. Interesting. What if they get into another road game 5 with the Thunder and instead of an epic choke by Paul this time...he comes through and they go on to win the series. That will be a product of fixing the team? Nah...it won't.

There is just a huge difference here. How a player performs in the biggest games/moments of their careers, imo, absolutely should factor into where a player ranks.

Like really? If Paul and the Clippers have a 3rd straight meltdown in these playoffs it won't alter your view at all? For one, I don't believe that...but if true, I really think you need to rethink that position.

You are essentially saying that would these guys actually do in the games doesn't matter. Even worse...what these guys do in the most important games of their careers doesn't matter.

That is what separates the great from all time great...on and on.

Dirk of today wouldn't be the Dirk of today if 2011 didn't happen. The hypothetical Dirk that played slightly worse in 11 and lost to the Blazers would just objectively worse than the player that went on to lead his team to a title.

What happens on the court is a reflection of how good players are. You can't just ignore everything that happens in the playoffs and essentially chalk it up to luck and circumstances.

Of course luck and circumstances are part of it...and that is why no 1 play, game, series, or year ever defines a player...but you take it all in and you have the best idea of how good a player is.

Just don't get the urge to use a smaller sample than reality gives us.

[ClipperRevival]

You seem really good a predicting the future. If they win the title this year...it won't be because of anything Paul does or did. Interesting. What if they get into another road game 5 with the Thunder and instead of an epic choke by Paul this time...he comes through and they go on to win the series. That will be a product of fixing the team? Nah...it won't.

There is just a huge difference here. How a player performs in the biggest games/moments of their careers, imo, absolutely should factor into where a player ranks.

Like really? If Paul and the Clippers have a 3rd straight meltdown in these playoffs it won't alter your view at all? For one, I don't believe that...but if true, I really think you need to rethink that position.

You are essentially saying that would these guys actually do in the games doesn't matter. Even worse...what these guys do in the most important games of their careers doesn't matter.

That is what separates the great from all time great...on and on.

Dirk of today wouldn't be the Dirk of today if 2011 didn't happen. The hypothetical Dirk that played slightly worse in 11 and lost to the Blazers would just objectively worse than the player that went on to lead his team to a title.

What happens on the court is a reflection of how good players are. You can't just ignore everything that happens in the playoffs and essentially chalk it up to luck and circumstances.

Of course luck and circumstances are part of it...and that is why no 1 play, game, series, or year ever defines a player...but you take it all in and you have the best idea of how good a player is.

Just don't get the urge to use a smaller sample than reality gives us.

I clearly recall exchanging with your regarding how much impact one great player had in winning. You said winning is circumstances and that a great player doesn't have much say in it and I said that one player can.

Did you have a change of thinking or did I misunderstand you?

[DMAVS41]

I clearly recall exchanging with your regarding how much impact one great player had in winning. You said winning is circumstances and that a great player doesn't have much say in it and I said that one player can pretty.

Did you have a change of thinking or did I misunderstand you?

I think you are confused. It's not just about winning at all...

It's about how well players play. I wouldn't say anything about Paul the last two years if he wasn't a huge part of two epic collapses that killed his teams chances of winning.

You guys make it sound like I'm saying he isn't great because he has 0 titles.

For starters, I think he is great, but I also question some things given he's never lead a team beyond round 2 with multiple chances and he's had two straight epic collapses in round 2.

I think it's stupid to say player x is better than player y solely on titles. That doesn't mean winning is completely irrelevant though.

It's such an odd thing on here that people can't have multiple things going on. Either it's all circumstances and luck or it's all one player.

Reality doesn't work like that. I know it's easier when everything is black or white, but that just isn't how the world works.

[Paul George 24]

Because the players were better in the 80's and 90's

Chris Paul wouldn't even be top 20 in the league
he is not as overhype as lebron did

[Young X]

You seem really good a predicting the future. If they win the title this year...it won't be because of anything Paul does or did. Interesting. What if they get into another road game 5 with the Thunder and instead of an epic choke by Paul this time...he comes through and they go on to win the series. That will be a product of fixing the team? Nah...it won't.

