Reply With Quote
He's annoying to watch, but he's a monster, tbh..
His style of play doesn't work for deep playoff runs, he's the Peyton Manning of the NBA, but still..
Nothing better than beating this crybaby, dirty, sneaky luck chuck pussy mother er. Refs cosbyed us that 3rd quarter cause of his bull . Wasn't enough him and the lucky ass clips.
He's annoying to watch, but he's a monster, tbh..
His style of play doesn't work for deep playoff runs, he's the Peyton Manning of the NBA, but still..
Nice comparison I'd like to kill him with my bare hands.
Peyton's won it all twice, though. Paul hasn't sniffed WCF. I'd say he's the Barry Bonds of the NBA, tbh.
He's got Curry's handles...without the range. Felt like he coulda got his shot off anytime he wanted. Curry and Paul really destroy our backcourt D. Tho, they destroy most everyone else's too. lol
What style would that be son?
And then eat him?
Historically ball-dominant little man that calls all his own plays..
You aren't winning a le with a 6" player that doesn't play without the ball in his hands, tbh..
I think he's ball-dominant by need, tbh. If he had another perimiter player star (like Westbrook has with Durant) he wouldn't be as ball-dominant. He does let Griffin do a lot of creating, imho.
The only defense against them is to go at them on the other end which WestBrick has done successfully against Paul b/c WestBrick is just too big/athletic for the aging midget & they have nobody else to put on him unlike the Worriers (Klay/Livingston). Paul has also made it a point to bait Curry into a foul (ala Patty) whenever he's on him on defense, usually to start the game.
You also had Lowry/Wall fighting fire w/ fire when they were matched up against Curry.
5'10" at best, tbh. lol NBA trainers' measurement edge
Dat boi gud
I am with you I can't stand mr Whiney face pouty Paul. He looks like he is going to cry the whole game.
Paul firing a ball at a ref after the high-low Duncan to LMA action. er got T'd up for that at the end of a playoff game last year for doing that sh**.
Peyton actually goes to the Superbowl and won too, Paul is usually one and done most of the time tbh.
Great player. Always thought he'd be even better if he looked for his own shot more.
Like the anti-Westbrook. More accurate shooter but doesn't shoot enough. And he rubs you wrong in a completely different way, a cold, passive-aggressive way rather than Westbrook's obnoxious gloating baggery.
Peyton is a 2 - time NFL champion and the greatest (statistical) QB ever, while Chris Paul's ass can't even make it to the conference finals.
Terrible comparison. He's more like Barry Sanders or Dan Marino.
Say what you want about his annoying on-court antics, but he's a ridiculously good basketball player tbh, especially at his size. He annoys the out of me too when we play them, but at the end of the day, I'd take him on the Spurs in a heartbeat.
First of all, Manning was literally the worst QB to win a Super Bowl in NFL history, this season..stop it..you could have replaced with him literally any QB in the NFL and the Broncos wouldn't have lost anything..giving him credit for the ring is the equivalent of giving Jeff Ayres credit for ringing in 2014..
He was terrible during his first SB run, as well..3 TDs vs. 7 INTs and a 70 QB Rating in the playoffs..giving him credit for being a "Super Bowl winner", despite being underwhelming in 1 and a complete non-factor in the other is pretty silly IMO
I compared the 2 because they are the most intelligent on-field/court players in their respective sports, they both have amazing regular season stats(Chris Paul has historically great stats for his position..if you consider advanced metrics, he's probably the greatest PG of all-time during the RS) as micro-managers that call their own plays and are not able to adapt to any style outside of their own..Manning was never able to play a different style of football that didn't have him running the entire team(which never worked, and why he is considered an underwhelming playoff performer), and Paul is the same way..
Last edited by HarlemHeat37; 03-16-2016 at 02:39 AM.
Whats disappointing is the Spurs have no answer for the double high pick and roll screen. Got abused everytime they went to it. Clippers eventually stopped in the 3rd/4th and they couldn't score after. Just like last year's playoffs though when they spammed that play to death and the Spurs had no counter. Just let Kawhi get screened off Paul and he got open midrange or layups
Should have known you'd come with the same old bull , per par. If "any QB could have done it" then why did Denver bench the far more capable, athletic and younger Brock Osweiler in favor of old, broken down and sorry ass Peyton Manning? It was because although he is a s of his former self he won't make enough mistakes that will cost you the game. He can play with in his (many) limitations and he helped stabilize a team that was highly inconsistent and teetering on the edge of falling apart. The defense won Denver the championship, but I doubt they would have even gotten to the Super Bowl without Manning's leadership and poise.First of all, Manning was literally the worst QB to win a Super Bowl in NFL history, this season
He was terrible during his first SB run, as well..3 TDs vs. 7 INTs and a 70 QB Rating in the playoffs
I compared the 2 because they are the most intelligent on-field/court players in their respective sports, they both have amazing regular season stats(Chris Paul has historically great stats for his position..if you consider advanced metrics, he's probably the greatest PG of all-time during the RS) as micro-managers that call their own plays and are not able to adapt to any style outside of their own..Manning was never able to play a different style of football that didn't have him running the entire team(which never worked, and why he is considered an underwhelming playoff performer), and Paul is the same way..
How did it "never work" when the man has 4 Super Bowl appearances and 2 victories in his resumé? You can attempt to discredit him all you like but you can't change that fact, buddy. His failures had a lot to do with (a lot of) poor playoff performances but also from having some historically ty defenses (early on in Indianapolis and 2 seasons ago in Denver). Anyway, Paul is much more like Barry Sanders, the greatest "pure" position player of his generation (maybe ever) but a guy that never, ever accomplishes as much team success as he should. While his rivals and peers (Curry/Parker) win with better balanced and overall teams (i.e. Emmitt Smith).
Paul is a great guard that will never see team success until he finds a situation where he isn't the best player and can play a more complimentary role. I don't believe his (on-court) stubbornness and ego will allow that to happen any time soon.
Last edited by J_Paco; 03-16-2016 at 03:19 AM.
Strongly dislike his antics on the court, but his feel for the game, basketball IQ and quick thinking are impressive. As Harlem said he'll always have that stigma of a ball dominant PG who could never lead a team to a championship but his game would age well and he might become an absolutely perfect vet, lower usage PG option for a younger contending team sometime down the line.
this ****
Kawhi is strong enough to push past the screen and keep following Paul, but guards aren't.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
