Reply With Quote
How he plays on the court, you really wouldn't know it until you look at the statsheet and he's got a great statline. He plays so smooth.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...e%3dCP3-071218
Try making a list of the game's great little guys, and you'll end up with a pretty short list. Even the great "little players" haven't been all that little -- Jerry West, Michael Jordan, Oscar Robertson and Dwyane Wade all stand at least 6-4, making them taller than the vast majority of the general population.
How spectacular? I submit that Paul is the MVP of the non-LeBron portion of the league thus far. He ranks third in the entire NBA in player efficiency rating at 26.64. And he has the Hornets at a surprising 15-10 despite his teammates' aversion to making shots -- Paul and center Tyson Chandler are the only regulars shooting better than 43.8 percent.
This may come as a shock to the mul udes who haven't seen the Hornets much. But if you consider it a sacrilege for Paul to outrank Nash or Chauncey Billups, get a tape of Saturday's Hornets-Suns game and it might be easier to swallow. Paul got the better of Nash in that pairing. And for the season, he's averaging 21.0 points and 9.6 assists -- leaving the hallowed 20-10 mark well within his sights. Moreover, despite being his team's unquestioned go-to guy, he has an unusually low turnover ratio (just 9.7 percent of his possessions).
Even on the off nights -- like Monday night's forgettable performance in a loss to Portland (5-for-15, 11 points, eight assists, four turnovers), there was plenty to remark on. For starters, the guy has to be the best dribbler in the league, with the ball seemingly attached to his hand while he zips around the court like he's on a motorized scooter. To combat that skill, the Blazers played a zone defense designed specifically to contain Paul and dared the other Hornets to beat them from the perimeter. Paul spent the whole game setting up open 3-pointers, only to watch his teammates shoot 3-for-21 from deep. (Come back soon, Peja. Please.)
And then there's the havoc Paul causes at the other end with his ball-hawking D. He leads the league in steals at 2.7 per game -- in fact he's way out in front. His insanely fast hands and equally speedy feet are even more noticeable on loose balls, on which he materializes out of thin air and either cleanly recovers the ball or gets a hand in to jostle it from an opponent. With Paul as one of the linchpins, New Orleans ranks fifth in the NBA in defensive efficiency.
The Paul highlight film for the season includes 12 double-doubles in 25 outings, 20 points in eight of his last 10 games, and perhaps most amazingly, a recently broken string of 21 straight games with at least two steals (including the final two games of last season). He had a 21-assist outing in L.A., and a 43-point effort against Memphis that included the game-winner. His PER doesn't lie, in other words -- he's been awesome.
But you may not realize how amazing he's been until you try to come up with other little players who have put up a PER that can match Paul's 26.64
… and realize there aren't any.
Of the players 6-3 or shorter who have been in the league since the NBA began tracking individual turnovers in 1977-78, none has posted a PER that tops Paul's so far this season. Only one had cleared 26 (Allen Iverson two years ago), and only three had cleared 24 (see chart).
Part of this is because the game has become more guard-oriented recently, as you can ascertain by quickly scanning the dates on the chart (In fact, Billups' performance this season would place him fourth on the same list). But obviously, part of this is because Paul has been so unbelievably good.
This may not be immediately clear from the numbers, since Paul doesn't have a single gaudy stat besides steals. He's third in assists, for instance, rather than first, and although his 21-point average is nice, he won't be making a bid for the scoring le.
Compare him to the league's other point guards, though, and it becomes clearer how well he's played. Paul has created far more shots than Nash or Billups -- more even than Iverson in fact -- and has turned the ball over substantially less than Nash. Tony Parker and T.J. Ford have created slightly more shots but are inferior passers and have a lower true shooting percentage. Jason Kidd, whom many lump into point guard discussions out of habit, creates far fewer shots, converts a much lower rate of them, and his turnover rate is more than 50 percent higher. And of this gang Paul is almost certainly the most effective defender (though some would pull the lever for Billups or, again out of habit, Kidd).
