Who's a better player Wade or CP3? [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

Mass Debator

11-24-2015, 03:03 PM

Wade has had a few rough games but I'm quite pleased with his play so far. His turnovers are down and his defense has been excellent. He's making good decisions with the ball, playing within the offense / limiting his iso's, and his defensive close-outs are much improved. At 22/6/4/2/1 per 36, his overall per-minute production is right where it needs to be. I expect his fg% will come back up and start trending toward the norm.
He's like 3x more athletic than last year. The speed is back even though his hops are so-so. You can see him trusting his body more as he continues to attack. You can tell he put in work during the offseason even though he was still caught up in the glitz and glam of being "fashionable"

LikeMike

11-24-2015, 03:36 PM

Currently - CP3

Peak - Wade

Career - Wade

Pretty easy question to answer.

TheImmortal

11-24-2015, 03:45 PM

This season: Wade

All-Time: Wade by far.. not even close.

GrapeApe

11-24-2015, 03:50 PM

all those arrows for 15-20 slots and like one tier seperating them?

You insecure

Yeah, he obviously exaggerated the gap, but I'm curious where you (and others) think CP3 ranks all-time. Is he considered a top 40 player? Top 50? I've never really given it much thought. Off the top of my head I can think of a handful of PG's ahead of him but he's probably top 10.

Most people have Wade in the 20-25 range. (I have him at 18. Yes I'm biased, but I can make a very strong, thorough, and objective case to back my ranking. However I don't feel like getting into it right now, as I'm mostly interested in where Paul is thought to be ranked.)

Paul has excellent career numbers in both the regular season and playoffs, but having never advanced past the 2nd round definitely hurts him. That being said, he's still just 30 years old so he has plenty of time to strengthen the resume. If he were to win a title and a FMVP he could shoot up the rankings pretty substantially.

Smoke117

11-24-2015, 04:06 PM

He's like 3x more athletic than last year. The speed is back even though his hops are so-so. You can see him trusting his body more as he continues to attack. You can tell he put in work during the offseason even though he was still caught up in the glitz and glam of being "fashionable"

I'm definitely not worried as much when he falls as I was compared to last year. Every time he hit the floor last season I was holding my breath hoping he didn't get hurt. He seems much less fragile so far this season than he was last season...but there are still a lot of games to go and him being healthy come playoff time is what is going to matter the most.

GrapeApe

11-24-2015, 04:09 PM

He's like 3x more athletic than last year. The speed is back even though his hops are so-so. You can see him trusting his body more as he continues to attack. You can tell he put in work during the offseason even though he was still caught up in the glitz and glam of being "fashionable"

No doubt, and it definitely appears he worked hard in the off-season. He looks better physically than he has since the 2013 regular season. He obviously doesn't get up like he used to, but he's shown improved quickness, change of direction, and defensive range. His off-ball movement has also been excellent. He creates a ton of opportunities for teammates by defenses reacting to his off-ball cuts. It's a thing of beauty.

aj1987

11-24-2015, 05:21 PM

all those arrows for 15-20 slots and like one tier seperating them?

You insecure
I know you're an 18 year old kid from Germany, who basically knows nothing about basketball outside riding LeBron.

Wade is ~20 all-time. CP3 isn't even top 60 all-time. Unless you consider CP3 to be ranked ~35-40 (which is beyond retarded), Wade >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CP3.

ArbitraryWater

11-24-2015, 05:28 PM

I know you're an 18 year old kid from Germany, who basically knows nothing about basketball outside riding LeBron.

Wade is ~20 all-time. CP3 isn't even top 60 all-time. Unless you consider CP3 to be ranked ~35-40 (which is beyond retarded), Wade >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CP3.

You drivel off the point once more, to your embarrassment, when you do actually adress the point (bold), nothing but stupidity comes out of you.

Pushing the "Germany" part I find ironic, given that you're living in India? Yea, that's funny, backfire.

Milbuck

11-24-2015, 05:31 PM

I know you're an 18 year old kid from Germany, who basically knows nothing about basketball outside riding LeBron.

http://massappeal.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/dwade-damn-sip-water.gif

Wade's Rings

11-24-2015, 05:41 PM

I know you're an 18 year old kid from Germany, who basically knows nothing about basketball outside riding LeBron and Dirk.

Wade is ~20 all-time. CP3 isn't even top 60 all-time. Unless you consider CP3 to be ranked ~35-40 (which is beyond retarded), Wade >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CP3.

Fixed.

sd3035

11-24-2015, 05:47 PM

Paul is a bitch, he doesn't belong in comparisons with all time greats like Wade

aj1987

11-24-2015, 05:59 PM

You drivel off the point once more, to your embarrassment, when you do actually adress the point (bold), nothing but stupidity comes out of you.

Pushing the "Germany" part I find ironic, given that you're living in India? Yea, that's funny, backfire.
I went off the point? Can you even read, moron?

Wade is ~20 all-time. CP3 isn't even top 60 all-time. Unless you consider CP3 to be ranked ~35-40 (which is beyond retarded), Wade >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CP3.

Tell me how CP3 is ~35-40 all-time? I'll wait.

I'm in the US right now, retard.

ArbitraryWater

11-24-2015, 06:26 PM

I went off the point? Can you even read, moron?

Wade is ~20 all-time. CP3 isn't even top 60 all-time. Unless you consider CP3 to be ranked ~35-40 (which is beyond retarded), Wade >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CP3.

Tell me how CP3 is ~35-40 all-time? I'll wait.

I'm in the US right now, retard.

Can you, is the question

when you do actually adress the point (bold), nothing but stupidity comes out of you.

Should I "lmao" at you living in the US, but being Indian? Focus on the topic, you're slow for whatever age you are, I don't even need to name it, you're seemingly proud of it, but I'm telling you, 18 is better :oldlol:

Paul is top 40, have you taken a look at the guys 'down there' ?

He's top 40 because he's better than players like Dominique Wilkins, Elvin Hayes, James Worthy, Jason Kidd, Jerry Lucas, Allen Iverson, Tiny Archibald, Dave Cowens, Robert Parish... those guys are common mentions in the top 50 range, you want me to believe Paul isn't better than them?

Revise your shit, Indian.

HylianNightmare

11-24-2015, 06:31 PM

Finals mvp was enough, other rings just icing

DoctorP

11-24-2015, 06:38 PM

Career: Paul has the longevity, Wade has the trophies.
Peak: Wade by a slim margin.

DMAVS41

11-24-2015, 06:43 PM

I know you're an 18 year old kid from Germany, who basically knows nothing about basketball outside riding LeBron.

Wade is ~20 all-time. CP3 isn't even top 60 all-time. Unless you consider CP3 to be ranked ~35-40 (which is beyond retarded), Wade >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CP3.

Chris Paul is absolutely one of the 60 best players of all time imo.

I completely agree that Wade is not only the better player, but had a much better career...and certainly a more dominant force at his best, but do you actually believe CP3 has no claim to being top 60?

aj1987

11-24-2015, 06:46 PM

Should I "lmao" at you living in the US, but being Indian? Focus on the topic, you're slow for whatever age you are, I don't even need to name it, you're seemingly proud of it, but I'm telling you, 18 is better :oldlol:
What the **** are you even talking about, you retarded Nazi? Do they even teach English there?

Paul is top 40, have you taken a look at the guys 'down there' ?
Yeah, I have. I'm not going to post an entire list right now, so copy-pasting it from another thread.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Bill Russell
4. Magic Johnson
5. Larry Bird
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kobe Bryant
9. Tim Duncan
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. Lebron James
12. Moses Malone
13. Oscar Robertson
14. Jerry West
15. Julius Erving
16. Kevin Garnett
17. Karl Malone
18. Charles Barkley
19. Elgin Baylor
20. Bob Pettit
21. John Havlicek
22. Dirk Nowitzki
23. George Mikan
24. David Robinson
25. Isiah Thomas
26. Bob Cousy
27. Scottie Pippen
28. Rick Barry
29. Dwyane Wade
30. Willis Reed
31. Patrick Ewing
32. John Stockton
33. Walt Frazier
34. Clyde Drexler
35. Steve Nash
36. Allen Iverson
37. Dave Cowens
38. Dolph Schayes
39. Bill Walton
40. Kevin McHale
41. Jason Kidd
42. Wes Unseld
43. Gary Payton
44. Elvin Hayes
45. Paul Arizin
46. Bob McAdoo
47. Dominique Wilkins
48. George Gervin
49. Paul Pierce
50. Dennis Rodman
51. Dwight Howard
52. James Worthy
53. Nate Thurmond
54. Ray Allen
55. Sam Jones
56. Kevin Durant
57. Tiny Archibald

I know it's from '12, but CP3 literally did nothing to be ranked higher.

He's top 40 because he's better than players like Dominique Wilkins, Elvin Hayes, James Worthy, Jason Kidd, Jerry Lucas, Allen Iverson, Tiny Archibald, Dave Cowens, Robert Parish... those guys are common mentions in the top 50 range, you want me to believe Paul isn't better than them?
You do know that some of them are MVP's, FMVP's, and a couple carried their teams to the Finals as well, right?

Revise your shit, Indian.

Stick to sucking Dirk and LeBron's D, Kraut.

aj1987

11-24-2015, 06:47 PM

Chris Paul is absolutely one of the 60 best players of all time imo.

I completely agree that Wade is not only the better player, but had a much better career...and certainly a more dominant force at his best, but do you actually believe CP3 has no claim to being top 60?
~50-60 all-time. Probably ~55-60.

HoopologyPhD

11-24-2015, 06:58 PM

I'll take Wade now and clearly Wade is better all time.

Both are on the athletic decline, neither is a great outside shooter, the only aspect of the game CP3 is better at is intangibles/playmaking which don't really matter because his teams haven't won anything.

feyki

11-24-2015, 06:58 PM

Wade's Rings

11-24-2015, 07:04 PM

I'll take Wade now and clearly Wade is better all time.

Both are on the athletic decline, neither is a great outside shooter

Both are great from midrange.

the only aspect of the game CP3 is better at is intangibles/playmaking which don't really matter because his teams haven't won anything.

If he hasn't won how are his intangibles better?

GrapeApe

11-24-2015, 07:18 PM

Career: Paul has the longevity, Wade has the trophies.
Peak: Wade by a slim margin.

Huh? Wade is in his 13th season and Paul is in his 11th and they're currently playing at a similar level. Wade's longevity is actually turning out to be pretty solid. At 33/34 years old he's still among the top SG's in the league. His game has aged much better than most had anticipated. Yes he's has had his share of injuries, but so has Paul. If Wade's body holds up (knock on wood) he still has a couple more solid all-star seasons left in him. If he's an all-star next year at 35 (to cap off 13 straight appearances), that would be outstanding longevity for a guard by ANY standards. Even right now at 11 consecutive is pretty damn good.

Only a handful of guards in history have made 11 straight all-star appearances.

