Reply With Quote
I feel bad for you redzero that you're so ing butt hurt about this that you'd take so much time arguing it on a message board. Honestly...you're pathetic man.
Of course, now we are at the "Paul has the ball in his hands more." Deron Williams already turns the ball over more with the ball in his hands less. Add more usage and he turns it over even more.
Also, having the ball in one's hands all the time doesn't make somebody that efficient. Monta Ellis had the ball in his hands more. His efficiency got worse. Trevor Ariza had the ball in his hands more. His efficiency got worse. Just because one has the ball in their hands a lot doesn't mean they are going to have a 30 PER by year's end. That is simply not the way it works.
Deron Williams already plays on a team with a faster pace. He already has those extra possessions. Would having the ball in his hands even more raise his stats? Maybe, but definitely not from an efficiency point of view.
We must take into account winning when dealing with one player, but when it's more than one, it becomes hard to prove? Since basketball is a team game, we must take into account the other four players on the court.
I feel bad for you redzero that you're so ing butt hurt about this that you'd take so much time arguing it on a message board. Honestly...you're pathetic man.
I thought I was having a basketball discussion on a basketball forum.
I guess I'll take my butthurt ass to another forum now.
Again, no one is saying Paul is less efficient or that he is only efficient because he has the ball more.
But I could easily say "of course, now we are at the Deron wins more because his team is better argument". What I am saying is that if you are using the "better teammates" argument, would it not make sense that Deron's numbers would be less? I am saying you can't use the teammates to knock Williams clear edge in winning down, while not using it when it makes Paul's numbers look better.
Again, you aren't understanding the argument.Also, having the ball in one's hands all the time doesn't make somebody that efficient. Monta Ellis had the ball in his hands more. His efficiency got worse. Trevor Ariza had the ball in his hands more. His efficiency got worse. Just because one has the ball in their hands a lot doesn't mean they are going to have a 30 PER by year's end. That is simply not the way it works.
You are acting like Deron is some wildly inefficient guy. He is not as efficient as Paul, but he is still elite.Deron Williams already plays on a team with a faster pace. He already has those extra possessions. Would having the ball in his hands even more raise his stats? Maybe, but definitely not from an efficiency point of view.
Paul had plenty of talent, especially with someone of his caliber. Not making the playoffs more than you miss them is inexcusable. Winning is winning. It is what separates the good from the great. It is what all players are judged by.We must take into account winning when dealing with one player, but when it's more than one, it becomes hard to prove? Since basketball is a team game, we must take into account the other four players on the court.
Winning is not hard to prove, just like stats. It is right in front of your face. Saying someone has better teammates therefor that explains the dominance of one over the other is what is hard to prove.
Better teammates, this seems to be going into Kg vs Duncan territory.
No, not really. Chris's numbers were better in 2008 and he had a better record than the Jazz with Deron Williams ever had, and he was second in MVP voting.
You're not understanding what I'm saying. Michael Jordan has the highest career PER of all time, and he was on some good teams. LeBron James was on a 66 win team and his PER was over 31. Shaq posted PERs of over 30 as a Laker.Again, you aren't understanding the argument.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...er_season.html
Here is the list of the players with the highest PERs in a season. Now tell me how many of them had bad teammates in those seasons.
No, this is the difference between good efficiency and great efficiency.You are acting like Deron is some wildly inefficient guy. He is not as efficient as Paul, but he is still elite.
So was KG not great when his team missed the playoffs three years in a row? This is a team game. Period.Paul had plenty of talent, especially with someone of his caliber. Not making the playoffs more than you miss them is inexcusable. Winning is winning. It is what separates the good from the great. It is what all players are judged by.
What dominance are you talking about? Again, you say it's hard to prove that one wins because he has better teammates, then in the same breath imply that winning is the cause of better play. I am merely doing the same thing and applying it to everybody on the team.Winning is not hard to prove, just like stats. It is right in front of your face. Saying someone has better teammates therefor that explains the dominance of one over the other is what is hard to prove.
Except that one guy was better statistically better AND won more.
And while we are on the subject of numbers going down when players play on better teams, Chris Paul posted a 30 PER the very next season and his team had one more win than the Jazz.
I never said it was a matter of fact. But when you have a very well balanced team, usually numbers take a hit. That is also because some guys are better at running a team and don't get all the stats that they could because it would be a net loss.
What does regular season record mean? Nothing. Missing the playoffs more than you make them and having one guy that doubles the other guy up in playoff appearances and that went further than the other speaks volumes.