There is just a huge difference here. How a player performs in the biggest games/moments of their careers, imo, absolutely should factor into where a player ranks.

Like really? If Paul and the Clippers have a 3rd straight meltdown in these playoffs it won't alter your view at all? For one, I don't believe that...but if true, I really think you need to rethink that position.

You are essentially saying that would these guys actually do in the games doesn't matter. Even worse...what these guys do in the most important games of their careers doesn't matter.

That is what separates the great from all time great...on and on.

Dirk of today wouldn't be the Dirk of today if 2011 didn't happen. The hypothetical Dirk that played slightly worse in 11 and lost to the Blazers would just objectively worse than the player that went on to lead his team to a title.

What happens on the court is a reflection of how good players are. You can't just ignore everything that happens in the playoffs and essentially chalk it up to luck and circumstances.

Of course luck and circumstances are part of it...and that is why no 1 play, game, series, or year ever defines a player...but you take it all in and you have the best idea of how good a player is.

Just don't get the urge to use a smaller sample than reality gives us.The thing is, your hypothetical isn't realistic. CP's always gonna have a bad game/moment that will hurt his team. He's not gonna come through every time. What makes those 40 or so seconds against OKC worse than a 4-19 shooting night or something?

If the Clippers improve to a true championship level then one bad quarter from CP3 wouldn't affect their chances at winning as much as they do. He should be allowed to have a bad game or a "choke" once in a while and still be able to win.

Your Mavs did the same thing the Clippers did (game 6 Houston) against the Blazers in 2011. They squandered a 20+ 4th quarter lead and ended up losing the game. Do you think they would've bounced back like they did if they hadn't grown into the championship team that they were? It wasn't just about Dirk. Dirk didn't magically become better in one year at age of 33, the circumstances around him got better. This isn't counted as a choke for Dirk because he ended up winning in the end.

No the playoffs aren't just about luck and circumstances but they do play a huge role and can negatively affect one player more than another. I believe luck and circumstances have affected CP3 more than any other player of his caliber. He's played in the toughest conference in league history and he hasn't been on the best team so his playoff competition due to seeding has ridiculously tough and will continue to be in the future.

You can't tell me the Clippers facing the Spurs in the 1st round last season isn't extremely unlucky.

You can't tell me facing OKC in the 2nd round of the playoffs without homecourt isn't unlucky.

You can't tell me CP3 never once facing a sub 50 win team in 11 series isn't extremely unlucky.

If you put him and his teams in the east from '08 to now, would he still not have gotten to the finals or conference finals? Would you still question his ability and impact?

No you wouldn't. That's why playoff team success don't mean a whole lot to me when it comes to measuring greatness.

[DMAVS41]

The thing is, your hypothetical isn't realistic. CP's always gonna have a bad game/moment that will hurt his team. He's not gonna come through every time. What makes those 40 or so seconds against OKC worse than a 4-19 shooting night or something?

If the Clippers improve to a true championship level then one bad quarter from CP3 wouldn't affect their chances at winning as much as they do. He should be allowed to have a bad game or a "choke" once in a while and still be able to win.

Your Mavs did the same thing the Clippers did (game 6 Houston) against the Blazers in 2011. They squandered a 20+ 4th quarter lead and ended up losing the game. Do you think they would've bounced back like they did if they hadn't grown into the championship team that they were? It wasn't just about Dirk. Dirk didn't magically become better in one year at age of 33, the circumstances around him got better. This isn't counted as a choke for Dirk because he ended up winning in the end.

No the playoffs aren't just about luck and circumstances but they do play a huge role and can negatively affect one player more than another. I believe luck and circumstances have affected CP3 more than any other player of his caliber. He's played in the toughest conference in league history and he hasn't been on the best team so his playoff competition due to seeding has ridiculously tough and will continue to be in the future.

You can't tell me the Clippers facing the Spurs in the 1st round last season isn't extremely unlucky.