Wade's Rings

11-24-2015, 07:24 PM

Huh? Wade is in his 13th season and Paul is in his 11th and they're currently playing at a similar level. Wade's longevity is actually turning out to be pretty solid. At 33/34 years old he's still among the top SG's in the league. His game has aged much better than most had anticipated. Yes he's has had his share of injuries, but so has Paul. If Wade's body holds up (knock on wood) he still has a couple more solid all-star seasons left in him. If he's an all-star next year at 35 (to cap off 13 straight appearances), that would be outstanding longevity for a guard by ANY standards. Even right now at 11 consecutive appearances is pretty damn good.

I was thinking about this the other day. His longevity isn't up there with guys like Kobe, Bron, etc...but his longevity is going to be pretty good if he can still play at all-star level for another year or 2 after this year.

ArbitraryWater

11-24-2015, 07:37 PM

What the **** are you even talking about, you retarded Nazi? Do they even teach English there?

Yeah, I have. I'm not going to post an entire list right now, so copy-pasting it from another thread.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Bill Russell
4. Magic Johnson
5. Larry Bird
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kobe Bryant
9. Tim Duncan
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. Lebron James
12. Moses Malone
13. Oscar Robertson
14. Jerry West
15. Julius Erving
16. Kevin Garnett
17. Karl Malone
18. Charles Barkley
19. Elgin Baylor
20. Bob Pettit
21. John Havlicek
22. Dirk Nowitzki
23. George Mikan
24. David Robinson
25. Isiah Thomas
26. Bob Cousy
27. Scottie Pippen
28. Rick Barry
29. Dwyane Wade
30. Willis Reed
31. Patrick Ewing
32. John Stockton
33. Walt Frazier
34. Clyde Drexler
35. Steve Nash
36. Allen Iverson
37. Dave Cowens
38. Dolph Schayes
39. Bill Walton
40. Kevin McHale
41. Jason Kidd
42. Wes Unseld
43. Gary Payton
44. Elvin Hayes
45. Paul Arizin
46. Bob McAdoo
47. Dominique Wilkins
48. George Gervin
49. Paul Pierce
50. Dennis Rodman
51. Dwight Howard
52. James Worthy
53. Nate Thurmond
54. Ray Allen
55. Sam Jones
56. Kevin Durant
57. Tiny Archibald

I know it's from '12, but CP3 literally did nothing to be ranked higher.

You do know that some of them are MVP's, FMVP's, and a couple carried their teams to the Finals as well, right?

Stick to sucking Dirk and LeBron's D, Kraut.

Rambling and fuming... all you do, when it comes to substance... crickets.

But credit for you to losing your cool on only the 3rd post in, this time :applause:

You're gonna hand off some shit and straight tell me Paul Pierce, Rodman, McAdoo, Howard, Schayes, Gervin, PAUL ARIZIN, BILL WALTON, KEVIN MCHALE, etc etc etc

are better, more impactful players than Chris ****ing Paul? Paul since 12 has added 2-3 more seasons as top PG and All-NBA teamer, leading the league in clutch stats and/or mid-range, on high winning teams in good conferences... nowhere does that not rank you higher, only an Idiot would think otherwise.

As I said, revise your shit, Indian

red1

11-24-2015, 07:48 PM

Overall? Wade with ease.

GrapeApe

11-24-2015, 07:55 PM

I was thinking about this the other day. His longevity isn't up there with guys like Kobe, Bron, etc...but his longevity is going to be pretty good if he can still play at all-star level for another year or 2 after this year.

Yep, and like I mentioned, even as of right now his longevity is solid. Last season at 33 years old he made his 11th consecutive all-star appearance and averaged 22/5/4/2 on 47% with a 22 PER. That puts him in pretty exclusive company in terms of guards his age. Again, his game is aging very well and he's doing it with intelligence and cerebral play. I remember always hearing that he'd be unable to play at a high level without elite athletic ability, and that has proven not to be the case. He's very capable of being an all-star caliber player for a couple more years due to his high B-ball IQ.

dannysc305

11-24-2015, 08:07 PM

I feel like I would rather have Wade today as well with everything he brings to the table defense boards dimes buckets steals blocks

catch24

11-24-2015, 08:20 PM

FKAri

11-24-2015, 08:24 PM

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Bill Russell
4. Magic Johnson
5. Larry Bird
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kobe Bryant
9. Tim Duncan
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. Lebron James
12. Moses Malone
13. Oscar Robertson
14. Jerry West
15. Julius Erving
16. Kevin Garnett
17. Karl Malone
18. Charles Barkley
19. Elgin Baylor
20. Bob Pettit
21. John Havlicek
22. Dirk Nowitzki
23. George Mikan
24. David Robinson
25. Isiah Thomas
26. Bob Cousy
27. Scottie Pippen
28. Rick Barry
29. Dwyane Wade
30. Willis Reed
31. Patrick Ewing
32. John Stockton
33. Walt Frazier
34. Clyde Drexler
35. Steve Nash
36. Allen Iverson
37. Dave Cowens
38. Dolph Schayes
39. Bill Walton
40. Kevin McHale
41. Jason Kidd
42. Wes Unseld
43. Gary Payton
44. Elvin Hayes
45. Paul Arizin
46. Bob McAdoo
47. Dominique Wilkins
48. George Gervin
49. Paul Pierce
50. Dennis Rodman
51. Dwight Howard
52. James Worthy
53. Nate Thurmond
54. Ray Allen
55. Sam Jones
56. Kevin Durant
57. Tiny Archibald

Stick to sucking Dirk and LeBron's D, Kraut.

You're a Heat fan and you have Dirk over Wade all time? Wade in general seems kinda low on your list. Interesting

Chris Paul is definitely a Top 50 player IMO.

He might not have the hardware of, say, Mcadoo, Unseld, Walton, Pierce or even Allen Iverson... but I would take him over all those guys without hesitation.

His numbers and impact in games are very comparable, and arguably greater than a few of those players.

You'd take prime CP over prime Walton?

plowking

11-24-2015, 08:26 PM

Chris Paul is definitely a Top 50 player IMO.

He might not have the hardware of, say, Mcadoo, Unseld, Walton, Pierce or even Allen Iverson... but I would take him over all those guys without hesitation.

His numbers and impact in games are very comparable, and arguably greater than a few of those players.

Agreed. He simply falls into that category of, really really good player who just hasn't won.

Probably not on the level of guys like Barkley or Malone, but he is rated higher than guys like McHale, Worthy and a few others who have rings IMO.

GrapeApe

11-24-2015, 09:19 PM

I feel like I would rather have Wade today as well with everything he brings to the table defense boards dimes buckets steals blocks

It's very close, and Wade and Paul this year have had nearly identical production (Wade having the edge in scoring and Paul the edge in assists). The biggest difference I've noticed with Wade this year is his defense. His defense thus far has been impressive overall. Solid man defense, good rotations, good closeouts, and high energy. It's obviously still early but it's great to see Wade putting in the effort on that end of the floor.

Smoke117

11-24-2015, 09:24 PM

It's very close, and Wade and Paul this year have had nearly identical production (Wade having the edge in scoring and Paul the edge in assists). The biggest difference I've noticed with Wade this year is his defense. His defense thus far has been impressive overall. Solid man defense, good rotations, good closeouts, and high energy. It's obviously still early but it's great to see Wade putting in the effort on that end of the floor.

Wade and his overall effort defensively has always been tied to his health. When he is feeling good he plays good-great defense...when he is ailing he doesn't. He was already hurt by this point in the season last year, but he was also asked to do too much for the team at this point in his career. That's not the case now that we have more weapons on the offensive and defensive end.

ArbitraryWater

11-24-2015, 09:31 PM

You're a Heat fan and you have Dirk over Wade all time? Wade in general seems kinda low on your list. Interesting

Thats not his list as he said. But I think he does anyway.

Agreed. He simply falls into that category of, really really good player who just hasn't won.

Probably not on the level of guys like Barkley or Malone, but he is rated higher than guys like McHale, Worthy and a few others who have rings IMO.

agreed, y'all

DMAVS41

11-24-2015, 09:48 PM

Cp3 is an underrated player , like before 2011 Dirk(Bill Simmons ranked Dirk around 50 at 2010 , and he said Dirk could in the pantheon at after 2011 and he argued with Dirk's 2006 performances , laughable) .

Cp3 is 35-45 class tier player at my all time list . I guess , i ranked him at 43 ; above Reggie , under Pippen .

I think , he will be around between 20-30 all time player at his career over .

I believe Simmons had Dirk at 37 and 39, but he even said he really messed up on that...Same thing with Wade...he said those were the two rankings he messed up the most.

He had Wade at 53 the first time....

But he's just an "on paper" ranking type guy. He doesn't care much for how good a player was/is...he cares about the paper legacy/resume way more (too much imo).

DMAVS41

11-24-2015, 09:51 PM

~50-60 all-time. Probably ~55-60.

Interesting.

Out of curiosity...where do you rank Stockton, Kidd, Nash, and Iverson?

WadeStan

11-24-2015, 10:00 PM

LOL Chris Paul isn't better than guys like Paul Pierce or Allen Iverson. Call me when CP3 leads his teem deep into the playoffs. Even now, you figure it's going to be Blake putting it all together that'll get yet another underachieving Clips team over the top (if they make it).

greatest-ever

11-24-2015, 10:55 PM

Wade is much better career wise, and i can't see Paul passing him.

aj1987

11-25-2015, 02:27 AM

Rambling and fuming... all you do, when it comes to substance... crickets.
Your "substance" is copy-pasting others posts without giving them credit. :oldlol:

But credit for you to losing your cool on only the 3rd post in, this time :applause:
Stating the obvious is losing my cool?

You're gonna hand off some shit and straight tell me Paul Pierce, Rodman, McAdoo, Howard, Schayes, Gervin, PAUL ARIZIN, BILL WALTON, KEVIN MCHALE, etc etc
McAdoo, PP, McHale, Rodman, Schayes, Gervin, Arizin, Walton, and Howard all have had better career accolades and careers than CP3 has had thus far.

Since you're a bit slow, I'll explain again. ATG rankings take career accolades into account as well. CP3 hasn't even sniffed the conference finals. Dude is a born choker. You're comparing him to players who carries their teams to the Finals, CF's, won DPOY's, etc..

are better, more impactful players than Chris ****ing Paul? Paul since 12 has added 2-3 more seasons as top PG and All-NBA teamer, leading the league in clutch stats and/or mid-range, on high winning teams in good conferences... nowhere does that not rank you higher, only an Idiot would think otherwise.
:biggums:

Dude chokes more than any other "top 10" player in the league. They guy is apparently the 2nd best PG in the league and is playing worse than a 34 year old Wade. NEVER made the conference FINALS with STACKED AF teams. Dude is a career loser.

BTW, IMPACT doesn't have anything to with rankings. Russell, Kobe, etc. might not have had the same impact that LeBron had, but they're ranked higher than him.

