http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLCrzNVvRvo&t=4m45s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuYfkp3nr2o&t=5m36s
http://i.imgur.com/E8ppfi0.jpg
Printable View
Startling revelation if true
Better than Porker
Who gives a shit about CP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
You mofos will hate CP3 more than Porker when he dribbles dribbles and deny your Kawhi the ball..
Already top 10 in assists.Quote:
Originally Posted by gilmor
Yes.. but you wont win another championshipQuote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
lol Spurs fans. Spurs continually in the top tier of assists per game but get mad because one players doesn't average 10+. Still don't understand the system.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Lol at Paul not being good. When have the Clippers had the best team out west? He's a great player, but he's playing in the Duncan/Kobe/Curry eras. Only three teams out west have won a title. But lots of great players out west.
Of course CP3 is good (I don't buy the talent argument - he has a pretty stacked team). The issue is just flatly equating assists with everything. On SA he would not average the assists he does (does not mean he isn't a great player)
My point isn't that he doesn't have a talented team, it's that there have always been more talented teams out west. Only 5 teams out West have made it to the finals in the last what 18 years. He's never been on the consensus number one team. As for averaging 10 assists, he could've easily done it in the Robinson/Duncan era. Now, we only have one ball dominant player, and that's Kawhi. No, it's not Parker. But even Kawhi could be a superior off the ball scorer. He and Paul would be great together, but I'm sure the Spurs wouldn't let Paul run the team like he does the Clippers, so naturally his assist numbers would go down.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
Says who?Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
:tuQuote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
The two guys above you^^Quote:
Originally Posted by RD2191
wait till george hill kicks cp3 out of this year playoffs
Numbers indicate that CP3 game is very conductive to winning throughout his entire career and with different teammates around him, tbh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
Don't disagree a bit. But... there are times when the Spurs' offense sputters, and a guy with CP3's skills would be a benefit. He's always struggled to break down a zone. He's never drawn fouls like CP3 does - I won't write half a page about why.
So, yeah, there are times when Paul's skills would be better. But I don't know how much better, if any, the team would be for it. They might win a few more of those games when the offense isn't clicking. But they would probably lose some of the ones where CP3 goes black hole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAF86
You might want to look back at the W/L record of the teams he was on. A couple of years in NO he had a LOT of talent around him, and they did well. He's done well at LAC, with Blake and Cousins - but the team has never lived up to the expectations of all the talent they had. Not saying it's his fault. But the years his teams have been successful haven't all been because of him, either.
But people here almost ALWAYS underestimate anyone who doesn't wear silver and black. CP3 is a badass, plain and simple. Making a blanket statement that he "doesn't play winning basketball" is just ignorant.
Especially now CP3 would be better. No doubt. CP3 is an amazing player. Just making a point to those obessesed with assists while failing to take into consideration system.Quote:
Originally Posted by GSH
I would take CP3 over porker in a heartbeat. :lol
I don't get your point son, it's like you made the second paragraph to contradict your first one. :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by GSH
Anyway, CP3 has been on winning teams ever since he matured as a player in 07/08 (where he should have won MVP), since that point on his teams have had winning records except in 2010 where, not coincidentally, he got injured. And he has been the main reason for all those winning seasons in both of his teams. Clippers become a joke when he doesn't play.
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopo...k-kidd-jpg.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by cd98
Hes good if not great but you have to look at the teams he had to go up against, namely the Spurs. Is Paul better than Parker, probably but Griffin, Deandre, West etc aint no Duncan, Ginobili and all our great bench players not to mention Pops. If the Spurs hadnt existed Paul might have won a ring just like if the Lakers with Shaq, Kobe and Phil Jackson hadnt existed we might be going for Bill Russells record instead of Jordans.Quote:
Originally Posted by GSH
Also I believe too much of a pass happy PG can be a detriment because it takes away both isolation play and team passing. Teams start relying too much on the one special pass.
Signing Paul would improve LMA play significantly IMO..he'd also help Green and our starting rolling center. CP3 is the master of setting up others with great looks...he's exactly the player Pop is trying to get Tony to do but just can't cause he's a scoring guard with tunnel vision.
Spurs and CP3 need each other tbh
These delusionals. Pop requesting DMurray to study CP3 but yeah, he does not play winning basketball. GTFO tbh :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by dabom
Never knew CP3 ever played with a Duncan, Manu type player/players. :lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by TheDoctor
Dedmon would average 12 ppg on lobs alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by coachmac87
LMAO exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by dabom
CP3 instead of Parker during the BIG3 era? Damn.