You can't tell me facing OKC in the 2nd round of the playoffs without homecourt isn't unlucky.

You can't tell me CP3 never once facing a sub 50 win team in 11 series isn't extremely unlucky.

If you put him and his teams in the east from '08 to now, would he still not have gotten to the finals or conference finals? Would you still question his ability and impact?

No you wouldn't. That's why playoff team success don't mean a whole lot to me when it comes to measuring greatness.

Again...you aren't responding to my points.

If CP3 is always going to have a bad game in a series and is always going to have a bad moment in a pivotal sequence....then we have to factor that into where we place him amongst his peers.

It's not about the winning/losing solely...it's not even the majority at all. It's about the level of play. And what players do in the playoffs heavily factors into level of play. Again, if the Clippers lose to the Rockets and Paul is great...you won't see his name mentioned by me.

This whole narrow minded thinking here is really getting on my nerves.

You can have a player on a team play absolutely great and still get bounced early in the playoffs. In that case...there is really nothing anyone can reasonably say. Dirk in 2009 is a good example. We got crushed by the Nuggets, but that might be the best Dirk ever was a basketball player. I don't think it makes sense to criticize him. Converse that with the 06 finals...Dirk does deserve criticism for not playing better. Now, there were problems with the team and coach not too different than what you are talking about with the Clippers.

It's not either or. A team can be not perfect...and a player can still deserve criticism for performance.


It's a total red herring to talk about Dirk not magically getting better. I never claimed he did. Just like I'm not claiming Paul will magically be better next year if the Clippers win.

You continue to argue with a ghost on those points.

The problem with your view is that it only makes sense looking back. You seem to like bringing up the 11 Mavs...well guess what...they are only thought of as a title contender because they won. If they had lost to the Lakers in round 2 with Dirk playing average...nobody would have even blinked and everyone would have just thought of them as a good, but not great team.

But Dirk was elite in that series and in the Thunder series. Like unreal elite. But if he doesn't play like that...you wouldn't consider them contenders.

See? Dirk goes for 38 instead of 48 and misses 3 ft's in game 1 against the Thunder and they lose...and then go on to lose the series with Dirk playing great. We can't criticize Dirk because he was great and under your view there was a problem with the team. You are doing the same thing with the 14 Clippers. How do you know they wouldn't have won the title if they win game 5 against the Thunder? Please show is this crystal ball you have that makes you so sure. That's why Paul gets heat...that joke of a joke of a joke of a sequence cost the Clippers any chance at the title that year. It's not then a fair move from a Paul fan like yourself to then jump to "team has flaws"...of course they do. every team does..

Sometimes it takes truly special games, moments, and series to win a title. Like the game 7 against the Spurs. It might take 3 games like that and 3 game winning shots like that for a team like the Clippers to win.

I already know Paul is one of the best ever. I want to see if he's capable of that kind of greatness. I want to see if he can string together something like Dirk in 11 that you are talking about.

3 years ago I definitely thought he could. Now I'm a bit unsure...in his two best chances to make noise...he and his team fell apart completely. I don't think you realize how bad it was that the Clippers lost to the Rockets man...it's all time bad. And with Paul not having much else in the playoffs for him...that stings a bit more than when other players have those moments.

[Young X]

It's not about the winning/losing solely...it's not even the majority at all. It's about the level of play. And what players do in the playoffs heavily factors into level of play. Again, if the Clippers lose to the Rockets and Paul is great...you won't see his name mentioned by me.By "great" do you mean great in crucial moments or in general? Because outside of his blunders in game 5 against OKC he played extremely well in both series. He was great against the Spurs in 2008 as well.