As I said, revise your shit, Indian
Again, go mastrubate to LeBron, Dirk, and Hitler, you retarded Kraut.

TheBigVeto

11-25-2015, 02:32 AM

Both are legit Robins but CP3 is better. At least he never got a tainted ring.

aj1987

11-25-2015, 02:33 AM

Interesting.

Out of curiosity...where do you rank Stockton, Kidd, Nash, and Iverson?
Stock is ~35, Kidd is ~40, and Nash is ~50. I hate AI though. Absolutely hate his game. He's probably around 50.

I keep changing my rankings. As I always keep saying, rankings are subjective.

Both are legit Robins but CP3 is better. At least he never got a tainted ring.
He never even got a "tainted" ring, you LeBron cumguzzler. Let the choker make the conference finals first.

feyki

11-25-2015, 08:18 AM

I believe Simmons had Dirk at 37 and 39, but he even said he really messed up on that...Same thing with Wade...he said those were the two rankings he messed up the most.

He had Wade at 53 the first time....

But he's just an "on paper" ranking type guy. He doesn't care much for how good a player was/is...he cares about the paper legacy/resume way more (too much imo).

:cheers:

Like he said , Lebron can't pass Jordan or Bill ; why? Cause ; Jordan is Jordan and Bill has 11 rings . Look at that analytics , amazing Simmons was here :oldlol: .

ArbitraryWater

11-25-2015, 09:00 AM

When dude said

CP3 isn't even top 60 all-time.

http://i1383.photobucket.com/albums/ah306/MaleRuler/GIFs/EZVPQ_zpsn9rehgkt.gif (http://s1383.photobucket.com/user/MaleRuler/media/GIFs/EZVPQ_zpsn9rehgkt.gif.html)

He never even got a "tainted" ring, you LeBron cumguzzler. Let the choker make the conference finals first.

you try too hard calling every one negative LeBron names, when you self admitted defend him all the time :oldlol:

Plus, you as usual, drivel off the point, I don't know if its trouble with the language or what.

ArbitraryWater

11-25-2015, 09:04 AM

CP3 hasn't even sniffed the conference finals.

Were you alive a year ago? Or remember anything that happened before LeBron came to Miami ('08)? Again, not sure if its pure stupidity or trouble with the language...

if you want to look up the context of "sniff", here:

http://dictionary.reference.com/

ArbitraryWater

11-25-2015, 09:06 AM

McAdoo, PP, McHale, Rodman, Schayes, Gervin, Arizin, Walton, and Howard all have had better career accolades and careers than CP3 has had thus far.

Okay, this is getting rather ridiculous now :oldlol:

Before you hit "Submit" on your next Post, make sure you're in the "dumbest things said on ISH" thread.

derb2k2

11-25-2015, 09:43 AM

Both are legit Robins but CP3 is better. At least he never got a tainted ring.

Yea. CP3 never got a ring. Period. :biggums: :biggums:

HiphopRelated

11-25-2015, 10:02 AM

Yea. CP3 never got a ring. Period. :biggums: :biggums:
Hell, he never got a Conference Final

DMAVS41

11-25-2015, 10:52 AM

Stock is ~35, Kidd is ~40, and Nash is ~50. I hate AI though. Absolutely hate his game. He's probably around 50.

I keep changing my rankings. As I always keep saying, rankings are subjective.

He never even got a "tainted" ring, you LeBron cumguzzler. Let the choker make the conference finals first.

So....are you ranking off of how good the players were/are....or their on paper legacies?

Or is it a combination of both?

Jasper

11-25-2015, 10:54 AM

Someone of these two players was MVP of a finals as well as rings
/

aj1987

11-25-2015, 05:36 PM

So....are you ranking off of how good the players were/are....or their on paper legacies?

Or is it a combination of both?
Combination of a bunch of things. Impact, accolades, and team achievements.

McAdoo, PP, McHale, Rodman, Schayes, Gervin, Arizin, Walton, and Howard all have had better career accolades and careers than CP3 has had thus far.

You do know that Bill won an MVP and an FMVP, right? Dude has a career accolades and accomplishments which CP3 will probably never reach. The guy was on track to be one of the greatest C's of all time before injuries.

You really might want to brush up you NBA knowledge before you talk to me, kid.

ArbitraryWater

11-25-2015, 05:39 PM

Combination of a bunch of things. Impact, accolades, and team achievements.

You do know that Bill won an MVP and an FMVP, right? Dude has a career accolades and accomplishments which CP3 will probably never reach. The guy was on track to be one of the greatest C's of all time before injuries.

You really might want to brush up you NBA knowledge before you talk to me, kid.

thanx for playin' brodie

you too old to be this dumb

sd3035

11-25-2015, 05:51 PM

Arbitrary, stick to wiener schnitzels and Dirk worshipping lol

DMAVS41

11-25-2015, 06:24 PM

Combination of a bunch of things. Impact, accolades, and team achievements.

You do know that Bill won an MVP and an FMVP, right? Dude has a career accolades and accomplishments which CP3 will probably never reach. The guy was on track to be one of the greatest C's of all time before injuries.

You really might want to brush up you NBA knowledge before you talk to me, kid.

Okay.

So if CP3 played in the East and the Clippers traded places with the Cavs...and the Clippers had made 4 straight conference finals and the finals twice.

You'd rank him higher?

Papaya Petee

11-25-2015, 06:32 PM

Okay.

So if CP3 played in the East and the Clippers traded places with the Cavs...and the Clippers had made 4 straight conference finals and the finals twice.

You'd rank him higher?

If my grandma has a ******** she'd be my grandpa.

Cp3 has had multiple seasons with very good rosters and never achieved anything.

Wade dominated in 2006 to a point Cp3 would never come close too, with a worse roster than 2013 and 2014 Clippers, and 2008 Hornets.

Unless I'm not understanding, whats your point?

ArbitraryWater

11-25-2015, 06:36 PM

If my grandma has a ******** she'd be my grandpa.

Cp3 has had multiple seasons with very good rosters and never achieved anything.

Wade dominated in 2006 to a point Cp3 would never come close too, with a worse roster than 2013 and 2014 Clippers, and 2008 Hornets.

Unless I'm not understanding, whats your point?

this is not about Wade, who's clearly had several seasons better than Paul's best.

Papaya Petee

11-25-2015, 06:43 PM

this is not about Wade, who's clearly had several seasons better than Paul's best.
What I understood out of his comparison was if Cp3 played in a weaker division with Lebron and won 2 title and made 4 finals would he be ranked higher. The answer is obviously yes.

DMAVS41

11-25-2015, 07:46 PM

If my grandma has a ******** she'd be my grandpa.

Cp3 has had multiple seasons with very good rosters and never achieved anything.

Wade dominated in 2006 to a point Cp3 would never come close too, with a worse roster than 2013 and 2014 Clippers, and 2008 Hornets.

Unless I'm not understanding, whats your point?

I'd like him to just answer the question before I even make my point...might not have one depending on his answer.

I have Wade over CP3 pretty easily....so I have no idea what your point is concerning the mention of Wade to me.

aj1987

11-27-2015, 11:32 AM

Okay.

So if CP3 played in the East and the Clippers traded places with the Cavs...and the Clippers had made 4 straight conference finals and the finals twice.

You'd rank him higher?
Does it really matter? If Wade doesn't get injured in '05, make the 3 in '11, etc., would he be in the top 10? What if Bird didn't mess up his back? What if LeBron got drafted by the Spurs? I rank players on what actually happened and facts.

I don't see the Clips beating the LeBron/Wade Heat if they played in the East. Probably one Finals in '15. That's it.

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 11:43 AM

Does it really matter? If Wade doesn't get injured in '05, make the 3 in '11, etc., would he be in the top 10? What if Bird didn't mess up his back? What if LeBron got drafted by the Spurs? I rank players on what actually happened and facts.

I don't see the Clips beating the LeBron/Wade Heat if they played in the East. Probably one Finals in '15. That's it.

You didn't understand my question....and I said Cavs instead of the Heat...which probably caused the confusion.

I meant to say... if the Clippers switched places with the Heat. So they wouldn't play the Heat until the Finals.

That is what I'm asking. From 11 through 15...the Clippers take the place of the Heat in the East...and the Heat take the place of the Clippers in the West.

And what I'm asking is...lets say in this hypothetical that the Clippers (now in the East) make 3 finals from 11 through 15...

Paul plays at his normal level...

Would you rank Paul higher than you do now?

aj1987

11-27-2015, 11:50 AM

You didn't understand my question....and I said Cavs instead of the Heat...which probably caused the confusion.

I meant to say... if the Clippers switched places with the Heat. So they wouldn't play the Heat until the Finals.

That is what I'm asking. From 11 through 15...the Clippers take the place of the Heat in the East...and the Heat take the place of the Clippers in the West.

And what I'm asking is...lets say in this hypothetical that the Clippers (now in the East) make 3 finals from 11 through 15...

Paul plays at his normal level...

Would you rank Paul higher than you do now?
Yeah. A couple of Finals as 1a/1b with Blake. He'd probably be at ~35ish.

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 11:56 AM

Yeah. A couple of Finals as 1a/1b with Blake. He'd probably be at ~35ish.

Okay...

So I would then argue that how you rank players is kind of flawed. I won't say it's fully flawed because I agree that players actually have to accomplish shit on the court. What good is it if a player puts up great numbers/stats, but his teams don't play to their full potential year in year out.

So, first, let me agree that results do matter...

But, if simply putting Paul on a loaded team in the East in place of the Heat for 5 years....would essentially mean you rank him 20 spots higher than you currently do...

I think that is a flawed way of looking at things.

Now, we are forced to enter hypothetical zone here...but that is the only way to make rankings somewhat fair. But I'd rather do that than just privilege certain players over others solely based on circumstances.

My argument would be...that if you switched the Heat and Clippers from 11 through 15....that the Paul led Clippers would make at least 2 finals...probably 3.

I don't think they'd win a title...

Agree or not...do you see my point?

aj1987

11-27-2015, 12:34 PM

Okay...

So I would then argue that how you rank players is kind of flawed. I won't say it's fully flawed because I agree that players actually have to accomplish shit on the court. What good is it if a player puts up great numbers/stats, but his teams don't play to their full potential year in year out.

So, first, let me agree that results do matter...

But, if simply putting Paul on a loaded team in the East in place of the Heat for 5 years....would essentially mean you rank him 20 spots higher than you currently do...

I think that is a flawed way of looking at things.

Now, we are forced to enter hypothetical zone here...but that is the only way to make rankings somewhat fair. But I'd rather do that than just privilege certain players over others solely based on circumstances.

My argument would be...that if you switched the Heat and Clippers from 11 through 15....that the Paul led Clippers would make at least 2 finals...probably 3.

I don't think they'd win a title...

Agree or not...do you see my point?
Nope. Not at all. Hypotheticals are pointless when you're ranking players. Give Shaq teams as stacked as the Russell Celtics, he'd have more than 7 rings. Put Russell on bad teams he wouldn't have even come to 11 rings. What players did is all that matters, when you want to rank them. That's how like 99.9% of people rank players.