Perhaps of more interest is the historical comparison. Does Paul's season to date really match the best years of Stockton, Nash, KJ, Kidd and Isiah? Says here it does. If you take everyone's stats from their best seasons and adjust them to the 2007-08 pace and league average TS%, and give everybody 40 minutes on the floor, what you end up with is a comparison in which you almost can't help but give Paul the nod.
Player Year Pts. Ast. Reb. TO TS% PER
Chris Paul 2007-08 22.3 10.2 4.1 3.2 57.2 26.67
Allen Iverson 2005-06 29.9 6.7 2.9 3.1 54.3 26.02
John Stockton 1989-90 17.4 14.6 2.6 3.5 60.5 23.96
Kevin Johnson 1990-91 22.1 10.1 3.5 3.5 60.5 23.94
Steve Nash 2006-07 20.0 12.5 3.8 4.1 64.6 23.87
Isiah Thomas 1984-85 19.1 12.4 4.0 3.3 52.1 22.20
This may not be immediately clear from the numbers, since Paul doesn't have a single gaudy stat besides steals. He's third in assists, for instance, rather than first, and although his 21-point average is nice, he won't be making a bid for the scoring le.
Compare him to the league's other point guards, though, and it becomes clearer how well he's played. Paul has created far more shots than Nash or Billups -- more even than Iverson in fact -- and has turned the ball over substantially less than Nash. Tony Parker and T.J. Ford have created slightly more shots but are inferior passers and have a lower true shooting percentage. Jason Kidd, whom many lump into point guard discussions out of habit, creates far fewer shots, converts a much lower rate of them, and his turnover rate is more than 50 percent higher. And of this gang Paul is almost certainly the most effective defender (though some would pull the lever for Billups or, again out of habit, Kidd).
Perhaps of more interest is the historical comparison. Does Paul's season to date really match the best years of Stockton, Nash, KJ, Kidd and Isiah? Says here it does. If you take everyone's stats from their best seasons and adjust them to the 2007-08 pace and league average TS%, and give everybody 40 minutes on the floor, what you end up with is a comparison in which you almost can't help but give Paul the nod.
The key here is that Paul's Hornets play what is easily the slowest pace of any of the guards on this list, at just 92.9 possessions per game. Everyone else was over 95; Isiah and KJ were well over 100. Let some of the air out of those 20-10 seasons from the '80s and it becomes clear how impressive it is that Paul is approaching those numbers this season.
Across the board, Paul stacks up well in this group. Only Iverson scores more, while Paul beats them all on the glass. He's in the middle of the pack in TS% and assists, but combined with the points, he creates as many shots as anyone on this list save Iverson. And check out those turnovers -- as always, we tend to underrate low-mistake players, and for one to be creating as many shots as Paul with so few miscues is a feat.
If you're trying to put words in my mouth by accusing me of saying Paul is better than Stockton or Isiah, don't. I'm not going there -- not yet anyway. As I pointed out above, it's much easier for a small guard to dominate in today's game than it was two decades ago.
More importantly, dominating over 25 games is very different from dominating 82 -- I'm sure you could find a 25-game stretch of any of these players' careers in which they were just as good or better than Paul has been.
Instead, the big takeaway should be this: Paul is on pace to have, arguably, the best season ever by a player 6-3 or smaller, and because of his small market and relatively unamazing per-game stats, absolutely nobody is even talking about it.
So it's time for me to ring the bell. He plays before a minuscule fan base, gets zero national TV exposure and might not even make the playoffs, which is keeping his performance under the radar. But Chris Paul is having a historic season thus far. It's about time somebody noticed.
Last edited by Cry Havoc; 12-19-2007 at 02:04 PM.
How he plays on the court, you really wouldn't know it until you look at the statsheet and he's got a great statline. He plays so smooth.
Hollinger's thoughts are often hit or miss because they are so statistically based. Paul is awesome and I think he'll continue to be one of the great point guards in the league for many years. The major problem I have with the article is that Hollinger insists on elevating Chris Paul's season as one of the greatest for a "little guy" ever 24-25 games into the season. It's not even 1/3 of the way through the season and Hollinger is already seemingly claiming it as one of the greatest seasons of all time. The grind of an 82 game schedule could quite easily and very likely bring his numbers closer down to earth. Now, if Paul could continue his pace and get 20/10 for a full season with a 26+ PER, then talk about how great his season was. At least wait longer than 24 or 25 games.
