The official "legit chris paul trade" thread

[dbestpro]

I don't think CP3 is better than TP for the Spurs at this point. End of story.

Disagree, but Paul most likely will never be able to play for SA. The story continues.........

[spursfaninla]

1. I am not on crack and I never even tried it.

2. Paul's assist numbers will definitely suffer in the spurs system but he would still get 2 more per game. This would happen because Paul is a better passer than Parker. Expect rj to get a lot more alleys. Shooters will get the ball right where they want it. Tim would not get the alley but the when fronted he will get ball passed to him in the perfect spot. Slashers will get the ball in the right spot at the right time.

3. I would argue that Paul is just as good if not better than Parker at breaking down the defense. Paul can also run the pick and roll. Why would he not be able to do these things? He can pass,dribble(great handles), and he is quick. That is all needs to be able to run the pick n' roll.

4. Paul has a really high fg% and he is the focus of every defense he goes up against. So if he played with the spurs the fg% will increase. Paul's ft% is also better than Parker's, so we will have less wasted points.

5. Parker being a better defender than Paul is debatable but he is definitely not far better than him. I would say Paul is better than Parker at defense. Paul makes calculated gambles on defense to get steals. He does not get all of them in passing lanes either he is just a pest on defense. He comes from behind on a big man and other situation that Parker does not capitalize on.

Bonus. I noticed that you didn't want to criticize Paul's ability to shoot threes and mid range shots. This is important because the opponent will not be able to leave rj and parker to help on defense. They will not sit in Duncan's lap either. Making everybodies life easier on the court. Thus, boosting everyones confidence.

Talking without numbers is useless; lets back some of this up to see who is full of it.

according to hoopdata, effective fg%:
2007 parker 52.7 paul 46
2008 parket 49 paul 52
2009 parker 50 paul 52
2010 parker 48 paul 53

mid-range jump shot (numbers from 2007 and up)

parker's % within 10 feet: 55, 52, 44, 53
parker's % outside 10 feet: 39, 42, 29, 39

Pauls % within 10: 40, 52, 50, 53
pauls outside 10: 43, 48, 51, 51

according to 82games.com, parker shoots 39% within close range, while Paul shoots only 20% close range; hence, parker does not need to shoot as well from the outside to shoot about the same effective percentage. He can't do that forever, though. Paul clearly is a FAR better outside shooter, even without considering the 3.

If we look at the 3, it becomes ridiculous.

Rebounding: Paul does NOT average 2 more per game than Parker.
Parker the last 4 years averages about 3 per game, and Paul about 4 per game. But paul averages about 37mpg, and parker about 33; that makes the difference not very significant.


Trying to have an objective discussion about defense or assists in different systems is futile.

[ducks]

paul gets 2 or 3 assist at home when he does not deserve it
during a game clearly another player made the finally pass to the player that made the shot but paul got the assist

[pad300]

A legitimate trade for Chris Paul...
I shouldn't let myself get sucked into this, but

SAS out - Parker, McDyess (18.3$M out), rights to James Anderson, 2011 1st, 2013 1st
SAS in - Paul, Gallinari (18.2$M in)

NYK out - Curry, Turiaf, Gallinari, Azabuike (21.8$M out)
NYK in - Parker, Okafor ($24.9M in)

NOH out - Paul, Okafor ($26.3M out)
NOH In - Curry, Turiaf, Azabuike, McDyess (23.3 $M in), rights to James Anderson, 2011 1st (SAS), 2013 1st (SAS)


Why for NYK - They don't have enough assets to get Paul straight up - they have no 1st rounders to trade. But moving Eddy Curry (junk expiring), Turiaf (Expiring backup center), Azabuike (expiring backup SF), and Gallinari (decent Prospect) for Parker and Okafor, 2 high level starters is a acceptable deal (and they can very likely resign Parker - it is my understanding that he was to be one of their FA targets in 2011).

Why for NOH - They move the discontented Paul, the long term contract of Okafor which they want to dump if they move Paul for expirings and 3 1st rounders...If they are forced to move Paul, that is about as good as they will get.

Why for SAS - They get Paul. They also get Gallinari, which gives them a decent SF/PF prospect behind Jefferson.

PS. As a follow up, from the money POV, (Chandler + Walker), Azabuike, and Gallinari are all interchangeable pieces. Depending on what value parties are willing to accept, they could be sent to any of the participants...

[RiverwalkParade]

not a Dallas fan, but they could make a good offer if NO wants to dump salary and plan ahead

Butler, Chandler, Barea, Stevenson

For

CP3, Okafor, Posey

[will_spurs]

SAS out - Parker, McDyess (18.3$M out), rights to James Anderson, 2011 1st, 2013 1st
SAS in - Paul, Gallinari (18.2$M in)

Parker + good vet center + 3 draft picks for barely an upgrade at PG position. Can I play in your fantasy basketball league?