You (and I as well) think Paul would make the ECF or the Finals in the East? Sure, but that's not a fact. Heck, dude has had stacked AF teams since he went to the Clippers and he still hasn't make the conference finals. Nobody gets as many excuses as CP3. Well, maybe Duncan, but the guy accomplished more than what anyone expected he would.

Also, I said he'd PROBABLY be ~35. It's a hypothetical and I said, you can't do all-time rankings basing off of hypotheticals. It's not fair? Well, tough luck. Again, if Wade doesn't get injured in '05, make the 3 in '11, etc., would he be in the top 10? What if Bird didn't mess up his back? What if LeBron got drafted by the Spurs? If we're going solely off of talent, Kobe is unquestionably top 10 and you don't have him in yours.

I always keep saying this, but all-time rankings are subjective. I keep changing mine depending upon how much I vale stuff at different times. The 5 main criteria are: personal accolades, team accomplishments, stats, longevity, and intangibles. Not in that particular order.

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 12:40 PM

Nope. Not at all. Hypotheticals are pointless when you're ranking players. Give Shaq teams as stacked as the Russell Celtics, he'd have more than 7 rings. Put Russell on bad teams he wouldn't have even come to 11 rings. What players did is all that matters, when you want to rank them. That's how like 99.9% of people rank players.

You (and I as well) think Paul would make the ECF or the Finals in the East? Sure, but that's not a fact. Heck, dude has had stacked AF teams since he went to the Clippers and he still hasn't make the conference finals. Nobody gets as many excuses as CP3. Well, maybe Duncan, but the guy accomplished more than what anyone expected he would.

Also, I said he'd PROBABLY be ~35. It's a hypothetical and I said, you can't do all-time rankings basing off of hypotheticals. It's not fair? Well, tough luck. Again, if Wade doesn't get injured in '05, make the 3 in '11, etc., would he be in the top 10? What if Bird didn't mess up his back? What if LeBron got drafted by the Spurs? If we're going solely off of talent, Kobe is unquestionably top 10 and you don't have him in yours.

I always keep saying this, but all-time rankings are subjective. I keep changing mine depending upon how much I vale stuff at different times. The 5 main criteria are: personal accolades, team accomplishments, stats, longevity, and intangibles. Not in that particular order.

But then you aren't ranking players. Which is fine...you don't have to rank players.

You are ranking circumstances.

The fact that putting Paul on loaded teams in a shitty conference would send him skyrocketing up your rankings...with him being no better at basketball...should be telling to you.

Again, you can rank however you want...just don't say you are getting to how good a player is.

You are merely ranking how good of a career/resume a player has had...and while that is fine...it's extremely dependent on circumstances.

And I like to try to cut through that as much as possible.

And, again, that would be your opinion. Kobe is unquestionably a top 10 talent of all time vehemently disagree with that. I don't think that is true at all.

It's not just about talent...it's about impact...it's about how good at basketball players were for me. I factor in all the other stuff like accomplishments and titles...etc. Because getting shit done matters, but you can't rank so heavily on that stuff and turn around thinking it's going to tell you who the best players were/are.

Again...you've conceded this stuff.

As for Wade? Yea...injuries are the main reason he's not thought of better. Problem is...how were the circumstances to blame for that though? He's just been injury prone since the jump...what better circumstances could you ask for in terms of staying healthy? He came into the league right when the rules changed to make it far easier on perimeter players....had Shaq for a few years...then had Lebron/Bosh for 4 to dramatically reduce his burden.

If he can't stay healthy in the softest league we've seen for perimeter guys with plenty of help to lessen his burden night in night out...then he's just an injury prone player of his own accord.

Get it?

aj1987

11-27-2015, 12:48 PM

But then you aren't ranking players. Which is fine...you don't have to rank players.

You are ranking circumstances.

The fact that putting Paul on loaded teams in a shitty conference would send him skyrocketing up your rankings...with him being no better at basketball...should be telling to you.

Again, you can rank however you want...just don't say you are getting to how good a player is.

You are merely ranking how good of a career/resume a player has had...and while that is fine...it's extremely dependent on circumstances.

And I like to try to cut through that as much as possible.

And, again, that would be your opinion. Kobe is unquestionably a top 10 talent of all time vehemently disagree with that. I don't think that is true at all.

It's not just about talent...it's about impact...it's about how good at basketball players were for me. I factor in all the other stuff like accomplishments and titles...etc. Because getting shit done matters, but you can't rank so heavily on that stuff and turn around thinking it's going to tell you who the best players were/are.

Again...you've conceded this stuff.

As for Wade? Yea...injuries are the main reason he's not thought of better. Problem is...how were the circumstances to blame for that though? He's just been injury prone since the jump...what better circumstances could you ask for in terms of staying healthy? He came into the league right when the rules changed to make it far easier on perimeter players....had Shaq for a few years...then had Lebron/Bosh for 4 to dramatically reduce his burden.

If he can't stay healthy in the softest league we've seen for perimeter guys with plenty of help to lessen his burden night in night out...then he's just an injury prone player of his own accord.

Get it?

Put PG on a superstacked team and he probably would've won a ring/MVP/FMVP in '14. If LeBron hadn't choked his ass of in '11, Wade would be a 4x champ and 2x FMVP, while Dirk would've probably retired ringless. Circumstantial. Does that mean that you'll rank Wade higher than Dirk from now on?

Tough shit, dude. If you want to rank players the way you want to, then you have to ignore accolades and team accomplishments COMPLETELY and go by stats. Should ignore personal accolades like MVP's as well. Considering Wade would've unquestionably ended up with one if he didn't have garbage ass teammates in '09.

Give Shaq teams as stacked as the Russell Celtics, he'd have more than 7 rings. Put Russell on bad teams he wouldn't have even come to 11 rings. What if LeBron got drafted by the Spurs? What if West played with Russell? What if MJ had better teammates since his rookie year.

Teammates and all that shit happens to almost every player. You're also ignoring the fact that CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Dude's in his 11th season and playing pretty much equal to a 34 year old Wade. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

SamuraiSWISH

11-27-2015, 12:51 PM

2012 until now? CP3
2008? CP3
2009 until 2011? Wade
Peak? Wade
All Time? Wade

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 12:52 PM

Put PG on a superstacked team and he probably would've won a ring/MVP/FMVP in '14. If LeBron hadn't choked his ass of in '11, Wade would be a 4x champ and 2x FMVP, while Dirk would've probably retired ringless. Circumstantial. Does that mean that you'll rank Wade higher than Dirk from now on?

Tough shit, dude. If you want to rank players the way you want to, then you have to ignore accolades and team accomplishments COMPLETELY and go by stats. Should ignore personal accolades like MVP's as well. Considering Wade would've unquestionably ended up with one if he didn't have garbage ass teammates in '09.

I'd absolutely rank Wade higher than Dirk if Wade stayed healthy and had better durability/longevity.

Me ranking Dirk over Wade has nothing to do with winning that ring in 11...it was how Dirk played and has played throughout his career...combined with all time great durability/longevity.

If Dirk played exactly the same and lost to one of the most loaded teams ever...I'd rank Dirk exactly the same where I do today...because his level of play would be identical.

You are ranking career resumes...which again...is fine. I factor that stuff in...it's just a much smaller part for me because logically it just doesn't hold up.

You don't have to go by just stats at all. You can go by how players played, what kind of success they had based on their circumstances, what kind of teammate they were, were they versatile enough to play different roles, were they successful in these roles, were they able to play with different coaches, players, and systems, were they a franchise first type guy...etc.

I'm trying to account for the different "luck" factors that go into this. I don't think KG should be penalized for being drafted by the Wolves and not the Lakers or spurs. That makes no sense to me. KG being drafted by the Wolves does not make him a worse player, but on your method it absolutely does.

And that is why your way is more flawed if your goal is actually trying to determine who the better player was/is.

aj1987

11-27-2015, 12:56 PM

I'd absolutely rank Wade higher than Dirk if Wade stayed healthy and had better durability/longevity.

Me ranking Dirk over Wade has nothing to do with winning that ring in 11...it was how Dirk played and has played throughout his career...combined with all time great durability/longevity.

If Dirk played exactly the same and lost to one of the most loaded teams ever...I'd rank Dirk exactly the same where I do today...because his level of play would be identical.

You are ranking career resumes...which again...is fine. I factor that stuff in...it's just a much smaller part for me because logically it just doesn't hold up.
Not really. Nope.

I always keep saying this, but all-time rankings are subjective. I keep changing mine depending upon how much I vale stuff at different times. The 5 main criteria are: personal accolades, team accomplishments, stats, longevity, and intangibles. Not in that particular order.

I still don't get how YOU rank players though? Stats? Their presumed "impact"?

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 12:57 PM

Not really. Nope.

I always keep saying this, but all-time rankings are subjective. I keep changing mine depending upon how much I vale stuff at different times. The 5 main criteria are: personal accolades, team accomplishments, stats, longevity, and intangibles. Not in that particular order.

I still don't get how YOU rank players though? Stats? Their presumed "impact"?

I spelled it out above.

Again, your way is flawed...you've admitted as much.

If you would rank Paul demonstrably higher just for playing in the East on a loaded team, but being no better at basketball...you have a glaring flaw in your method.

aj1987

11-27-2015, 01:03 PM

I spelled it out above.

Again, your way is flawed...you've admitted as much.

If you would rank Paul demonstrably higher just for playing in the East on a loaded team, but being no better at basketball...you have a glaring flaw in your method.
PROBABLY. IF he makes the Conference Finals/Finals. It's not a guarantee that he makes the Conference Finals or the Finals. Better chance than in the West? Definitely, but it's not a guarantee that he does though. Reposting again:

You're also ignoring the fact that CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Dude's in his 11th season and playing pretty much equal to a 34 year old Wade. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Dude, you don't have a player who won 5 rings, 2 FMVP's, 1 MVP, a combined 25+ All-NBA/All-Def teams, one of the greatest offensive players in NBA history and an amazing defender in his prime/peak in your top 10 and you were arguing to for Dirk in the top 15. My ranking is flawed?

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 01:08 PM

PROBABLY. IF he makes the Conference Finals/Finals. It's not a guarantee that he makes the Conference Finals or the Finals. Better chance than in the West? Definitely, but it's not a guarantee that he does though. Reposting again:

You're also ignoring the fact that CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Dude's in his 11th season and playing pretty much equal to a 34 year old Wade. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Dude, you don't have a player who won 5 rings, 2 FMVP's, 1 MVP, a combined 25+ All-NBA/All-Def teams in your top 10 and you were arguing to for Dirk in the top 15. My ranking is flawed?