I would guess Hollinger foresees the Celtics winning 75 games too.
But he actually states in the article that this is a pre-emptive statement.
He also said that some players have probably had better 25 game stretches before.
However, watch Chris Paul (and also how Deron Williams plays) and you'll see that these new PGs are something special. Paul has better handles than Nash and is a LOT quicker. Nash might be craftier, but Paul looks absolutely amazing on the court. Watching him, you get a feeling of calm. You know he's going to make a smart decision.
That's the thing. His defense sucks. Sure he gambles and gets steals. He does it well actually as far as gambling goes. But Hollinger is so stat obsessed that wets himself over the 3 steals a game and labels it as good defense. Paul routinely gets abused in the post and routinely has trouble staying in front of his man. (not that a TON of pg's are any different).
I think he's a very good passer. He's averaging 10 dimes a game with a decent turnover ratio that I'm too lazy to look up, but I know it ain't bad. And he's creating those assists himself. Maybe not quite Steve Nash yet, but in terms of court vision he's in the tier right below him.
Chris Paul is my favorite player in basketball. I have had the opportunity to meet him over a dozen times in the last two years since he entered the league (being in Oklahoma City for those two years) and he is more than just a great basketball player but also a class act and wonderful person. But his game speaks for itself. And Chris Paul is clearly the better player over Deron Williams. Hands down.
Yeah, you're right. I didn't click the link. I thought you quoted the entire article in your first post. What you posted did not include those things he wrote:
I don't know about "clearly the better player over Deron." I think they're both excellent young point guards. Perhaps the fact Paul is your favorite player skews your bias somewhat when determining which guy is better?
I don't think its that clear. Deron gets burned trying to stay in front of his guy, but his size does count for something. I know they lost to the Spurs, but Deron was just killing Tony Parker in the post. That's a huge advantage for a guard to have, huge. They are both good shooters. I do think Paul is a better ball handler, faster and a better passer. But not by much, in any one of those areas, so it's not hands down in my mind. I'd say he's marginally better in most aspects. Deron Williams ain't no .
Whoa, I thought I did too. I'll edit it to include the full text.
I don't think anything is that clear, especially when you admit to being a homer about Paul having met him several times. Deron is a cerebral guy, he's a smart fella from a little school that's one of the best public universities in the country, and his game has practically no ceiling due to his ability to think quickly and use his intellect, not just his body, to improve his game.
Deron became a defensive beast in his last season at Illinois, and I expect his NBA career to experience a similarly high level of development.
I'll admit it, I'm a homer. But I think it's apparent that Paul is the superior player (albeit, not by miles and miles, but still superior). They're both great players, but what Paul brings to the Hornets vice what Williams brings to the Jazz is fairly lopsided. Paul is a very cerebral player as well that has a good BBIQ. But his passing ability is being underrated by some here. The thing that seems to drive his passing ability though is not needle threading passes but simply chemistry with his teammates and the knowledge or where they will be at any given time. But hes been doing that since his rookie year and with a variety of roster changes the last few years...so it's not a matter of being with the same players for a long time, but simply the fact that he learns quickly. His passing ability might not be so glamerous as others, but his knowledge of the players around him allows him to make the "right" pass without needing to be overly flamboyant.
I think that Paul is a great player and quite possibly the second best point guard in the game, but Hollinger (as usual) way over-analyzes this stuff. I don't trust any of his statistical models, and the whole, "adjusted for 40 minutes... etc.", is a bunch of hog wash. You can't just adjust statistics, we should only be measuring how the player actually performs.
But you can't actively compare a team that scores under 95 ppg to one that ran in a different era and averaged 120.
It is not a valid or a fair comparison.
I totally agree, which is why I don't think that you can create an accurate statistical model that does just that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