See? Dirk goes for 38 instead of 48 and misses 3 ft's in game 1 against the Thunder and they lose...and then go on to lose the series with Dirk playing great. We can't criticize Dirk because he was great and under your view there was a problem with the team. You are doing the same thing with the 14 Clippers. How do you know they wouldn't have won the title if they win game 5 against the Thunder? Please show is this crystal ball you have that makes you so sure. That's why Paul gets heat...that joke of a joke of a joke of a sequence cost the Clippers any chance at the title that year. It's not then a fair move from a Paul fan like yourself to then jump to "team has flaws"...of course they do. every team does..You're right, I don't know what would've happened had the Clippers won that game. It is very unlikely that they win the title though considering there was a team like the '14 Spurs standing in their way.

I think you put a little bit too much stock into those singular games and moments. Yeah, CP had that terrible finish against OKC but he was great outside of that. Just the game before he led a 22 point comeback, had 23/10 and played excellent defense on Durant down the stretch. In game 1 he dropped 8 threes in 3 quarters. His play was the only thing that kept the series competitive.


Sometimes it takes truly special games, moments, and series to win a title. Like the game 7 against the Spurs. It might take 3 games like that and 3 game winning shots like that for a team like the Clippers to win.

I already know Paul is one of the best ever. I want to see if he's capable of that kind of greatness. I want to see if he can string together something like Dirk in 11 that you are talking about.

3 years ago I definitely thought he could. Now I'm a bit unsure...in his two best chances to make noise...he and his team fell apart completely. I don't think you realize how bad it was that the Clippers lost to the Rockets man...it's all time bad. And with Paul not having much else in the playoffs for him...that stings a bit more than when other players have those moments.Saying all this, what do CP and the Clippers have to do next season? If he plays at his normal level and the Clippers win the title where would you rank him?

[DMAVS41]

By "great" do you mean great in crucial moments or in general? Because outside of his blunders in game 5 against OKC he played extremely well in both series. He was great against the Spurs in 2008 as well.

You're right, I don't know what would've happened had the Clippers won that game. It is very unlikely that they win the title though considering there was a team like the '14 Spurs standing in their way.

I think you put a little bit too much stock into those singular games and moments. Yeah, CP had that terrible finish against OKC but he was great outside of that. Just the game before he led a 22 point comeback, had 23/10 and played excellent defense on Durant down the stretch. In game 1 he dropped 8 threes in 3 quarters. His play was the only thing that kept the series competitive.

Saying all this, what do CP and the Clippers have to do next season? If he plays at his normal level and the Clippers win the title where would you rank him?


I'm not putting much weight on those moments actually. Not like I dropped Paul in my all time rankings last year. In fact, he went up for me. I just think it's fair to mention everything.

I don't question his greatness. I know you feel the need to, but I don't need you to remind me about something that happened so recently. Paul is an all time great player. Again...I agree with this. The question is how great...and that is best determined taking all information throughout a career in. I don't see any reason to cut off evidence when it's coming in.

If Paul leads the Clips to the title next year? I don't know where I would rank him all time as I haven't really thought about his specific ranking. He would definitely go up. Assuming he plays great and they go through the Spurs, Warriors, Rockets, Thunder combination and then the Cavs? Would be one of the most impressive titles of all time quite frankly.

So if Paul was the driving force behind that...he'd probably go into the top 30 for me...or around that...have to think more, but he'd be around that range.

[houston]

DMAVS breaking down. Paul is great no doubt but vastly overrated similar how Payton use to underachieve with the sonics in the 90's.

[r0drig0lac]

Because he's the floor general and has a stacked team. Still not able to reach the WCF :applause:

this, even if people try to make other excuses

[sd3035]

Paul gets hate because he's such a little bitch

[SpecialQue]

Paul gets hate because he's such a little bitch

I have to agree that Paul's on the court antics make him a very easy target for hate even if, for the most part, he doesn't deserve it.

[greatest-ever]

Well against OKC in 2014, he made cruial mistakes like turning te ball over and fouling Westrook on a 3 at the end of game 5. He deserves a lot of blame for that one, they blew a 7 point lead in 49 seconds or something like that, Paul should've closed that deal and they would've been up 3-2. It 2015 i don't think he should get a pass for missing the first 2 games against the Rockets, and even though they managed a 3-1 lead i think he could've done enough to get them at least one more win. The onus doesn't all go on him but he isn't 100 % free of blame like his fans want you to believe.