A few things;

1. It's about "IF"...that is a red herring as in a hypothetical it's always "IF"...LOL

The hypothetical is exposing the flaw in your method. I'm asking you a question based on Paul doing something, but remaining exactly the same as a basketball player. If the goal is to actually rank how good these players were at playing basketball...you have a large flaw. We all have this flaw to some extent...because like I said...doing shit matters, but my argument is that it's best to minimize the impact circumstances have on rankings. Again I point to KG and Lebron early on in their careers....Lebron was so much better of a player early on than Kobe....yet under your way you'd have to rank Kobe ahead of him because of the titles...etc. This makes no sense to me.

2. Why would you throw out on paper resume stuff if you know it means very little to me? You think I care that a player like Kobe has that many all defensive teams? Why would that matter to me over watching him play average to poor defense for large stretches of his career....and the objective data matches up with my own conclusions...

You really think, knowing I don't care much about accolades, that listing a bunch of all defensive teams...matters to me?

3. Last rankings I did...I had Kobe at 11. It's perfectly reasonable. Sorry.

4. I never argued Dirk was top 15. I simply argued Dirk was in that range with the likes of KG, Barkley, Malone...etc.

Please figure out what I'm actually saying before you straw man another position. Thanks.

aj1987

11-27-2015, 01:14 PM

A few things;

1. It's about "IF"...that is a red herring as in a hypothetical it's always "IF"...LOL

The hypothetical is exposing the flaw in your method. I'm asking you a question based on Paul doing something, but remaining exactly the same as a basketball player. If the goal is to actually rank how good these players were at playing basketball...you have a large flaw
What flaw? Put everyone on stacked AF teams, call them all GOAT's, and ignore the rest of the criteria. Yeah, lets just do that. Everyone's a GOAT.

2. Why would you throw out on paper resume stuff if you know it means very little to me? You think I care that a player like Kobe has that many all defensive teams? Why would that matter to me over watching him play average to poor defense for large stretches of his career....and the objective data matches up with my own conclusions...

I'm not even gonna get into a debate about Kobe with you. I know for a fact that you absolutely despise him. Whatever.

You really think, knowing I don't care much about accolades, that listing a bunch of all defensive teams...matters to me?
It shouldn't matter? Defensive impact doesn't matter?

Please figure out what I'm actually saying before you straw man another position. Thanks.
PROBABLY. IF he makes the Conference Finals/Finals. It's not a guarantee that he makes the Conference Finals or the Finals. Better chance than in the West? Definitely, but it's not a guarantee that he does though. Reposting again:

You're also ignoring the fact that CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Dude's in his 11th season and playing pretty much equal to a 34 year old Wade. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Please stop using the conference excuse.

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 01:20 PM

What flaw? Put everyone on stacked AF teams, call them all GOAT's, and ignore the rest of the criteria. Yeah, lets just do that. Everyone's a GOAT.

I'm not even gonna get into a debate about Kobe with you. I know for a fact that you absolutely despise him. Whatever.

It shouldn't matter? Defensive impact doesn't matter?

PROBABLY. IF he makes the Conference Finals/Finals. It's not a guarantee that he makes the Conference Finals or the Finals. Better chance than in the West? Definitely, but it's not a guarantee that he does though. Reposting again:

You're also ignoring the fact that CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Dude's in his 11th season and playing pretty much equal to a 34 year old Wade. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Please stop using the conference excuse.

You realize I'm not arguing for Paul here really...right? I have Wade way over Paul and have repeatedly said this. Again, please ****ing read what I'm saying.

Sorry, ranking Kobe at 11th all time is not hating. It just isn't and screaming it over and over again doesn't change that.

You are still aren't grasping what I'm saying at all. I'm not saying give everyone stacked teams. I'm saying being on a stacked team vs being on a bad team should not be such a large factor in how good we perceive a player is. Because, in reality, it has nothing to do with it.

Of course defense matters. But you thinking defensive impact = all defensive selections is my point. It doesn't.

You are a Wade fan. You have to realize how screwed he's gotten on that front. You really think it's fair for someone to claim Kobe was better defensively than Wade solely based on all defensive selections? Please answer this.

aj1987

11-27-2015, 01:28 PM

You realize I'm not arguing for Paul here really...right? I have Wade way over Paul and have repeatedly said this. Again, please ****ing read what I'm saying.
I'm just using Wade as an example. :facepalm

You You are still aren't grasping what I'm saying at all. I'm not saying give everyone stacked teams. I'm saying being on a stacked team vs being on a bad team should not be such a large factor in how good we perceive a player is. Because, in reality, it has nothing to do with it.

:oldlol:

You really think that Duncan would win 5 rings if he played in a shitty franchise like the Sixers? Him winnings 5 rings is one of the MAIN reasons he's ranked in the top 7. LeBron, if he didn't play with the Heat, wouldn't be in the top 10. Not even close.

Now you understand how rankings work? It's a combination of stats, personal and team accolades, longevity, and intangibles subjectively ranked. 99.99999% of the world does it this way is basically EVERY sport. Are you saying that your way is the right way and the rest are wrong?

Will post this one more time, since you seem to keep missing this:

You're also ignoring the fact that CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 01:31 PM

I'm just using Wade as an example. :facepalm

:oldlol:

You really think that Duncan would win 5 rings if he played in a shitty franchise like the Sixers? Him winnings 5 rings is one of the MAIN reasons he's ranked in the top 7. LeBron, if he didn't play with the Heat, wouldn't be in the top 10. Not even close.

Now you understand how rankings work? It's a combination of stats, personal and team accolades, longevity, and intangibles subjectively ranked. 99.99999% of the world does it this way is basically EVERY sport. Are you saying that your way is the right way and the rest are wrong?

Will post this one more time, since you seem to keep missing this:

You're also ignoring the fact that CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Please answer the question about Wade vs Kobe on defense. Please actually answer it.

Yes, people are wrong if they weigh the accolades and titles as heavily as you do.

It should matter, but not nearly as much you put into your rankings.

I'm not ignoring anything about Paul...people have ****ing called me a CP3 hater for how hard I went on him these last 2 years. These last 2 years matter that he didn't get out of the 2nd round and didn't play better when his team needed him the most.

So, again, you could actually take the time to accurately grasp my position...or you could continue to create straw man arguments.

aj1987

11-27-2015, 01:42 PM

Please answer the question about Wade vs Kobe on defense. Please actually answer it.
He did get screwed. Never denied that. Doesn't change the FACT that Kobe was a brilliant defender as well. He was an elite defender for over 8 years MINIMUM. Wade was an elite defender in '05, '06, '09-'13 (only the RS in '13). That's 7 years MAX for Wade. Peaks? Pretty close. As you said, I'm a Wade fan and I'll pick Wade's peak (defensively) over Kobe's.

Yes, people are wrong if they weigh the accolades and titles as heavily as you do.
So you're saying basically everyone other than you is wrong?

It should matter, but not nearly as much you put into your rankings.
How do you still not understand? Give all elite players comparable teams and they'll win roughly the same number of the rings. The Kobe's, LeBron's, Shaq's, etc.. CP3, even with super stacked teams has not made it to the WCF. Never made it past the 2nd round with players like BG, DJ, Craw, etc..

I'm not ignoring anything about Paul...people have ****ing called me a CP3 hater for how hard I want on him these last 2 years. These last 2 years matter that he didn't get out of the 2nd round and didn't play better when his team needed him the most.
So, you agree that he did practically nothing over the past couple of years even with stacked AF teams?

So, again, you could actually take the time to accurately grasp my position...or you could continue to create straw man arguments.
Do you know what a straw man argument actually means? I've made my arguments 100% clear. Told you my criteria for my rankings. Told you why I don't like the way YOU rank players. Talked about his shortcomings and the only thing which I don't like doing is hypotheticals to rank players on all-time lists.

If you missed it the first couple of times, I'll post it AGAIN.

I always keep saying this, but all-time rankings are subjective. I keep changing mine depending upon how much I vale stuff at different times. The 5 main criteria are: personal accolades, team accomplishments, stats, longevity, and intangibles. Not in that particular order.

CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Can you actually tell me how a player, who had some REALLY good teams, never made it past the 2nd round, yet is in the top 50?

feyki

11-27-2015, 01:50 PM

So , If Wade hadn't Shaq and Lebron ; he could out of 50 on your all time list?

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 01:50 PM

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 02:07 PM

So , If Wade hadn't Shaq and Lebron ; he could out of 50 on your all time list?

Bingo.

Someone else gets it.

aj1987

11-27-2015, 02:08 PM

AJ...you can't have it both ways.

You can't post how Kobe has 12 all defensive teams and how that should matter a ton...etc. And then turn around and say Wade was better defensively...when he has 3 all defensive selections.

Well, you can...but that would make my point.

You see? You are just making my point for me here. That it matters more how the players actually play than what accolades they get. I agree with you that Wade was better defensively a lot of those years, but on your own method you really don't get to say that.
Read the entire posts. At this point, I'm just repeating myself, because you are probably just skimming through the posts.

He did get screwed. Never denied that. Doesn't change the FACT that Kobe was a brilliant defender as well. He was an elite defender for over 8 years MINIMUM. Wade was an elite defender in '05, '06, '09-'13 (only the RS in '13). That's 7 years MAX for Wade. Peaks? Pretty close. As you said, I'm a Wade fan and I'll pick Wade's peak (defensively) over Kobe's.

Kobe has more years being a better defensive player than Wade. That's just a FACT/

You are confused to mine or knowingly misrepresenting it.
:oldlol:

What? I'm using FACTS to show that CP3 is not a top 50 level player and I've been trying to explain how I do my rankings. That's the only thing I've been doing. If you think I actually care about anyone else's rankings, then you're mistaken. Well, maybe I do, but not enough to post this much about it.

I understand your position just fine. You rank mostly on accolades and team accomplishments.
Once again, I'll repost.

I always keep saying this, but all-time rankings are subjective. I keep changing mine depending upon how much I vale stuff at different times. The 5 main criteria are: personal accolades, team accomplishments, stats, longevity, and intangibles. Not in that particular order.

Try to read it slowly.

Again, you have conceded this when you said you'd rank Paul 20 spots higher for making the finals a few times in the East on a loaded team.

My position is simple. I care more about how good players actually were/are than you do...and while I factor in in accolades and accomplishments...I want to create as even of a playing field as possible rather than privilege one player over another just because his team was better.
That would basically mean almost all elite players are basically the same. Even on a "level" playing field, CP3 fails. Dude NEVER MADE IT PAST THE 2ND ROUND WITH LOADED TEAMS. **** getting to the Finals.

So , If Wade hadn't Shaq and Lebron ; he could out of 50 on your all time list?

Bingo.

Someone else gets it.
Once again, hypotheticals. Can we deal with reality here or are we gonna stay in Lala land?

BTW, if the '05 Heat didn't get Shaq, they would've has ~$25M in salary cap to sign a player or players. Could've gotten someone younger and better than a declining Shaq. Maybe then Wade wouldn't have had garbage ass teams from '08-'10, which mean that he would've gotten a chance to make more noise in the PO's, while moving into the top 15.