[Nathan89]

So Portland gets a lot of salary and Parker.
Spurs exchange Parker with Paul
Hornets get Rudy in' Fernandez, Batum, Miller + Scrubs?

This trade makes no sense for either team.

The Hornets would only listen to that if they get either Roy + Filler or Aldrige + Oden + Picks + Filler for Paul and Okafor.

There are virtually no teams who have the assets to get Paul via a trade without parting with their franchise players. And most teams would look worse if the traded for Paul giving up those players.

Anything else than another Star + Filler or Young, proven, promising players + Fillers for Paul is redundant.

Hornets get-
3vets(miller,camby,pryzbilla)
2youngplayers(fernandez,batum)
Maybe some draft picks for some more young players

Hornets get rid of-
Paul- Who wants out
Okafor- Who they want out,so they get to lose his long overpaid contract.

I doubt that the hornets are going to get a better deal than this. No team is going to give hornets a player as good as roy or aldrige. They can not demand a big time player in return. They have to get some young pieces+picks+vets. This will save them money in the longrun and make the rebuilding process go faster.

[pad300]

Parker + good vet center + 3 draft picks for barely an upgrade at PG position. Can I play in your fantasy basketball league?

1) Parker is an expiring who may just leave on us. Whereas Paul is under contract for 2 more seasons (minimum, the 3ed year is a player option, which take given the new CBA). The contract situation is MUCH better fit with Duncan and Manu's remaining years.
2) Paul is not "barely" an upgrade at PG. By most summary stats, CP is a significant upgrade over TP. Compare say career PER and Ws/48. CP 25.6 and .233 TP 18.3 and .143. This is a star driven league. TP is one of the top 10 and possibly top 5 PG's in the league. CP is top 3. The step up is significant.
3) Gallinari is not nothing. Gallinari is worth one of those 3 draft picks equivalents. He may be a good fit in our system - a big SF who can shoot...
4) You missed the biggest value from SAS and NOH's POV. The 2013 pick. That season, Duncan is retired, Manu is either really old (35) or retired, and possibly CP has left as a FA looking for a better situation than a rebuilding team.

[will_spurs]

I'm goign to stop discussing soon but just for the record.

1) Parker is an expiring who may just leave on us. Whereas Paul is under contract for 2 more seasons (minimum, the 3ed year is a player option, which take given the new CBA). The contract situation is MUCH better fit with Duncan and Manu's remaining years.

So it's Parker for one year or Paul for two. Doesn't any kind of difference, especially given the fact that if the Spurs offer Paul's salary to Parker next year he will sign.

2) Paul is not "barely" an upgrade at PG. By most summary stats, CP is a significant upgrade over TP. Compare say career PER and Ws/48. CP 25.6 and .233 TP 18.3 and .143. This is a star driven league. TP is one of the top 10 and possibly top 5 PG's in the league. CP is top 3. The step up is significant.

It is barely an upgrade. First of all you're comparing one player whose whole game right now centers around padding his stats, with another player who has proven he can play in the Spurs system and check his ego at the door. Second, Parker is also a top 3 PG in the league when not injured. As for people say Parker is a fringe top 15 player in the league, they conveniently forget he got ranked #8 and #9 in different MVP votes.

3) Gallinari is not nothing. Gallinari is worth one of those 3 draft picks equivalents. He may be a good fit in our system - a big SF who can shoot...
4) You missed the biggest value from SAS and NOH's POV. The 2013 pick. That season, Duncan is retired, Manu is either really old (35) or retired, and possibly CP has left as a FA looking for a better situation than a rebuilding team.

Yeah... and you're sending that 2013 pick (and 2011 and 2010) to NOLA. Which means the Spurs would have to rebuild without a 1st round pick for 4 straight years.

[Obstructed_View]

Parker + good vet center + 3 draft picks for barely an upgrade at PG position. Can I play in your fantasy basketball league?

[pad300]

So it's Parker for one year or Paul for two. Doesn't any kind of difference, especially given the fact that if the Spurs offer Paul's salary to Parker next year he will sign.

Yes it does make a difference, a huge one. 2 serious championship shots vs 1, and for Duncan's last 2 year (SAS owes it to Duncan to try and make it two shots vs one). A 100% increase in quan y. As well as a significant increase in quality of those shots.