[Doranku]

Well against OKC in 2014, he made cruial mistakes like turning te ball over and fouling Westrook on a 3 at the end of game 5. He deserves a lot of blame for that one, they blew a 7 point lead in 49 seconds or something like that, Paul should've closed that deal and they would've been up 3-2. It 2015 i don't think he should get a pass for missing the first 2 games against the Rockets, and even though they managed a 3-1 lead i think he could've done enough to get them at least one more win. The onus doesn't all go on him but he isn't 100 % free of blame like his fans want you to believe.

lol I remember this game. One of the biggest choke jobs I've ever seen from an individual player, yet no one ever brings it up.

#ChrisPaulPrivilege

[DMAVS41]

DMAVS breaking down. Paul is great no doubt but vastly overrated similar how Payton use to underachieve with the sonics in the 90's.

So you say he's great and I say he's great. Yet somehow I'm vastly overrating him?

This doesn't make sense.

[Wade's Rings]

lol I remember this game. One of the biggest choke jobs I've ever seen from an individual player, yet no one ever brings it up.

#ChrisPaulPrivilege

It's always brought up, it was mentioned multiple times in this thread.

[Young X]

I just think the whole not getting to the finals/conference finals thing is way overblown.

When you break down CP3's career, he's been on 4 elite teams in 10 seasons. '08 Hornets and '13-'15 Clippers.

The other teams he's been on were either...

non playoff teams (rookie year, 2nd year, injured 45 game season in 2010) or overmatched teams that had no chance of getting to the WCF ('09 & '11 Hornets, '12 Clippers).

I've already explained what happened in 2013. Blake went down after game 4 when the series was tied 2-2 and barely played in the next 2 games. CP was excellent in games 5 and 6 but he was basically out there by himself against a better Grizzlies team. I don't think this should be held against him.

That leaves the '08 Spurs series, '14 Thunder series and the Rockets series last season.

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve any criticism for these series. It's not like he was amazing. His last 2 games against the Spurs weren't that great and his game 5 finish against OKC was horrible. Plus you could criticize him for missing the first 2 games against Houston with injury.

I just don't think it's enough to start questioning his ability/impact or even to go as far as to start calling him a loser. It's 3 series against 2 higher seeded opponents that had homecourt and one against the defending champs that had the same record/were just as good as his team. In those 3 series combined he averaged almost 23/11/4 on 59 TS%.

If he had been in the east and those opponents were the Nets/Wizards/Hawks he'd likely have gotten to the conference finals or even the finals and no one would be questioning his greatness as a player.

[DMAVS41]

I just think the whole not getting to the finals/conference finals thing is way overblown.

When you break down CP3's career, he's been on 4 elite teams in 10 seasons. '08 Hornets and '13-'15 Clippers.

The other teams he's been on were either...

non playoff teams (rookie year, 2nd year, injured 45 game season in 2010) or overmatched teams that had no chance of getting to the WCF ('09 & '11 Hornets, '12 Clippers).

I've already explained what happened in 2013. Blake went down after game 4 when the series was tied 2-2 and barely played in the next 2 games. CP was excellent in games 5 and 6 but he was basically out there by himself against a better Grizzlies team. I don't think this should be held against him.

That leaves the '08 Spurs series, '14 Thunder series and the Rockets series last season.

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve any criticism for these series. It's not like he was amazing. His last 2 games against the Spurs weren't that great and his game 5 finish against OKC was horrible. Plus you could criticize him for missing the first 2 games against Houston with injury.

I just don't think it's enough to start questioning his ability/impact or even to go as far as to start calling him a loser. It's 3 series against 2 higher seeded opponents that had homecourt and one against the defending champs that had the same record/were just as good as his team. In those 3 series combined he averaged almost 23/11/4 on 59 TS%.

If he had been in the east and those opponents were the Nets/Wizards/Hawks he'd likely have gotten to the conference finals or even the finals and no one would be questioning his greatness as a player.