That's why ranking players based on hypothetical scenarios is retarded.

PsychoBe

11-27-2015, 02:13 PM

why is it fair to rank cp3 to a different standard than other superstars? i don't get it.

at least bran had a few mvp's despite not winning in the finals and he was still outside of the top 10 (still is but most ppl have him there for some reason).

if everyone was looked at purely at accolades and not team accomplishments to help pacify a player who never got out of the second round, then t-mac has a case over cp3.

DMAVS41

11-27-2015, 02:21 PM

AJ

You can keep screaming how you rank, but that screaming doesn't clean up the mess you've created.

What if Wade played on terrible teams his entire career...but was exactly as good at basketball as he has been? You'd rank him much lower. This is a ****ing flaw...I don't understand why you can't see it.

Again, I understand it just fine. We get your position...

My argument is that you put too much emphasis on personal accolades and team accomplishments.

I never said we should ignore it altogether. I've said this repeatedly.

You miss the point about Kobe vs Wade. Kobe has 12 selections. Wade has 3. Anyone that knows reality...knows this is idiotic. On your ranking, because you privilege those selections so much...you simply can't say what you are saying.

Or, you'd have to go edit the post earlier in which you made a huge deal about Kobe's all defense selections.

So which is it? Does the actual play matter more...or do the selections matter more?

Also, Paul should take criticism for not getting out of the 2nd round these last 2 years....precisely because his circumstances were not to blame. But back when he was in New Orleans...nah...just not gonna say much about a guy that averages 24/4/11 56% TS and loses to a better Spurs team. We can say he didn't do something special...and that should separate him from guys that have proven they can do something special, but that shouldn't separate him from the likes of a guy like Kidd or something.

You see? Context...you can try to put each part of the criteria through a fair lens of context. Rather than just blanket statements about "2nd round"...no all defense, not enough all nba, no MVP...etc.

To your last point...just no. It wouldn't mean that at all. It just means trying to figure out what to do with KG spending the first half plus of his career playing with shit while someone like Kobe was playing with Shaq/Phil...how do we somehow get beyond those circumstances.

Lastly, what you claim is just false. Go check the RealGM top 100 in 08, 11, and 14....and tell me that 99.9% of the basketball community ranks like you.

Not everyone puts so much emphasis on personal accolades and team accomplishments.

Hypothetical situations and thought experiments are vital to this. My god...how can you be fore a system that privileges a player so much just based off where he was drafted. You really think Duncan and KG got drafted into similar circumstances? Now, I rank Duncan higher specifically for basketball reasons, but how the **** are you going to sit there and tell me we should rank KG and Duncan on the same standard from 98 through 07...in terms of team accomplishments. If you don't create a thought experiment and apply context....you are just ignorant to reality.

Like...if you were comparing Curry and Anthony Davis last year. You really think a sound argument would be;

"Curry won the title and AD couldn't even win a game in the first round"

This is what I keep trying to tell you. Not everyone...far less than you think at the very least...see it like that. They'd want to have a conversation about the two players and how they actually play...you know...the game of basketball...and how that play makes one more impactful or not.

And this is why I keep saying you are doing "career/resume rankings" and now player rankings in terms of how good they are/were.

aj1987

11-28-2015, 05:31 AM

AJ

You can keep screaming how you rank, but that screaming doesn't clean up the mess you've created.

What if Wade played on terrible teams his entire career...but was exactly as good at basketball as he has been? You'd rank him much lower. This is a ****ing flaw...I don't understand why you can't see it.
IT DOESN'T ****ING MATTER. How do you not get that through your head? I really do not give a flying **** about hypotheticals. It's all about what ACTUALLY HAPPENED. It's also not a give that CP3 is making the ECF, considering the FACT that he lost in the 2nd round multiple times with better teams.

Nique, AD, etc. would've won as well, if they had stacked teams. You really don't see people ranking them high, do you?

Kobe has almost everything that you value over Hakeem and yet, you still rank Hakeem over Kobe. Longevity? Kobe. Stats? Kobe. Offense? Kobe. Heck, Kobe is considered to be a shitty playmaker, but he's still better than Hakeem. The only things he has on Kobe are defense and rebounding. Don't even try to bring up efficiency, because they were pretty much equal.

Lastly, what you claim is just false. Go check the RealGM top 100 in 08, 11, and 14....and tell me that 99.9% of the basketball community ranks like you.
Why the **** would I go there? That website is literal trash and filled up with PC ******s.

And yes. Almost 99.99% of actual basketball fans would have the same top 50 (never did a top 100) as I do.

Like...if you were comparing Curry and Anthony Davis last year. You really think a sound argument would be;

"Curry won the title and AD couldn't even win a game in the first round"
AD wasn't really impressive in the PO's. He put up stats, but you could see that he really wasn't that good. Curry was incredible though. AD got out rebounded by a midget C.

Again, for the billionth time, since you seem to attention deficit:

I always keep saying this, but all-time rankings are subjective. I keep changing mine depending upon how much I vale stuff at different times. The 5 main criteria are: personal accolades, team accomplishments, stats, longevity, and intangibles. Not in that particular order.

He did get screwed. Never denied that. Doesn't change the FACT that Kobe was a brilliant defender as well. He was an elite defender for over 8 years MINIMUM. Wade was an elite defender in '05, '06, '09-'13 (only the RS in '13). That's 7 years MAX for Wade. Peaks? Pretty close. As you said, I'm a Wade fan and I'll pick Wade's peak (defensively) over Kobe's.

How do you still not understand? Give all elite players comparable teams and they'll win roughly the same number of the rings. The Kobe's, LeBron's, Shaq's, etc.. CP3, even with super stacked teams has not made it to the WCF. Never made it past the 2nd round with players like BG, DJ, Craw, etc..

CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Can you actually tell me how a player, who had some REALLY good teams, never made it past the 2nd round, yet is in the top 50?

If you have any new points to talk about, we can but otherwise we're pretty much done. I've basically reposting the past couple of times. Try to read entire posts before you reply though.

houston

11-28-2015, 08:26 AM

Paul slightly better

robby712

11-28-2015, 08:56 AM

Wade is so disrespected :coleman:

Wade's Rings

11-28-2015, 10:46 AM

Wade is so disrespected :coleman:

How was he disrespected in this thread?

DMAVS41

11-28-2015, 11:02 AM

AJ

I've read your entire posts and you still aren't grasping it. I know exactly what your criteria is and I'm telling you....that you value personal accolades and team accomplishments too much if your goal is to try to figure out how good a player actually was....not how good of a career they had. If you can't see the difference between the two...that is on you.

I'll try to make this as simple as possible.

Why do I rank Hakeem over Kobe? Because I thought Hakeem was better. Also their longevity is very similar. I actually might give the edge to Hakeem. Kobe was not a relevant player his first 2 years, and he's been a terrible player for 3 years now. It's very close on longevity at this point...and Hakeem didn't have a run in his career where he destroyed his team.

Why is CP3 top 50? Simple...he's as good or better at playing basketball than some of the guys you put in your top 50. I don't know why you can't grasp this. You making the comment "tell me how a player is top 50 that hasn't been out of the 2nd round" means very little to me. Especially when the comparison is players at the end of the 50 that simply weren't better players than Paul. So you thought KG just sucked all the way through his 03 season? Because, and you might not realize this because you clearly didn't watch some of these guys play...KG didn't make it out of the first round his first 7 years in the playoffs. In fact, he made it out of the first round one time in his 12 years in Minny....

If the comparison is Paul and a guy like Wade...then Paul not making it out of the 2nd round hurts him a lot more because he loses to Wade on ability and on accolades, team accomplishments. And Paul doesn't have remotely the kind of longevity to make up that gap.

But you tell me Paul is worse than Gary Payton....I just don't care much about the 2nd round stuff because Paul is simply a better basketball player imo.

So if it's your opinion that a guy like Payton is better....great, that is fine. It's your reasoning that is flawed...because it sounds like your reasons are going to be about Paul not making it out of the 2nd round...and that's a terrible reason when it comes to Paul vs Payton. Again, not saying we don't factor in success at all...I'm saying you are valuing it too much.

Read this article please;

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/chris-paul-is-a-point-god/

The come back and tell me..."maybe he just isn't that good"

robby712

11-28-2015, 03:55 PM

How was he disrespected in this thread?

The simple fact that this thread exists is an example of how people underrate Wade. Yes, I am biased because he is my fav player ever. But come on, it isn't even that close. Yes, CP3 had great seasons, but he isn't and wasn't the court presence that Wade was. His injuries made people underestimate just how great he was. In his prime, Wade had shit teams. 09' and 10' Wade is one of the most complete and explosive players that played in this league.
If we consider the regular season, then the gap between them isn't that big. Although CP3 doesn't take those Heat teams to the playoffs. But I don't think anyone realizes how different is in the playoffs. Being able to lift your team, to take over when you have to, all that pressure , also the fact that sometimes you play against the same team for 7 games in row gets disregarded. It's not easy to produce for 7 games against the same team, the same defenders. After a while they learn your game, you have to be a step ahead all the time. Wade has 3 rings, came very close to another 2, has one of the best Finals ever, and despite people thinking that he was carried by Lebron in 2012 and 2013, he had all time great games against Indiana and San Antonio. Meanwhile, Cp3 has had great teams, and never made the WCF. And he choked a number of times. It's not even close. It should be CP3 vs Melo. Wade is in another league.

DaOldLion

11-28-2015, 03:57 PM

The simple fact that this thread exists is an example of how people underrate Wade. Yes, I am biased because he is my fav player ever. But come on, it isn't even that close. Yes, CP3 had great seasons, but he isn't and wasn't the court presence that Wade was. His injuries made people underestimate just how great he was. In his prime, Wade had shit teams. 09' and 10' Wade is one of the most complete and explosive players that played in this league.
If we consider the regular season, then the gap between them isn't that big. Although CP3 doesn't take those Heat teams to the playoffs. But I don't think anyone realizes how different is in the playoffs. Being able to lift your team, to take over when you have to, all that pressure , also the fact that sometimes you play against the same team for 7 games in row gets disregarded. It's not easy to produce for 7 games against the same team, the same defenders. After a while they learn your game, you have to be a step ahead all the time. Wade has 3 rings, came very close to another 2, has one of the best Finals ever, and despite people thinking that he was carried by Lebron in 2012 and 2013, he had all time great games against Indiana and San Antonio. Meanwhile, Cp3 has had great teams, and never made the WCF. And he choked a number of times. It's not even close. It should be CP3 vs Melo. Wade is in another league.

you shouldn't take ISH so seriously, if Wade was more popular and talked about more then he would have anti Wade trolls trolling all of his threads. If this was Cp3 vs Kobe there would be 10+ pages of trolls arguing for Cp3 over Kobe, it's happened before.

Be happy that your favorite player falls into that "underrated realm" and doesn't have a dedicated fan base of trolls constantly undermining his every accomplishment.

