2013-2014 NBA Season

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Conrad

Chris Paul

I suggested this to a big CP fan friend of mine and was basically yelled at.
He's fantastic and all that, but is he the one to lead a team to the title?
I am beginning to seriously doubt it.

Based on what exactly? New Orleans and the Clippers rich tradition of winning and his failure to singlehandedly catapult them into model organzations like San Antonio and Miami?

You think if we subbed him for Tony Parker that SA doesnt win a few of those titles?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Based on what exactly? New Orleans and the Clippers rich tradition of winning and his failure to singlehandedly catapult them into model organzations like San Antonio and Miami?

You think if we subbed him for Tony Parker that SA doesnt win a few of those titles?

I'm obviously biased, but every time OKC meets the Clippers, Westbrook usually outplays Paul, or at the least matches him. So it gets old listening to how great Chris Paul is to be honest. Paul is obviously one of the top players in the league, I just don't think he is one of the 3 or 4 best like a lot of people claim.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I'm obviously biased, but every time OKC meets the Clippers, Westbrook usually outplays Paul, or at the least matches him. So it gets old listening to how great Chris Paul is to be honest. Paul is obviously one of the top players in the league, I just don't think he is one of the 3 or 4 best like a lot of people claim.

I prefer Westbrook and Curry all day over Paul. I like those athletic combo guys.
Russell has to get himself healthy. He is a guy I hated, but am now sold on. He is a super player.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

I prefer Westbrook and Curry all day over Paul. I like those athletic combo guys.
Russell has to get himself healthy. He is a guy I hated, but am now sold on. He is a super player.

Paul is a more complete player. Curry is a huge negative 1/2 the game. Westbrook takes far too many bad shots.

There isnt GM or coach in the league that isnt taking Paul at PG if they need to win one game. The advanced stats on Paul are crazy good. His PER's dwarf those two guys. In roughly the same amount of games Curry has 157 turnovers and Paul has 85. Thats a lot especially for the guy running the show

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I'm obviously biased, but every time OKC meets the Clippers, Westbrook usually outplays Paul, or at the least matches him. So it gets old listening to how great Chris Paul is to be honest. Paul is obviously one of the top players in the league, I just don't think he is one of the 3 or 4 best like a lot of people claim.

He is clearly the best two way PG in the league. I like Westbrook a lot but he isnt in Paul's league as a playmaker but who in the NBA really is considering Nash is finished? Really Westbrook, Rose, Lillard, Wall arent true PG's but more of combo guards.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

He is clearly the best two way PG in the league. I like Westbrook a lot but he isnt in Paul's league as a playmaker but who in the NBA really is considering Nash is finished? Really Westbrook, Rose, Lillard, Wall arent true PG's but more of combo guards.

I dont think Paul is clearly the best anything. How is he clearly better then Westbrook or Curry? I could fire some stats out, but you already know them.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

I dont think Paul is clearly the best anything. How is he clearly better then Westbrook or Curry? I could fire some stats out, but you already know them.

A PG that has a lot more assists and lot less turnovers doesnt need much more.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

He is clearly the best two way PG in the league. I like Westbrook a lot but he isnt in Paul's league as a playmaker but who in the NBA really is considering Nash is finished? Really Westbrook, Rose, Lillard, Wall arent true PG's but more of combo guards.

He is better on D than Westbrook? The position has evolved. Paul is more traditional, doesn't make him better.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

He is better on D than Westbrook? The position has evolved. Paul is more traditional, doesn't make him better.

Chris Paul is the best PG on the Earth. This is an eminently defensible position by virtually any manner.

I think Westbrook is great. Love his intensity. However he simply isn't as good a player as Chris Paul is. But Westbrook can have questionable clock management, he takes bad shots, he gambles on defense and often can be caught out of position and he commits a lot of unforced turnovers. Paul rarely has any of these issues. His only real weakness is his 3 point shooting can be streaky both ways.

The position can evolve or change or whatever but the guy handling the ball the most who has way more assists and way less turnovers is the better player.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Chris Paul is the best PG on the Earth. This is an eminently defensible position by virtually any manner.

If you play fantasy basketball, you are right. But most times I watch them play head to head, Westbrook is the better player. Probably just a coincidence though. I'm sure Paul plays better against Sacramento and the Pelicans.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

If you play fantasy basketball, you are right. But most times I watch them play head to head, Westbrook is the better player. Probably just a coincidence though. I'm sure Paul plays better against Sacramento and the Pelicans.

So Paul is just good against bad teams now? We are talking about Chris Paul right? Not Cliff Paul? Not Sean Paul?