It is barely an upgrade. First of all you're comparing one player whose whole game right now centers around padding his stats, with another player who has proven he can play in the Spurs system and check his ego at the door. Second, Parker is also a top 3 PG in the league when not injured. As for people say Parker is a fringe top 15 player in the league, they conveniently forget he got ranked #8 and #9 in different MVP votes.

You want to talk MVP votes...
Parker MVP vote share and ranking:
2005-06 NBA 0.007 (9)
2006-07 NBA 0.001 (15)
2008-09 NBA 0.007 (8)
Career 0.015 (141)
Paul MVP vote shares and Ranking
2007-08 NBA 0.706 (2)
2008-09 NBA 0.159 (5)
Career 0.864 (33)

CP's had 5 years in the league so far, and TP's had 9. TP gets fringe votes from the homers at the SAEN. That's where those .00x's come from. Chris Paul, on the other hand is being recognized nationally to get enough vote shares to get .xxx, three orders of magnitude more votes. TPs in the top 150 all time on his career to date. CP's in the top 50!

Yeah... and you're sending that 2013 pick (and 2011 and 2010) to NOLA. Which means the Spurs would have to rebuild without a 1st round pick for 4 straight years.

a) you can't count. 3 traded pick equivalents <> 4 years without picks.
b) It's really only 2 - its effectively a trade of Anderson for Gallinari.
c) The real price is potentially delaying the rebuild for a year of sucking in 13-14. That is if 1) we got a high lottery pick that year, which would really depend on the future development of Hill, Blair, Splitter and Gallinari 2) also assumes that 2013 was a good draft year, with a potential franchise cornerstone available when our pick came up 3) that we were smart enough to pick said franchise cornerstone when our turn came; I've seen enough high draft picks blown...
I say that a potential one year delay in rebuilding is worth doubling current championship shots.

[will_spurs]

I say that a potential one year delay in rebuilding is worth doubling current championship shots.

Let's say you win. Unfortunately for you Paul is still not coming to SA. And the Spurs are going to sign Parker to a max extension, so at least you have a great future arguing pointless Parker trade scenarios to look forward to.

[UnWantedTheory]

I'm goign to stop discussing soon but just for the record.



So it's Parker for one year or Paul for two. Doesn't any kind of difference, especially given the fact that if the Spurs offer Paul's salary to Parker next year he will sign.

It is barely an upgrade. First of all you're comparing one player whose whole game right now centers around padding his stats, with another player who has proven he can play in the Spurs system and check his ego at the door. Second, Parker is also a top 3 PG in the league when not injured. As for people say Parker is a fringe top 15 player in the league, they conveniently forget he got ranked #8 and #9 in different MVP votes.

Yeah... and you're sending that 2013 pick (and 2011 and 2010) to NOLA. Which means the Spurs would have to rebuild without a 1st round pick for 4 straight years.

Thats pushing it a bit far bro, because he is not a top 3 PG....& he is a fringe top 15 player.

[UnWantedTheory]

I would love CP3, but it wont happen. Pointless threads that argue for unrealistic outcomes are tiring. Just because money matches up, doesnt mean its realistic!!! AHHHH!!!! Obekaybe?

[UnWantedTheory]

But good job working it out.

[rayray2k8]

Hornets Want Okafor Included In Any Paul Deal

If the Hornets are going to trade All-Star point guard Chris Paul, they reportedly want teams to take on the contract of Emeka Okafor.

Okafor's contract has four years and $52 million left on it.

The second overall pick in the 2004 NBA Draft, Okafor has career averages of 13.3 points, 10.3 rebounds and 1.8 blocks.

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar...any_paul_deal/


Kill this thread. No way the spurs will want to absorb Okafor's contract as well.

[Obstructed_View]

Thats pushing it a bit far bro, because he is not a top 3 PG....& he is a fringe top 15 player.

There are only two names ahead of him that are point guards.

[pad300]

There are only two names ahead of him that are point guards.

Only 2?

Top 3
Chris Paul
Deron Williams
Rajon Rondo

A clear step below:

Steve Nash
Chauncy Billups
TP (is in this second group somewhere)

And there are up and comers
Collison
Tyreke Evans (although is he a PG?)
Derrick Rose

[Obstructed_View]

Only 2?

Top 3
Chris Paul
Deron Williams
Rajon Rondo

A clear step below:

Steve Nash
Chauncy Billups
TP (is in this second group somewhere)

And there are up and comers
Collison
Tyreke Evans (although is he a PG?)
Derrick Rose

Yeah, there are two point guards in the league that are above him. Rondo is not one of them. At worst you've got him one spot below that, so I'm assuming you agree that calling him a "fringe top fifteen player" was a weak attempt to paint Parker in a negative light.