Kobe_6/8

11-28-2015, 04:03 PM

All-time: Wade
Currently: CP3

3 rings, 1 FMVP, GOAT level 08-09 season

ArbitraryWater

11-28-2015, 04:09 PM

Aj still fuming and losing.. :(

aj1987

11-28-2015, 04:25 PM

But you tell me Paul is worse than Gary Payton....I just don't care much about the 2nd round stuff because Paul is simply a better basketball player imo.
You do know that GP was a DPOY level defender while still managing to up 21/5/8 over 11 seasons, right? You also do know that he made the Finals, right? Dude scored 22/7/9 in their only two wins in the Finals, while managing to "shut down" (slow down actually) MJ. Something which no one outside GP was able to accomplish in the Finals.

How do you still not understand? Give all elite players comparable teams and they'll win roughly the same number of the rings. The Kobe's, LeBron's, Shaq's, etc.. CP3, even with super stacked teams has not made it to the WCF. Never made it past the 2nd round with players like BG, DJ, Craw, etc..

CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Can you actually tell me how a player, who had some REALLY good teams, never made it past the 2nd round, yet is in the top 50?

Aj still fuming and losing..
Why you still melting down, retard?

game3524

11-28-2015, 04:26 PM

IT DOESN'T ****ING MATTER. How do you not get that through your head? I really do not give a flying **** about hypotheticals. It's all about what ACTUALLY HAPPENED. It's also not a give that CP3 is making the ECF, considering the FACT that he lost in the 2nd round multiple times with better teams.

Nique, AD, etc. would've won as well, if they had stacked teams. You really don't see people ranking them high, do you?

Why the **** would I go there? That website is literal trash and filled up with PC ******s.

And yes. Almost 99.99% of actual basketball fans would have the same top 50 (never did a top 100) as I do.

AD wasn't really impressive in the PO's. He put up stats, but you could see that he really wasn't that good. Curry was incredible though. AD got out rebounded by a midget C.

Again, for the billionth time, since you seem to attention deficit:

I always keep saying this, but all-time rankings are subjective. I keep changing mine depending upon how much I vale stuff at different times. The 5 main criteria are: personal accolades, team accomplishments, stats, longevity, and intangibles. Not in that particular order.

He did get screwed. Never denied that. Doesn't change the FACT that Kobe was a brilliant defender as well. He was an elite defender for over 8 years MINIMUM. Wade was an elite defender in '05, '06, '09-'13 (only the RS in '13). That's 7 years MAX for Wade. Peaks? Pretty close. As you said, I'm a Wade fan and I'll pick Wade's peak (defensively) over Kobe's.

How do you still not understand? Give all elite players comparable teams and they'll win roughly the same number of the rings. The Kobe's, LeBron's, Shaq's, etc.. CP3, even with super stacked teams has not made it to the WCF. Never made it past the 2nd round with players like BG, DJ, Craw, etc..

CP3 had teams which were good enough to make the WCF a couple of times. Not even the Finals. Just the WCF. Maybe he's just not that good a player?

Can you actually tell me how a player, who had some REALLY good teams, never made it past the 2nd round, yet is in the top 50?

If you have any new points to talk about, we can but otherwise we're pretty much done. I've basically reposting the past couple of times. Try to read entire posts before you reply though.

DMAVS41 is full of shit when it comes to Kobe.

I mean if you want to argue Timmy, Shaq, or even Lebron over Kobe....fine you can make case. But Hakeem.....GTFO.:oldlol:

brownmamba00

11-28-2015, 04:30 PM

Career wise D-Wade

right now? didn't watch much bball this year but D-Wade looks better imo

DMAVS41

11-28-2015, 05:07 PM

DMAVS41 is full of shit when it comes to Kobe.

I mean if you want to argue Timmy, Shaq, or even Lebron over Kobe....fine you can make case. But Hakeem.....GTFO.:oldlol:

Yea...it's idiotic is it to take one of the best two way players ever with back to back title runs while averaging 31/11/4 56% TS....while being dominant defensively.

Like really? This is the new thing...to pretend like Kobe played the game at a higher level than Hakeem did?

This actually is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Kobe had a better career than Hakeem...going off of accolades and team accomplishments...even then it's very close.

But in terms of actual play? Please stop. You simply are ignorant if you think Kobe is a tier above Hakeem in actual play.

But sure...with the simple minded counting routine you guys do...Kobe beats Hakeem when you add up titles, finals mvp's, and mvp's....

What a great method...

PsychoBe

11-28-2015, 05:28 PM

if hakeem is ahead of kobe then he's definitely ahead of bran as well since bran had to literally leave his team and compete with 2 of the greatest players in the eastern conference to win twice (and lose twice) while hakeem had kenny smith as his point guard :roll: :roll: :roll:

game3524

11-28-2015, 05:34 PM

Yea...it's idiotic is it to take one of the best two way players ever with back to back title runs while averaging 31/11/4 56% TS....while being dominant defensively.

Like really? This is the new thing...to pretend like Kobe played the game at a higher level than Hakeem did?

This actually is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Kobe had a better career than Hakeem...going off of accolades and team accomplishments...even then it's very close.

But in terms of actual play? Please stop. You simply are ignorant if you think Kobe is a tier above Hakeem in actual play.

But sure...with the simple minded counting routine you guys do...Kobe beats Hakeem when you add up titles, finals mvp's, and mvp's....

What a great method...

Yes, he did and he did it for a longer period time(2006-2010). Hell, you pimp Hakeem's two year run, but forget Kobe had a similar run from 2008-2010 of averaging 30/5/5 with 56% TS.

And stop putting words in my mouth, I never said Kobe is a tier above Hakeem. Hakeem is in the 11-15 range, Kobe is in the 7-10 range. It is just clear that Kobe is better. You can dismiss accolades and team success(which is silly since basketball is the one sport where one player can have a massive impact). But at the end of the day Kobe has more All-NBA/defensive team selections, more career points in the playoffs and regular season, and you can argue that his peak is higher(35/5/5 on 56% TS is up there with Hakeem's 26/13/4 57% TS).

DMAVS41

11-28-2015, 05:42 PM

Yes, he did and he did it for a longer period time(2006-2010). Hell, you pimp Hakeem's two year run, but forget Kobe had a similar run from 2008-2010 of averaging 30/5/5 with 56% TS.

And stop putting words in my mouth, I never said Kobe is a tier above Hakeem. Hakeem is in the 11-15 range, Kobe is in the 7-10 range. It is just clear that Kobe is better. You can dismiss accolades and team success(which is silly since basketball is the one sport where one player can have a massive impact). But at the end of the day Kobe has more All-NBA/defensive team selections, more career points in the playoffs and regular season, and you can argue that his peak is higher(35/5/5 on 56% TS is up there with Hakeem's 26/13/4 57% TS).

You told me to GTFO by taking Hakeem over Kobe. So assumed you didn't think it was very close.

If it's close...what are you complaining about?

Again...I'm not interested in all-nba/defense selections. They don't mean much to me...if anything...

This is why I said this is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. If we are going to rank players based on all nba, all defense, mvp's, finals mvp's. and titles...I'm not interested

I think some of those things matter, but I don't think any of them matter much

I'm more interested in who the better player was and what the impact was.

Kobe has more all defense selections than Hakeem...okay. That means nothing to me. Hakeem is a borderline top 10 defender of all time. Kobe doesn't sniff him there.

So....really could not care less about all defense selections

Hakeem has two defensive player of the year awards, but I think Duncan, who has 0, was better defensively

So...like I have been saying...you guys are interested more in ranking careers...not players

That is fine...I just would rather rank the players first....with a small emphasis on accolades and team accomplishments because I do think they matter, but you have to apply context

You list Kobe as having more career points in the playoffs...okay great. I'd rather just compare their overall playoff play;

And with Hakeem you are getting a two way monster.

A 26/11/3...2 steals, 3 blocks....57% TS....defensive monster

Oh, but Kobe gets the nod in playoff play because he scored more total points. Sigh...

And the sick thing is...I actually think Hakeem tends to get a bit over-rated here...but no, sorry, it's not clear Kobe was just a better player

GrapeApe

11-28-2015, 07:16 PM

Career wise D-Wade

right now? didn't watch much bball this year but D-Wade looks better imo

Wade has struggled with his shooting but he's been missing a lot of good looks that will eventually start to drop. Physically he looks great. The euro-step dunk and crossover jumper from last night were good examples. He wasn't making those types of moves last season. Aside from looking quicker and more explosive, he's taking better care of the ball and playing much better defense. I expect by mid-season his fg% will be back in the upper 40's like usual.

The Heat's schedule will get tougher in terms of back-to-backs so we'll see how his body holds up as the season progresses. However, by this time last season he had already been dealing with a hamstring injury so he's off to a better start health-wise.

PsychoBe

11-28-2015, 07:21 PM

game3524

11-28-2015, 07:44 PM

game3524

11-28-2015, 08:08 PM

You told me to GTFO by taking Hakeem over Kobe. So assumed you didn't think it was very close.

If it's close...what are you complaining about?

Again...I'm not interested in all-nba/defense selections. They don't mean much to me...if anything...

This is why I said this is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. If we are going to rank players based on all nba, all defense, mvp's, finals mvp's. and titles...I'm not interested

I think some of those things matter, but I don't think any of them matter much

I'm more interested in who the better player was and what the impact was.

Kobe has more all defense selections than Hakeem...okay. That means nothing to me. Hakeem is a borderline top 10 defender of all time. Kobe doesn't sniff him there.

So....really could not care less about all defense selections

Hakeem has two defensive player of the year awards, but I think Duncan, who has 0, was better defensively

So...like I have been saying...you guys are interested more in ranking careers...not players

That is fine...I just would rather rank the players first....with a small emphasis on accolades and team accomplishments because I do think they matter, but you have to apply context

You list Kobe as having more career points in the playoffs...okay great. I'd rather just compare their overall playoff play;

And with Hakeem you are getting a two way monster.

A 26/11/3...2 steals, 3 blocks....57% TS....defensive monster

Oh, but Kobe gets the nod in playoff play because he scored more total points. Sigh...

And the sick thing is...I actually think Hakeem tends to get a bit over-rated here...but no, sorry, it's not clear Kobe was just a better player

Kobe gets the nod because he was simply more productive during the playoffs. He was giving you 30/5/5 on 56% TS with good overall man/team defense. Hakeem was a great playoff performer as well in his prime, but I am taking the better overall scorer since playoff basketball generally comes done to shot-making, and Kobe is one of the best of all-time in that regard.

And as much as you want to deny it, accomplishment and accolades do matter. Duncan and KG have similar overall numbers and averages, yet Duncan is considered a lock for the top 10, while KG is in the 15-20 range and the only reason for that are the championships, along with the finals/regular season MVPs.

DMAVS41

11-28-2015, 09:28 PM

Kobe gets the nod because he was simply more productive during the playoffs. He was giving you 30/5/5 on 56% TS with good overall man/team defense. Hakeem was a great playoff performer as well in his prime, but I am taking the better overall scorer since playoff basketball generally comes done to shot-making, and Kobe is one of the best of all-time in that regard.

And as much as you want to deny it, accomplishment and accolades do matter. Duncan and KG have similar overall numbers and averages, yet Duncan is considered a lock for the top 10, while KG is in the 15-20 range and the only reason for that are the championships, along with the finals/regular season MVPs.

A few things;

1. I never said accomplishments don't matter. I'm not going to keep repeating myself here though.

2. I have no problem with someone taking Kobe. You, however, seem to have a problem with someone taking Hakeem. And it is that last part I take issue with. It is perfectly reasonable to think Hakeem was a better player and playoff performer than Kobe.

3. As for playoff play....I just disagree. You think 30/5/5 from Kobe is better than what Hakeem brought. Totally understand that. Again, I disagree.

Hakeem was an offensive beast and opened up everything for his teammates. You talk about scoring like there is a large discrepancy...there isn't. You seem to want to focus on 06-10 for Kobe...great. Let's take a look at Hakeem's best stretch....from 87-95...Hakeem averaged;

29/12/4 58% TS...and again...just destroys Kobe on defensive impact. Again, I'm not sure this is resonating with you...Hakeem is a legit all time great defender. Kobe...not so much...

Again, take Kobe...I won't say anything. I disagree, but you won't find me saying things like "GTFO"

But say "GTFO" and it's absurd...and ROFL...etc.? Like...just means you are ignorant or just flat out stupid...honestly can't tell which is the case here...I'm leaning towards simply ignorant to how good Hakeem actually was

DMAVS41

11-28-2015, 09:38 PM

ignore dmavs's opinion on kobe. there are only two players in nba history who did what kobe did in the finals:

mj and kobe himself (30+/5/5). not bran, not wilt, not kareem, not bird, not magic, not shaq, not russel....

just mj and kobe.

but it's okay, hakeem was "simply better" :roll: :roll: :roll:

Let's compare the finals;

00 - Kobe 16/5/4 41% TS
01 - Kobe 25/8/6 50% TS
02 - Kobe 27/6/5 62% TS
08 - Kobe 26/5/5 51% TS
09 - Kobe 32/6/7 53% TS
10 - Kobe 29/8/4 53% TS

86 - Hakeem 25/12/2 53% TS
94 - Hakeem 27/9/4 56% TS
95 - Hakeem 33/12/6 51% TS

I just posted them all for your information...So, you know, that stat about just MJ/Kobe is false. Hakeem went over 30/10/5...LOL

I know you are more concerned with just 09 and 10, but were you aware that Hakeem averaged something like 30/11/5 over the 94 and 95 finals.

Like...and I don't mean this as an insult...you just seem ignorant. Hakeem was better in the 94/95 finals than Kobe was in the 09/10 finals...

And keep in mind, this is just raw stats and scoring efficiency....Hakeem was an elite defender.

So...:no:

PsychoBe

11-28-2015, 09:50 PM

Let's compare the finals;

00 - Kobe 16/5/4 41% TS
01 - Kobe 25/8/6 50% TS
02 - Kobe 27/6/5 62% TS
08 - Kobe 26/5/5 51% TS
09 - Kobe 32/6/7 53% TS
10 - Kobe 29/8/4 53% TS

86 - Hakeem 25/12/2 53% TS
94 - Hakeem 27/9/4 56% TS
95 - Hakeem 33/12/6 51% TS

I just posted them all for your information.

I know you are more concerned with just 09 and 10, but were you aware that Hakeem averaged something like 30/11/5 over the 94 and 95 finals.

Like...and I don't mean this as an insult...you just seem ignorant. Hakeem was better in the 94/95 finals than Kobe was in the 09/10 finals...

And keep in mind, this is just raw stats and scoring efficiency....Hakeem was an elite defender.

So...:no:

why are you putting an injured player's stats? :facepalm

and nice try but no. 09' clearly > 94' but hakeem can get the nod for 95' > 10' even though kobe's overall body of work is clearly more impressive than hakeem's, which is why he's considered the greatest laker ever.

also btw, kobe has more 1st all-defensive selections than any other guard (which i'm sure you're aware of) and completely shutdown russell westbrook in the 10' playoffs - a fact you conveniently left out because you barely know anything about kobe.

also, you keep stating hakeem's "impact" even though 1: dpoy is a regular season award much like the mvp and scoring title

and 2: hakeem could not stop shaq (who dropped 28 ppg on 60% shooting)

he did well on ewing but he's not an offensively talented player by any stretch of the imagination. you see how i didn't bring up kobe locking down turkulou or jameer nelson? :oldlol:

you can't keep trying to say "hakeem had more impact on defense" when all defensive big-man have more impact than guards, that's why you have to look at it relative to their positions.

and relative to his position, kobe is one of the greatest defensive/scoring guards ever (along with mj and peyton)

DMAVS41

11-28-2015, 09:59 PM

why are you putting an injured player's stats? :facepalm

and nice try but no. 09' clearly > 94' but hakeem can get the nod for 95' > 10' even though kobe's overall body of work is clearly more impressive than hakeem's, which is why he's considered the greatest laker ever.

also btw, kobe has more 1st all-defensive selections than any other guard (which i'm sure you're aware of) and completely shutdown russell westbrook in the 10' playoffs - a fact you conveniently left out because you barely know anything about kobe.

also, you keep stating hakeem's "impact" even though 1: dpoy is a regular season award much like the mvp and scoring title

and 2: hakeem could not stop shaq (who dropped 28 ppg on 60% shooting)

he did well on ewing but he's not an offensively talented player by any stretch of the imagination. you see how i didn't bring up kobe locking down turkulou or jameer nelson? :oldlol:

you can't keep trying to say "hakeem had more impact on defense" when all defensive big-man have more impact than guards, that's why you have to look at it relative to their positions.

and relative to his position, kobe is one of the greatest defensive/scoring guards ever (along with mj and peyton)

You are so ignorant here it's kind of sad.

I'll focus on the bold. Absolutely false.

Are you serious? You don't grade on an impact curve for positions. You don't say;

"well, Hakeem is better on defense, but it matters less because he's a center"

That isn't how it works. And even if we did it relative to position...Kobe grades out so damn poorly on defense. He never had the elite impact defensively like the best perimeter defenders did.

Hakeem, on the other hand, was elite defensively for his position.

So Kobe loses on both fronts here.

This is what makes guys like Hakeem and Duncan better than Kobe...in my opinion of course.

You make it sound like we have to give Kobe extra credit for being a guard....

Even worse, I have never seen a Kobe fan or any other guard fan look at scoring for a big and talk about "relative to their position"...

Just to be clear...you think we should discount Kobe's scoring when we compare him to Duncan because shooting guards tend to score more and shoot more in this era. Right...we should grade on a curve for Duncan's scoring...right?

Interesting...I've never seen a Kobe fan want to grade on a curve like that.

The one great thing about this place is that you really never know what moronic thing a Kobe stan is gonna say next.

Smoke117

11-28-2015, 10:03 PM

BasedTom

11-28-2015, 10:13 PM

Hakeem is laughably underrated with these idiots here on ISH.
a lot of people have him in their top 10. some above lebron.

ISH is probably one of the few places where ppl seriously take into account how stacked a team was, era, etc as opposed to pure numbers or ring count.

PsychoBe

11-28-2015, 10:22 PM

You are so ignorant here it's kind of sad.

I'll focus on the bold. Absolutely false.

Are you serious? You don't grade on an impact curve for positions. You don't say;

"well, Hakeem is better on defense, but it matters less because he's a center"

That isn't how it works.

This is what makes guys like Hakeem and Duncan better than Kobe...in my opinion of course.

You make it sound like we have to give Kobe extra credit for being a guard....

Even worse, I have never seen a Kobe fan or any other guard fan look at scoring for a big and talk about "relative to their position"...

Just to be clear...you think we should discount Kobe's scoring when we compare him to Duncan because shooting guards tend to score more and shoot more in this era. Right...we should grade on a curve for Duncan's scoring...right?

Interesting...I've never seen a Kobe fan want to grade on a curve like that.

The one great thing about this place is that you really never know what moronic thing a Kobe stan is gonna say next.

:facepalm

you're giving hakeem more credit than he deserves for his defense relative to kobe simply because he's a guard.

1: guards don't get dpoy considerations as often as big men. that's just a fact a life.

2: most/all advanced defensive metrics favor big-men over guards.

so of course hakeem will have more defensive impact as a big-man if his position puts him in a better position to have more defensive impact than any other position :oldlol:

come on now let's think outside the boxscore for a second. kobe bryant has the most 1st team all defensive selections than any other guard ever and did it while scoring more points than any other guard ever throughout his entire career.

let me repeat that.

kobe bean bryant has the most 1st nba all defense selections while scoring more total points than any other guard in the history of the nba.

you praise hakeem for being able to defend and score at great efficiency. that's great.

but by acclimation: no guard in the history of the national basketball association has ever accomplished what kobe has accomplished on both sides of the ball.

see what i mean by relative to their position? there will always be a gray area when comparing guards to big-men. that's why it's ridiculous to credit hakeem for averaging a double-double when he's always 5ft from the basket, just like it's ridiculous to penalize hakeem for averaging less assists than kobe since a guard will always be in a better position to get an assist than a big-man.

however, overall kobe is in a class of his own.

30k/6k/6k
(he's also top 15 in all-time steals btw)

placing hakeem over kobe all-time due to 2 finals series and imaginative "defensive impact" despite the fact kobe himself is an all-time great guard defender and has shut down offensive juggernauts such as russel westbrook makes no sense to me.

WayOfWade

11-28-2015, 10:33 PM

^
How did a thread about Wade and CP3 evolve into Kobe vs Hakeem?

PsychoBe

11-28-2015, 10:35 PM

wade is better than cp3 how is that not obvious? :facepalm

DMAVS41

11-28-2015, 10:43 PM

I'm not going to repeat myself, yet again, about all defensive selections.

Just a FYI to anyone interested...

Even if you were to grade "relative to position"...Hakeem still outclasses Kobe.

Hakeem was an elite defensive big for most of his career. Kobe was not an elite defensive perimeter player for most of his career.

Kobe never had the kind of consistent perimeter defensive impact an Artest, Battier, Iggy, Tony Allen, Kidd, AK47...etc. had.

Hakeem, on the other hand, was arguably the best of the best defensive big during his era. Certainly on the short list.

What I'm curious about though...is this grading on a curve thing.

Does that mean, one thinks that a player like Dirk was a better scorer than Kobe during 08-10? Because Kobe wasn't the highest scoring perimeter player, but Dirk was definitely the highest scoring big/post player over that 3 year period.

So if we grade on a relative to position curve...why doesn't offense/scoring fall into that?

SugarHill

11-28-2015, 10:46 PM

we got dude really arguing kobe is a better defender than hakeem

Smoke117

11-28-2015, 11:04 PM