:wowQuote:
Originally Posted by TheDoctor
Only one team wins every year....
Unless it's Westbrook they don't award an assist for throwing the ball to the center in the post.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
Also, imo, Kawhi doesn't need a ball dominant PG at all, he needs to run the PnR more.
And CP3 is never on that team.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proxy
Tony Romo of the NBA tbh.
He (and Kobe) would have probably won a title if that trade hadn't been vetoed
It's not just the alley oop, it's that during the Robinson era and the beginning of the Duncan era, the Spurs system used a ball dominant point guard. Now it is less so. Chris Paul is great at everything a point guard does, from directing the team, to smart plays, to passing, to shooting, and to defending. He would instantly improve any team he was on, and if he was on the Spurs without them needing to gut the roster, they would be the best team in the NBA. But he would cost too much to add at his age. He's have two good years and then be overpaid compared to his production.Quote:
Originally Posted by BG_Spurs_Fan
He would make Kawhi even better. Kawhi is a good off the ball player and when Kawhi ISOs, Paul is a good shooter if his man cheats to help. If you swapped Parker for Paul, I'd say Spurs were better than GSW on paper.
Ive been watching Chris Paul lately
and sometimes I wonder, if he really is that good, why no rings??
Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
-------------------------------------------------------
Agree, but
will he take less money to come to us?
Probably easier to play winning basketball with Tim Duncan as opposed to Tyson Chandler or DeAndre Jordan.
CP3 didn't get to play with Duncan Manu and to be coached by Pop
We would have 7 peated with CP3 instead of that POS Porker
Plus, CP3 was a Duncan fan wheb he was a kid
Best PG of the past two decades. A lot of morons posting in this thread.
No, he won't. He won't be a Spur, but if he was over the next two years with our core, we'd be awesome.Quote:
Originally Posted by cutewizard
yeah that kind of fanaticism turns me off, if CP3 or LBJ wanted to come to the Spurs (for less than the max) I would be all for it. They have the skills any team would want and if they wanted to come to the Spurs for less than the max it would prove that winning is the most important thing to them (and that they are over themselves). Anyone that would say they didn't want them is either lying or lacking in basketball IQ.
Chandler took a wet shit on Duncan in 2008, and he was a key cog in a championship team in Dallas a few years later. Choke-P is just a career loser.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
I absolutely agree, but people keep saying winning basketball. It's funny because he wins every year. The Clippers are in the playoffs every year. Paul is a playoff fixture since he came into the league. If you are talking about championships, well then I think the TD versus Tyson Chandler and D. Jordan come into play. He's never been a part of the best team. Few superstars have. Kawhi was part of a great team in 2014. If he never wins another title but posts numbers like he has, it doesn't mean he doesn't playing winning basketball (the dude is a main player on 2 60 win teams), it means he played in an era with teams that were better.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
i would love that to happen, but I'd be a hypocrite to say at 32 I'd turn down the max to play for the Spurs. I mean, if he signed the max to play for the Kings, maybe you could say it's just for the money. But if he resigns with the Clippers for the max, I can't fault him bc I would do the same. I don't think a player has to give up a third of his value to "get over himself."Quote:
Originally Posted by $pursDynasty
I guess you'll need to define "career loser." If it means a championship or deep run, well that's 98% of NBA players. Seems like a high standard. But that 2008 claim is a poor answer. First, I hardly think Chandler was better than Duncan in 2008, but the point is playing with Duncan for several years is better than playing Chandler, which is indisputable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clipper Nation
true just wishful thinking on my part, but players say all the time that the ring is the most important thing but very rarely do they put their money where their mouth is. When they do they get scornfully laughed at (David West, Keven Durant) I am not saying play for the minimum but there is no need for the max when most get paid more for endorsements than for actual play. As much as I would love a PG rotation of CP3, MVParker and Dijon, I am not sure if CP's love of all the endorsements that being in LA provides is greater than his desire for a ring. Ideal scenario pull a Lebron come visit the Spurs for 2-3 years get a ring (or 3) then go back to LA a champion promising "to bring one to the Clips".Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
We offered Parker for Paul years ago. Fun fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by lefty
Lebron left in is prime.And although Paul is probably right now in his prime, he is also on the decline. And for PG’s, that can go quick, eg Parker. So Lebron could actually come back the Cleveland after 4 years and still be in his prime basketball skill wise.Quote:
Originally Posted by $pursDynasty
N:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
Of the last decade yes
he and Romo should just sign with GS over the summer thenQuote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBoy