Clippers: Is chris paul the 2nd best pg of all time?

[ambchang]

1. agree how they won is very important but for themost part EVERY TRULY great player was a key contributor to their # of les I cannot think of anyone that is in GOAT discussion for their position, that is not. Even Kareem at the end, duncan last year all were key contributors even if they were not the #2.

Not entirely true, Kareem is actually a great example in 87 and 88. He was definitely a good player then, even all star level good, and he most definitely contributed to the championships. You can even argue that the Lakers wouldn't have won without him, but he didn't add much, if anything to his legacy with those two championships. His legacy was cemented a long time before then.

Same with Jordan, he was the best player in the league in 98, but his legacy would have been the same without that championship.

Duncan, same deal, his legacy has been cemented for years, whether he won in 14 or not is not consequential to his legacy.

If Hakeem won another two rings at the tail end of his career, he would have been the same player.

Shaq's Heat ring didn't add anything to his legacy of absolute dominance in the three peat.

2. Ok you we can play the switch teams argument? Why do we need to do that when Isiah who played against Stockton head to head murdered him (so much so that Malone took a cheap shot to stop him) led his team to les ...and beat the teams and players that people use as an excuse as to why Stockton did not ring? Isiah led teams that beat Magic, Bird and Jordan. Not only that but as good as Dumars, Laimbeer and Rodman were he never had ANY team-mate as good on both ends as Karl Malone. Mj took a two year sabbatical so the MJ excuse doesnt work for me. Dream won. with Kenny freaking Smith as his PG and Otis thorpe as his #2. Not only did stockton have one of the best scorers at his disposal he also had a HOF coach and later on also one of the best pure shooters (hornacek) I have ever seen in person. So no, I dont excuse him for not ringing. You compete vs the guys you face. Despite having the #2 GOAT PF, a top 5 PG and a HOF coach they failed to win the ultimate prize. Isiah had great coaching and a great team a team that is vastly underrated, no doubt.But he also not only faced Jordan, but King, Bird and Magic. He won. Stockton is great absolutely and I agree in some ways even greater than Malone (more clutch definitely) but not greater than Isiah. Both imho are greater than Paul. Dont care what winshares per 48/pur point rating times PER says ...

I flip flop on this, but I would agree that in most measures Isiah > Stockton. Not sure why your brought this in because I was talking about Stockton and Billups.

As for his teammates, Malone was an overrated choker. There are very few chokers in NBA history (I felt that term is being thrown around needlessly and unfairly by people who only look at boxscores and not the actual games), but Malone most definitely was a choker. I'd say Nick Anderson was the other one. If Stockton had Robinson or Barkley on his team instead of that pedophile, I am quite certain he would have rung, against Jordan or not.

3. Again duncan winning 5 does NOTHING to his legacy? Really?! Based on who or what? 5 (or more) is a very special club. Even if you take away your obsession only Magic, Kareem and MJ (GOATS) are in that club since 1980.Yes he proved he could win yes he proved he can play more of a David Robinson type role all of that PLUS rinnging adds to his legacy. who gives a if he accepts a lessor role but they lose?

Not really, no. If Duncan won 5 the way Jordan won 6, then he'd be in GOAT discussions, but he didn't.

Magic won 5, but he wasn't the absolute top dog in 80 and 82. 85 was a co-lead situation, and that was why even with 3 rings, Bird was widely viewed as greater than Magic even when he had 2 rings vs. Magic's 3. it wasn't until Magic rang in 87 and 88 as the absolute top dog and injuries to Bird that it became Magic > Bird. Again, it wasn't about the number of rings, and it was about how those rings were won.

And Duncan playing a Robinson role somehow adds to his legacy? Robinson will never be in the GOAT conversation because he never led his team to a le as the top dog. It's unfair to him because I'd like to see how the other GOAT big men would have done with Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro as their starting backcourt, with legendary coaches like Tark the Shark, John Lucas and Bob Hill leading the charge.

4. Malone and Chuck are special cases. Like i said a case can be made for either as the #2 GOAT PF. But as great as KG or Dirk are (yes they rang) but as it stands today if they were both reired no neither are as great as Malone or Chuck. No, it's not like Billups vs. Stockton but I do believe there is a wide enough gap that the rings wont matter in the end. (im saying general consensus) If Dirk continues to put up numbers and have a significant impact on his team ESPECIALLY if rings again even as a #2 I could see an argument for Dirk as #2 . But for me, rings are really important.

Why not? Dirk has one, Chuck has none. 1>0. Both were legendary PF that changed the way the position is perceived. Why is Barkley > Dirk, especially when rings are really important to you?

Same with Billups and Stockton.

[Raven]

In case you missed my stance on the subject. I dont rate players I never saw play. It's not fair to them or me. I am not a numbers guy. SO i would never just use that. As much as I value rings, rings alone or no good either. SO no Russell, Cousy, Oscar West or Elgin in my lists. yes, I have seen some "tape" on NBA's greatest games and I do have some of the Laker greats old games on DVD. But that is them at their best. I saw Magic, Kobe, Bird and even MJ WIN AND FAIL. Watched them in their primes so I can speak on those guys extensively. On what basis could I rank guys that retired before I was born? Kareem tbh barely makes the cut for me because I missed his true prime but saw enough of him to rank him first at center.

on what ground can you make lists of goats then anyway?

[lefty]

OP

[Franklin]

Paul ain't even the 2nd best PG of his time imho.

[Arcadian]

I will argue that Duncan winning a 5th ring does help his legacy. The fact that one player was able to anchor a franchise for 17 years, and the fact that Pop and RC were able to consistently build le contenders around him for that long, is a feather in Tim's cap. He wasn't the best player on the 2014 team, but he was still the centerpiece. What other player was a centerpiece for 17 years?

Now, on the other hand, I would not say that he needed to win a 5th ring to be ranked as high as he is. I've had him ranked in the top 5 of all time since 2003 when he was at peak performance. I value peak more than longevity. Just making the Finals the last two years would have been enough to cement that legacy. But still, having the concrete accomplishment of actually winning it even further cements it. It adds something.

[Killakobe81]

on what ground can you make lists of goats then anyway?

1. les leading a team to multiple les
2. Peak performance dominance over peers
3. Consistent greatness Hakeem had a great peak but Tim is great.
4. Stats/metrics important but need context
5. Eye test a non expert could watch a game and tell LeBron MJ are great

[CitizenDwayne]

Paul ain't even the 2nd best PG of his time imho.

CP3 is overrated as , but you're reaching a bit with that one.