I never said that you can't be on a good team and post good numbers, although the Cavs weren't what you call deep on talent. Lebron is just that good. Shaq is one of the most, if not the most dominant players of all time.You're not understanding what I'm saying. Michael Jordan has the highest career PER of all time, and he was on some good teams. LeBron James was on a 66 win team and his PER was over 31. Shaq posted PERs of over 30 as a Laker.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...er_season.html
Here is the list of the players with the highest PERs in a season. Now tell me how many of them had bad teammates in those seasons.
I said that you can't say "it's a team game and Paul's individual stats (a lot of which rely on other players making plays) are great, and the clear advantage Williams has in winning is all attributable to his better teammates. Especially when Paul had some very well balanced and talented teams.
Yes, there is. Deron Williams is elite when it comes to point guards.No, this is the difference between good efficiency and great efficiency.
That was always a knock on KG. He was still considered great, but he could never be mentioned with the likes of Duncan because of winning. It is a team game and KG did have some talented teams and did not get it done. Lebron took less talented teams than KG had to the finals and at a younger age.So was KG not great when his team missed the playoffs three years in a row? This is a team game. Period.
What dominance. In the same amount of time, Williams has led the Jazz to 4 playoff appearances and CP3 has 2. Williams has been to the second round the same amount CP3 has made the playoffs. Williams has a WCF appearance. That is winning dominance. That gap is just as big as the statistical gap that CP3 has. Also, like I said, the playoffs are what matters and that statistical lead CP3 has over DWill shrinks when you look at playoffs.What dominance are you talking about? Again, you say it's hard to prove that one wins because he has better teammates, then in the same breath imply that winning is the cause of better play. I am merely doing the same thing and applying it to everybody on the team.
Winning is winning. Stat are stats. Some correlate strongly with winning, some have a lesser effect. I am implying that you can't say DWill is not debatable over CP3 because he has won so much more where it counts (playoffs) and the playoff stats (even regular season) are somewhat close.
Clearly better teammates has an effect on winning, but Paul has had enough talent to where they should be in the playoffs more than the lottery.
We aren't talking about the Celtics here. We aren't talking about the Miami Heat. These teams are not that well balanced.
It means that based on the regular season, the Hornets were a better team than the Jazz, and Chris Paul's stats did not take a hit. The argument is invalid.What does regular season record mean? Nothing. Missing the playoffs more than you make them and having one guy that doubles the other guy up in playoff appearances and that went further than the other speaks volumes.
And Chris Paul is just that good. As you saw from 2008, his team won a lot and he still was efficient.I never said that you can't be on a good team and post good numbers, although the Cavs weren't what you call deep on talent. Lebron is just that good. Shaq is one of the most, if not the most dominant players of all time.
They both have had decent teams. I don't see why Deron's stats should be the ones that take a hit. He's the one with a faster paced team. There is no excuse.I said that you can't say "it's a team game and Paul's individual stats (a lot of which rely on other players making plays) are great, and the clear advantage Williams has in winning is all attributable to his better teammates. Especially when Paul had some very well balanced and talented teams.
He is elite but his efficiency is not on the same level as Paul's.Yes, there is. Deron Williams is elite when it comes to point guards.
KG had how many decent teams? He wasted his career playing for crappy Minnesota teams.That was always a knock on KG. He was still considered great, but he could never be mentioned with the likes of Duncan because of winning. It is a team game and KG did have some talented teams and did not get it done. Lebron took less talented teams than KG had to the finals and at a younger age.
What dominance. In the same amount of time, Williams has led the Jazz to 4 playoff appearances and CP3 has 2. Williams has been to the second round the same amount CP3 has made the playoffs. Williams has a WCF appearance. That is winning dominance. That gap is just as big as the statistical gap that CP3 has. Also, like I said, the playoffs are what matters and that statistical lead CP3 has over DWill shrinks when you look at playoffs.
And again, I will say that the stats aren't close and that Williams had better teammates.Winning is winning. Stat are stats. Some correlate strongly with winning, some have a lesser effect. I am implying that you can't say DWill is not debatable over CP3 because he has won so much more where it counts (playoffs) and the playoff stats (even regular season) are somewhat close.
Really? When was this? This season? When he missed 37 games? 2006? Who was healthy then? Peja missed many games. Tyson Chandler wasn't playing like he did in 08. The Hornets had a really decent team from 2007 to 2009. The Jazz had a decent team for a longer time.Clearly better teammates has an effect on winning, but Paul has had enough talent to where they should be in the playoffs more than the lottery.
Last edited by redzero; 08-20-2010 at 08:43 PM.
So again, you can't explain why Williams wins so much more in the playoffs:You keep focusing on that one thing (Deron's stats on a good team) when that was never the point. It is bordering on semantics. I said that could explain some of the stats difference (even though they are very close in playoff stats which you ignore). I said what this all tells you is that what ever Deron is doing is leading to more success more than just for the individual while maintaining elite stats for a PG.What dominance. In the same amount of time, Williams has led the Jazz to 4 playoff appearances and CP3 has 2. Williams has been to the second round the same amount CP3 has made the playoffs. Williams has a WCF appearance. That is winning dominance. That gap is just as big as the statistical gap that CP3 has. Also, like I said, the playoffs are what matters and that statistical lead CP3 has over DWill shrinks when you look at playoffs.
You also can't say "Chris Paul is that good" when I made the Lebron comment. If he was, he would have taken his teams that had more talent than the Cavs to a finals like Lebron did.
KG's teams weren't all crappy. Was Lebron's Cavs team that went to the finals crappy? Yes. So your argument is invalid.
You keep clinging to the fact Paul does well in the regular season and has had virtually no playoff success. Yes he is more efficient, but what does that translate to? Deron is elite and wins.
So long story short, all of this certainly makes it debatable although I think CP3 is better.
i don't get what all the fuss is about.
chris vs williams can be very debatable but my take on everything is that deron takes his team further, so being a PG isn't that what your role is? lead your team and win?
why the ing about better teams? basketball is a team game suck it up.
who cares if chris paul > deron williams stat wise. if paul's numbers were like double deron's numbers then maybe you can argue a case, but they are relatively close.
wins > stats
*
and if you ask me? i prefer deron b/c..
lol paul nut punching
lol paul flopping
Yeah, he had a chance to get there in the first place.
No, actually, you tried to use the fact that he was on a good team and imply that it might bet the reason why Deron has worse stats. I showed you that was completely false, since Paul still had better stats in 2008 and 2009 when his team finished with a better record.You keep focusing on that one thing (Deron's stats on a good team) when that was never the point.
I have told you that what your reasoning is bologna.It is bordering on semantics. I said that could explain some of the stats difference (even though they are very close in playoff stats which you ignore). I said what this all tells you is that what ever Deron is doing is leading to more success more than just for the individual while maintaining elite stats for a PG.
Except no. What LeBron did in the East is not comparable to what happens in the West. At all. And LeBron is a better player than Chris Paul. Chris is that good, he isn't as good.You also can't say "Chris Paul is that good" when I made the Lebron comment. If he was, he would have taken his teams that had more talent than the Cavs to a finals like Lebron did.
No, actually, it isn't. This is LeBron James we are talking about. Even Kobe couldn't get out the first round on a one man team, but nobody faults him for it. LeBron performed extraordinarily against the Pistons, and using his situation in the East and comparing it to what happens in the West is stupid.KG's teams weren't all crappy. Was Lebron's Cavs team that went to the finals crappy? Yes. So your argument is invalid.
Chris does well in the playoffs, too. His stats are better across the board there, too, with the exception of free throw shooting.You keep clinging to the fact Paul does well in the regular season and has had virtually no playoff success. Yes he is more efficient, but what does that translate to? Deron is elite and wins.
Again, it is not debatable. Deron has the better teammates. It is not something that is far fetched. It is not outlandish. All you have said is that the teams that Deron has been on have more playoff success, but you haven't given any explanation for why that may be. I have showed you that playing on a decent team doesn't automatically make one's stats take a dive, so you can't give me a good reason why Deron's stats are worse.So long story short, all of this certainly makes it debatable although I think CP3 is better.
Hold on, are you a Kobe fan?
And since we are going on nothing but winning, how come nobody here put Rondo over Paul and Williams? And what about Nash?
Just a garbage argument that has no validity and nothing substantial to back it up. This is becoming clear that you are defending Paul (like everyone on here notices) just for the sake of it. Paul didn't have a chance? Was his team suspended? Did they ban the Hornets from the playoffs?
It is not completely false. If it were completely false, then you would never be able to find an example of multiple good players playing together and their numbers being less than they would be if they played on a bad team. Is that true? I can certainly find examples of that. So it was not completely false because for every Paul example you can find, I can find a player that it supports.No, actually, you tried to use the fact that he was on a good team and imply that it might bet the reason why Deron has worse stats. I showed you that was completely false, since Paul still had better stats in 2008 and 2009 when his team finished with a better record.
Again, you are focusing on the only clear thing Paul has over Williams (stats), while trying to knock down the clear advantage Williams has over Paul (winning in the playoffs and playoff appearances). You have done nothing to back up what you are saying except that Deron has better teammates and more opportunity which is bologna.
It is shocking that a fan defending a player on a average team that does not make the playoffs for whatever reason even though they have the best PG in the game, two solid big men and shooting around, tries to dismiss winning as something viable to compare players with. Shocking.
It's even more shocking that they use the excuse that player simply has a better team (which isn't even quite clear in some years) which is something that is hard to quantify, especially when there is not a huge gap in perceived talent (like LA vs ....)
I feel the same way about your argumentsI have told you that what your reasoning is bologna., so who is correct? I am quite confident it is me since virtually every major pundit in the sport argues about DWill vs CP3 and most are pretty split. That alone shows you it is debatable. Unless you are saying literally most everyone on ST and in the national media and amongst NBA players is wrong and you are right. Because I have heard people from everywhere go back and forth and debate it.
Except, when I say Lebron is "that good" and you come back and say "Paul is that good" you are putting them in the same breath.Except no. What LeBron did in the East is not comparable to what happens in the West. At all. And LeBron is a better player than Chris Paul. Chris is that good, he isn't as good.
at the East is not comparable. I don't care what side of the bracket you are on, what Lebron did was nothing short of spectacular and it is an incredibly lame argument to try and knock Lebron to prop up Paul because he was in the East. Being in the East does not make up for the gap in one guy taking an average team to a final and another guy constantly missing the playoffs.
Uhhhhhhhhh except Kobe has only missed the playoffs once with his one man team. CP3, with a better roster than Kobe had, misses the playoffs more than he makes them. So lets see, comparing a player to misses the playoffs once, to a guy that misses 3 out of 5 years is quite dumb.No, actually, it isn't. This is LeBron James we are talking about. Even Kobe couldn't get out the first round on a one man team, but nobody faults him for it. LeBron performed extraordinarily against the Pistons, and using his situation in the East and comparing it to what happens in the West is stupid.
Also, plenty of people faulted Kobe for that one year. Where have you been? Kobe gets a pass now, because he shut everyone up by winning in the playoffs. Something Paul has not done.
Using the fact Lebron was in the East to prop up Paul for his lack of playoff success is the only thing that is stupid.
Lets not forget 3 PT shooting as well. Deron is a career 40% 3PT shooter in the playoffs, while Paul shoots a measly 27%.Chris does well in the playoffs, too. His stats are better across the board there, too, with the exception of free throw shooting.
Chris does do well in the playoffs statistically, when he gets there every once in a blue moon. Deron's playoff stats become extremely comparable to Paul's which is what you are so desperately clinging to. What does that say? Or do you not agree that:
40 MPG, 21.1 PTS, 9.6 AST, 3.7 REBS, 45% FG, 80% FT, 40% 3 PT,
is comparable to
40 MPG, 21.9 PTS, 11 AST, 4.8 REBS, 48% FG, 80% FT, 27% 3 PT
Especially when one player has a much larger sample size?
Also doing well in the playoffs means getting there and making a run. Deron has been to the WCF, Paul has not. Deron has been to the second round the same amount of times Paul has been to the playoffs.
Again, it is most definitely debatable and the fact you say things are baloney with no legit or quantifiable argument does not make it wrong. Like I said the entire basketball world to some degree (fans, players, coaches, pundits) all have this debate and it is pretty split. That alone shows you, you are wrong.Again, it is not debatable. Deron has the better teammates. It is not something that is far fetched. It is not outlandish. All you have said is that the teams that Deron has been on have more playoff success, but you haven't given any explanation for why that may be. I have showed you that playing on a decent team doesn't automatically make one's stats take a dive, so you can't give me a good reason why Deron's stats are worse.
I think Paul is the better player, but it is most definitely debatable. What is outlandish is laying all the blame for CP3's lack of playoff success on his teammates/"lack of opportunity and giving Williams no credit. I have told you the reason Deron has playoff success is because he is great at running his team efficiently and maximizing what he gets from everyone along with maintaining elite PG stats for himself. He does work on both ends of the floor. It is why this is debatable and you crying about CP3's teammates does not change that. It is the reason why you can't explain the lack of playoff success when all the other elite players (Kobe, Wade, Lebron...) all take/took teams worse than the Hornets to the playoffs multiple times, while CP3 misses them more than he makes them
Deron's stats are worse (but not really when it matters which is the playoffs) because Paul is the more efficient player. So he has great stats. It is not that surprising, but that alone does not make him so much better than Williams that it is not debatable.
Last edited by DPG21920; 08-21-2010 at 11:21 AM.
To Lazy to read. Did someone use the Yao ming vs Dwight Howard argument yet?
Since player A(Dwight Howard) scores more points with greater efficiency he's a better offensive player?
Sons, you have to read my last one.
i am a fan of multiple players in the league, kobe being 1 of them.
what about it?
-rajon is the not the main man on his team versus paul and deron
-nash is past his prime
It's also funny how he keeps clinging to semantics like it proves an entire argument wrong. Like when he says: "The Hornets won one more game than the Jazz that year and Paul posted a great PER...so what about numbers going down on a good team now?".
So? He keeps acting like a one win difference is some monumental difference in how good a team is or something like that. There are a bunch of those little things that he puts so much credence in when in reality the difference between said things is not as vast as he portrays them to be.
I also find it hilarious that I actually think CP3 is better and I having to go to such great lengths just to prove his ludicrous point wrong. I tell him it is ridiculous to get so butt hurt when someone says William is better than Paul.
He says, oh really, show me how it can be argued. I go through a lot of time explaining it and he just says "that's baloney"
I think CP3 is a better pure PG than Williams, but its debatable if he's a better overall player.
The reason why CP3 puts up better stats is because he's a better ball-handler, better passer, commits less turnovers, shoots a higher FG%, better FT shooter, and has quicker hands and instincts to get more steals. Even if D-Will played on a worse team, he still wouldn't put up quite the stats since CP3 does some of these things better. Overall he's a better pure PG.
Williams however has the ability to play SG as well and due to his size can defend bigger strong guards. He's an excellent one-on-one scorer. CP3 has improved in that aspect, but still not quite the perimeter scorer like D-Will. This fact makes it quite more even when comparing both players.
Utah has been the deeper team and probably better coached, plus losing a healthy Tyson Chandler was a big blow overall to the team and he hasn't been replaced. Utah has made the playoffs, but overall hasn't done that much. Ten years from now, their playoff performances won't be remembered just the like Hornets with the exception of 121-63. No excuse for that. That's why the team is vastly different now from that team two years ago. Okafor, Thornton, Ariza, Aaron Gray, Songalia, Pondexter, Bellinelli, Brackins, new head coach, new GM, and hopefully new owner soon. Only guys left from that team are CP3, West, and Peja.
I don't think anyone was trying to say the Jazz were some epic playoff team, but when you have a player as good as Paul and you have a solid supporting cast most years, there is no excuse for not being a playoff team every year. Williams has done that (except his rookie year I believe). His team is not that much better than the Hornets have been in terms of perceived talent and depth.
The entire point is that you can't say something stupid like "there is no debate" when there clearly is. You can't dismiss winning and getting to the playoffs, especially if you want to say CP3 is elite. Because the other elite players (Wade, Kobe, Lebron) have all done so much more with less talent than Paul has had around him in their down years with regards to at least making the playoffs.
CP3 took over a team that was 18-64 the year before and instantly improved them by 20 wins. It was still a bad team overall. Only West and CP3 remain from that team.
The next season, the majority of guys were hit by the injury bug. West missed 30 games, Peja missed 70 games, Chandler missed 17 games, Paul missed a bunch of games as well. The team still missed the playoffs by only a 3 games. Injuries made that season a wash.
The next season, everyone was healthy and the team finished 2nd in the West, CP3 was 2nd in the MVP voting and the team advanced to the 2nd round.
The following season, Chandler missed most of the season and was playing on one foot in the Denver series, plus the team wasn't very good anyway, but they still won 49 games and made the playoffs because CP3 had a better season than the one before. However, they were badly mismatched across the board against a loaded Nuggets team
Last season the team replaced Chandler with Okafor, brought in several new players, fired Byron Scott after ten games and replaced him with the GM who had no previous coaching experience (who got fired this summer as well), and CP3 missed half the season as well. The team was starting to play well before CP3's injury and were in the 8th spot of the playoffs despite a 3-8 start and CP3 missing 10 games earlier.
Honestly, CP3 has had to carry this franchise with no depth, a small market owner who's main goal is to stay under the luxury tax and is thankfully selling the team, and basically his best go-to-option in David West. Hasn't really that much help around him if you look at the roster yearly. Losing Tyson Chandler was a huge blow to the team because Okafor is just limited as an undersized center. Hopefully things will change, but I doubt it which is why he will probably leave in a couple of seasons.
When a player is as good as CP3, if you have a core of West/Paul/Okafor, you should be a playoff team.
The Jazz were hit with the injury bug as well and have a team full of second round draft picks and undersized guys (Milsap) playing their asses off.
Again CP3 missed half the season. If he was healthy, the team might have made the playoffs. Doubt the Jazz would make it if Williams missed half the season.
Besides, Okafor sucks balls. Doesn't do anything particularly well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