[pad300]

Yeah, there are two point guards in the league that are above him. Rondo is not one of them. At worst you've got him one spot below that, so I'm assuming you agree that calling him a "fringe top fifteen player" was a weak attempt to paint Parker in a negative light.

No, your underestimating my " Parker Hate" as it's referred to around here; although I think it's not wearing rose colored glasses. I said:

TP is one of the top 10 and possibly top 5 PG's in the league.

I'm not calling Parker one of the top 15 players in the league. I'm serious when I say Rondo is ahead of him. Rondo is a monstrous defender and has demonstrated that he's good at running an offence. Rondo gets a jumpshot and he's winning the argument for being TOP pg in the league. Parker, IMO, is in the 2nd tier of PG's,with Nash and Billups. Now either of those guys might drop out due to age, but some of those up and comers might jump up or even over that second tier.

I would never have called Parker a fringe top 15 player in the league. Just start listing names, in no particular order

Rondo, CP, Deron Williams
Kobe, Wade, Roy, Ginobili
Lebron, Paul Pierce, Durant
Bosh, Dirk, KG, Josh Smith
Howard, TD, Pau Gasol

More Maybe Ahead of TP: Kevin Love, Gerald Wallace, Bogut, Noah, Nash, Horford, David Lee (we are going to see if his numbers are simply from the D'antoni system)

Some more thought might lead to more players...
(Also note, a lot of bigs - simply because bigs are move valuable than smalls...)

[Dave McNulla]

i thought it was about ru paul.

[UnWantedTheory]

There are only two names ahead of him that are point guards.

Just 2? Wow. I love TP, but Damn.

[UnWantedTheory]

Yeah, there are two point guards in the league that are above him. Rondo is not one of them. At worst you've got him one spot below that, so I'm assuming you agree that calling him a "fringe top fifteen player" was a weak attempt to paint Parker in a negative light.

Fringe Top 15 player...not fringe top 15 PG...Anyone who thinks TP is not a fringe top 15 player is a homer.


Durant
LeBron
Bosh
Wade
Dirk
TD
Pierce
Melo
Roy
Howard
Paul
D Williams
Kobe
Gasol


Thats just 14....Fringe 15? Yes TP is. I think after that it kinda goes to second tier players, but there are many arguments to be made....perhaps J Johnson, Amare, Rose, Boozer, Rondo, Nash, KG, Gino, Nelson, Lewis, VC, Allen, Arenas, Etc,... for the top 25. Who knows...All I am saying is "fringe" top 15 is realistic and not all that bad with the talent we have in the NBA today.


It is not meant to cast TP in a negative light, but to face the fact he isnt but a possible top 15 player if that. 2 years ago he was defintately not,...today?...Perhaps. That is still great btw. TP is a great player, who fits our system...but let us not be silly about it.

[venitian navigator]

if we really decide to trade Parker for Paul, her's a trade that works for everybody at espn trade machine :

Spurs take Paul from NO and give Parker to NY

N.O. takes Chandler, Gallinari, Azubuike, Randolph and Curry and give Paul to Spurs and Okafor to NY

NY takes Parker from spurs and Okafor from NO and give Chandler, Gallinari, Azubuike, Randolph and Curry to NO



for Spurs and Knicks the advantage is obvious

for NO, the advantages are :

1) they can get rid of Okafor contract;
2) they can play from the beginning the young duo of Collison and Thompson in the back court
3) they receive all contracts for a short term, so in case they can clean house in max two years
4) all pieces they receive are young guns and all in different roles, some of them with rookie contracts and a lot of potential to become the starters for a long long time (see Gallinari like small forward and Randolph like power forward);
5) some draft choices dcan also be included

[Chieflion]

if we really decide to trade Parker for Paul, her's a trade that works for everybody at espn trade machine :

Spurs take Paul from NO and give Parker to NY

N.O. takes Chandler, Gallinari, Azubuike, Randolph and Curry and give Paul to Spurs and Okafor to NY

NY takes Parker from spurs and Okafor from NO and give Chandler, Gallinari, Azubuike, Randolph and Curry to NO



for Spurs and Knicks the advantage is obvious

for NO, the advantages are :

1) they can get rid of Okafor contract;
2) they can play from the beginning the young duo of Collison and Thompson in the back court
3) they receive all contracts for a short term, so in case they can clean house in max two years
4) all pieces they receive are young guns and all in different roles, some of them with rookie contracts and a lot of potential to become the starters for a long long time (see Gallinari like small forward and Randolph like power forward);
5) some draft choices dcan also be included

I don't see how New York giving away all of their young talent plus Eddy Curry's expiring contract gets only Tony Parker ans Okafor's contract is some sort of advantage.