Reply With Quote
Gasol is a bigger flopper than Dirk.Fact.
Butt hurt for even noticing.
Gasol is a bigger flopper than Dirk.Fact.
...How could I not notice when you just quoted probably seven or eight posts?
You're beginning to sound like lefty.
Ok Mr. Lefty. Even after I tell you I am trolling you, you still go all Lefty. Wow.
Hey, you were trying to find all my posts in this topic and quote them to prove some kind of point, right? I'll let you get back to it.
I'm sure it will be something as hilarious as "
Look at it from my perspective. I have gone to quite a few Hornets games in the last few years. I've watched Chris play amazingly for a while now.
To me, I just don't understand why people say that both players are close when Chris Paul has played better year after year. Even in a season in which Chris was injured almost half the time, his stats are better than Deron's across the board.
No girl. I had them quoted for some reason from a while ago (a post I never made) and instead of deleting them when I quoted something else it posted them. It was erased in 5 seconds, but of course you being Mr. Lefty and all (also a hypocrite because you act just like him) noticed it and you just had to post about it.
You are one butt hurt person. We need the Jim Rome troll: "wow, look at the level of butt hurt from this poster. Un.Bee.Leave.Able."
What's next from you, calling me a hypocrite (when it makes no sense in context)? That is making me an emotional wreck.
I wouldn't argue with that ...... Derek Fisher has got to be up there as well ......
This is a gem as well
So is it just about stats? Because there are many players who get stats, but it does not translate to winning or making the playoffs. It is definitely debatable and again you look hilarious saying it is not.
anyone who posts below me is a .
shhhh girlz.
And I think Paul is better than Williams.
Oh, so we're comparing Chris Paul to somebody like Zach Randolph now?
The Hornets didn't make the playoffs because (1) Chris Paul was injured, (2) they weren't good from a chemistry perspective and (3) the team wasn't that good to begin with.
Again, it is not debatable.
Who is the better scorer? Who is the better shooter? Passer? Ball handler? Rebounder?
Oh, but I'm not allowed to talk because Chris Paul has never won a ring.
Yeah,no question.Kirilenko is in top5 hands down.
It is debatable and the fact you keep going back to an obvious joke that I made reeks of butt hurt. Let it go Louie.
They did not make the playoffs because they weren't very good. Even with Paul healthy I don't see them making it.
That was not the point. The point is that it is debatable and stats do not tell the entire story. Who compared Paul to Randolph? That is you being self conscious. The point was to show the stats argument is not always the best argument, especially when the systems, talent and other factors between two great players are relevant.
The fact CP3 has no ring has nothing to do with your terrible takes on the matter that CP3 is so far ahead of Williams that it is not debatable.
Yeah, I have horrible takes. I have used facts and you haven't actually said anything but "It's debatable."
Come on, be Devil's Advocate and list some reasons why it is debatable.
Paul/D-Will
OTHERS
Paul is better than Williams
People don't like Paul just because he is Lebron's close friend.
I think pass-first point guards should be higher on the lists. Parker, Rondo, Westbrook are all too high on Darrin's list IMO.
My list is about the PG and not the overall success of the team.
1. Nash
2. D-Will
3. CP
4. Billups
5. Rose
6. Rondo
7. Brooks
8. Harris
8. Parker
8. Westbrook
gotta love Bob Horry
I wouldn't go that far. Paul went down with injury and people have a short memory, so they put Williams above Paul.
Agree with this.
This has been discussed ad nauseum.
Deron Williams Career Averages:
Reg Seas: 35 MPG, 16.7 PTS, 9 AST, 3.1 REBS, 46% FG, 80% FT, 36% 3 PT, 1 STL, 2.98 TO's
PO's - 40 MPG, 21.1 PTS, 9.6 AST, 3.7 REBS, 45% FG, 80% FT, 40% 3 PT, 1.2 STL, 3.55 TO's
He has led his team to the playoffs 4 out of 5 years. He was only bounced in the first round once, and reached the second round twice along with a WCF appearance. The only time he missed the playoffs was his rookie year.
Chris Paul Career Averages:
Reg: 37 MPG, 19.3 PTS, 10 AST, 4.7 REBS, 47% FG, 84% FT, 35% 3 PT, 2.4 STLS, 2.57 TO's
PO's: 40 MPG, 21.9 PTS, 11 AST, 4.8 REBS, 48% FG, 80% FT, 27% 3 PT, 2.1 STLS, 2.71 TO's
He has led his team to the playoffs twice in 5 years. He got bounced in the first round once and the second round the other time. So he has missed them more than he has made them and never been past the second round.
Paul has a clear edge in most stats, but it is not some landslide of a gap. Especially when you look at playoff averages. It is hard to say (like you do) that Paul is clearly the better shooter as well, especially when you look at 3 PT % (especially in the playoffs).
When stats are some what close, winning is the next thing you look at. Deron has clearly won more than Paul. He has taken his team to the playoffs double the amount of times that Paul has for various reasons. Not only that, he has fared better in the playoffs from a winning perspective.
Deron is also much bigger and that is something you can't teach and that is not a skill. It is an actual physical mis-match. While Paul out does Williams on the defensive stats, I think Deron is a better defender. This is much harder to prove, but it comes with watching them play.
When you start to equalize things out using advance metrics (Per 36 stats, true %'s) the numbers start to look a little closer. Paul still has the edge statistically, but it becomes a little closer.
Paul is definitely the better player in my opinion and does more for his team in terms of numbers and carrying the load. It just has not translated to winning like Deron. Now, that is an entirely different debate that is much harder to quantify, but that caveat, the winning, combined with the stats both being ridiculously good makes it debatable.
Yes, Deron has lead his team to the playoffs. However, Deron also had better teammates. Carlos Boozer, AK-47, Memo, Millsap and the rest are better overall players than David West, Peja Stojakovic, Tyson Chandler and the rest. Out of the three aforementioned players, two of them had one decent year and they played mediocre for the rest of their tenures as Hornets.
And that can't be blamed on Paul just like the T-Wolves missing the playoffs can't be blamed on Kevin Garnett.He has led his team to the playoffs twice in 5 years. He got bounced in the first round once and the second round the other time. So he has missed them more than he has made them and never been past the second round.
Actually, when taking into consideration things like pace and PER, the gap does become wider.Paul has a clear edge in most stats, but it is not some landslide of a gap. Especially when you look at playoff averages. It is hard to say (like you do) that Paul is clearly the better shooter as well, especially when you look at 3 PT % (especially in the playoffs).
Again, Deron without question had superior teammates, and again, the stats are not somewhat close.When stats are some what close, winning is the next thing you look at. Deron has clearly won more than Paul. He has taken his team to the playoffs double the amount of times that Paul has for various reasons. Not only that, he has fared better in the playoffs from a winning perspective.
It is much harder to prove because it is an unsubstantiated claim. Also, Deron is a poor rebounder for somebody who has a three or four inch height advantage over Paul, so his size is almost for naught.Deron is also much bigger and that is something you can't teach and that is not a skill. It is an actual physical mis-match. While Paul out does Williams on the defensive stats, I think Deron is a better defender. This is much harder to prove, but it comes with watching them play.
Williams' play has nothing to do with translating to winning. He has had much better teammates throughout his career.Paul is definitely the better player in my opinion and does more for his team in terms of numbers and carrying the load. It just has not translated to winning like Deron. Now, that is an entirely different debate that is much harder to quantify, but that caveat, the winning, combined with the stats both being ridiculously good makes it debatable.
Okay, let's look at the stats a little closer.
Chris Paul:
Deron Williams:
Chris Paul's PER is seven points higher. His rebounding percentage is two points higher. His assist percentages are five points higher. His steal percentages are more than double that of Deron Williams. His turnover percentages are 3 points lower. His offense win shares blow Deron Williams' out of the water. His defensive win shares blow Deron Williams' out of the water.
Chris Paul:
Deron Williams:
Chris Paul is assisted on half as many shots as Deron Williams, and he still manages a better fg% and ts%.
And all of this without factoring in pace, which is the biggest thing. Deron Williams' teams have been in the top 10 in pace for the past three years. Chris Paul's teams have been in the bottom five in two out of the last three years. I'm not an expert on pace, but Chris was able to do all of this while playing at one of the slower paces in the league. He had fewer possessions and he has gotten more assists each and every year, which has to account for something. I will find the per possession stats because they better reflect each player's impacts.
All that means, is CP3 has to shoulder the load and ball hog more. That is not a bad thing always. When you have better teammates (as you claim), you have less opportunities to score and do things. You can't penalize DWill twice. Either you say CP3 gets better stats because he has more opportunities or you dismiss the better teammate argument with regards to winning.
How you can see those stats (see 3PT %) and say Paul is the better shooter ant that the stats are not close? I never said Paul does not have the edge statistically, but when you look at playoff stats (which are the most important), the numbers are definitely close.
You can't just look at stats and then dismiss winning because of "better teammates". That is hard to prove and does not account for everything. Just like defense is harder to prove, just laying the playoff failures on "better teammates" is unsubstantiated.
Either way, it is certainly debatable because of the winning and playoffs. Just because you want to dismiss that because of better teammates does not mean it gets tossed aside in the debate. Winning is everything and when you are debating, that takes serious precedence.
no thanks Imma roll with Fisher...my money is on Fish and he's delivered the last 2 years...But now that Blake is in LA I say he deserves to be mentioned as a top 10 guard...it's similar to guilt by association.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