Who, that isn't a troll, is calling Chris Paul a career loser? I mean, I'm sure someone is, but I just don't see the point of basing all your posts off something nobody but ignorant posters are saying.

Those series aren't everything, but they aren't nothing either. You seem to be advocating that they are nothing. Which is just false in my opinion.

[Young X]

Who, that isn't a troll, is calling Chris Paul a career loser? I mean, I'm sure someone is, but I just don't see the point of basing all your posts off something nobody but ignorant posters are saying.

Those series aren't everything, but they aren't nothing either. You seem to be advocating that they are nothing. Which is just false in my opinion.I see it all the time even by non trolls. It's a reputation he's definitely received that I don't feel he deserves.

And I'm not trying to say those series don't mean anything, I just don't think they're bad enough especially individually for CP. The way the Clippers have lost the last 2 seasons has been what looks bad but I think CP played well enough in all 3 series honestly. His game 5 against OKC has been literally his only bad game.

[FreezingTsmoove]

What the f*ck are you talking about? Blake led the Clippers to a win by himself in Game 1 vs the Rockets (he had 26/14/13). And had 34/15/4 in game 2 without Paul.

Definitely useless without Paul, RIGHT?

Blake's always been better without CP by the numbers. Sorry to f*ck up your narrative cuz.

He looked useless as **** in Game 6 with a chance to win and go to the WCF :lol

Where were those stats in game 6 cuz? After CP3 was hobbled with injury :lol

Useless dog

[dhsilv]

I just think the whole not getting to the finals/conference finals thing is way overblown.

When you break down CP3's career, he's been on 4 elite teams in 10 seasons. '08 Hornets and '13-'15 Clippers.

The other teams he's been on were either...

non playoff teams (rookie year, 2nd year, injured 45 game season in 2010) or overmatched teams that had no chance of getting to the WCF ('09 & '11 Hornets, '12 Clippers).

I've already explained what happened in 2013. Blake went down after game 4 when the series was tied 2-2 and barely played in the next 2 games. CP was excellent in games 5 and 6 but he was basically out there by himself against a better Grizzlies team. I don't think this should be held against him.

That leaves the '08 Spurs series, '14 Thunder series and the Rockets series last season.

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve any criticism for these series. It's not like he was amazing. His last 2 games against the Spurs weren't that great and his game 5 finish against OKC was horrible. Plus you could criticize him for missing the first 2 games against Houston with injury.

I just don't think it's enough to start questioning his ability/impact or even to go as far as to start calling him a loser. It's 3 series against 2 higher seeded opponents that had homecourt and one against the defending champs that had the same record/were just as good as his team. In those 3 series combined he averaged almost 23/11/4 on 59 TS%.

If he had been in the east and those opponents were the Nets/Wizards/Hawks he'd likely have gotten to the conference finals or even the finals and no one would be questioning his greatness as a player.

This is well done, but I'll add another element. His teams have had very weak benches, I'm not talking about his backups per say but just as a whole. The result is that there are huge dropoffs and even he and his starters are gassed at the ends of games often leading to mistakes.

There's reason to be question him as yes he's not lived up in the playoffs to what we'd like, but things happen. That's just basketball.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

He looked useless as **** in Game 6 with a chance to win and go to the WCF :lol

Where were those stats in game 6 cuz? After CP3 was hobbled with injury :lol

Useless dog

Damn.

:oldlol:

[masonanddixon]

Also, if he were white he'd get called soft and a choker about 100000x more than he does.

[LoneyROY7]

He looked useless as **** in Game 6 with a chance to win and go to the WCF :lol

Where were those stats in game 6 cuz? After CP3 was hobbled with injury :lol

Useless dog

He had 28/8 on 12 of 20 shooting in game 6, cuz. :lol

He had 27/11/6 on 13 of 23 shooting in game 7, dog. :oldlol:

OH SHIT SON, THERE GOES YOUR NARRATIVE FLYING OUT THE WINDOW.

:yaohappy: