PDA

View Full Version : where will CP3 rank all time?



More-Than-Most
01-04-2017, 07:38 PM
Where will he rank in terms of PGs and general Best players ever list... I think he is severly underrated and will likely be a top 2 PG ever and a top 20 player ever easily. Wondering other peoples thoughts.

FlashBolt
01-04-2017, 08:19 PM
Only way he ever gets in the top 20 is if he wins a ring. He's had way too many opportunities and always fell short. I don't think he has necessarily taken his game to "another level" that many of those who have won a ring tend to do.

He's #1 in all-time WS/48 so far. He's top 10 in PER. Statistically, he's probably the greatest PG ever. He's an elite defender in ways Magic never was. Stockton had inflated assist numbers anyhow. He'll be the #2 PG by the end of his career (assuming he has about six years left). He's better than Nash, Kidd, and GP already. It's tough to rank CP3, though. With the new wave of PG's coming in (Lillard, Irving, Curry, Westbrook, Wall), all those guys can easily crack top 10 ever.

valade16
01-04-2017, 08:30 PM
The question with top 20 is "who gets kicked out?"

MJ
Kareem
Wilt
Russell
Shaq
Hakeem
Magic
Bird
LeBron
Duncan
Kobe

Are all fairly locked in to top 20 so that's 11 right there. After that you have guys like:

Big O
Jerry West
Dwayne Wade
Julius Erving
Dirk
Charles Barkley
Karl Malone
Kevin Garnett
Moses Malone
David Robinson

That's another 10 so already we're at 21. And that doesn't include contemporaries who may be ahead of him or may pass him shortly like

Curry
Durant
Westbrook
Harden
Kawhi

Then there are guys on the fence like Pippen, Drexler, Havlicek, Isiah, Stockton, etc.

I can maybe see him top 25 but top 20? I can't see less than 20 guys on the above list he should be ahead of...

Avenged
01-04-2017, 08:33 PM
Top 50 seems way too low for him but top 20 seems too high. He is a hard one to rank. Individually, he is up there with the greatest. I know some people don't like to rank players based on rings or success when it comes to the whole team and not just the individual player but I think it has a lot to do with where one ranks. Him leading his team to a championship EASILY propels him to another class. Just how it propelled Curry. Yeah, he is great, but winning a ring already puts him in the HOF class and upped him in all-time rank.

Chronz
01-04-2017, 08:36 PM
I think he will experience a retrospective resurgence of sorts over the next 20 years. At first i think he will get the whole couldn't make it to arbitrary round talk even tho he's already led his teams past superior forces than some of the other pgs.

Very similar to what became of Wilt, moving up the ranks as many started appreciating his individual dominance more. I think as our knowledge of the game evolves, we might look back on the past differently. Maybe it's just wishful thinking

Shammyguy3
01-04-2017, 08:37 PM
top-35 without a ring, top-30 with one

valade16
01-04-2017, 09:10 PM
I think he will experience a retrospective resurgence of sorts over the next 20 years. At first i think he will get the whole couldn't make it to arbitrary round talk even tho he's already led his teams past superior forces than some of the other pgs.

Very similar to what became of Wilt, moving up the ranks as many started appreciating his individual dominance more. I think as our knowledge of the game evolves, we might look back on the past differently. Maybe it's just wishful thinking

Where do you think he's currently ranked? Where do you think he will eventually get ranked? Where do you rank him?

If it's top 20 who "gets the boot so to speak"?

JasonJohnHorn
01-04-2017, 09:38 PM
I certainly can't name 5 point guards who are better. 20 players? Yeah... I think there is a case for that, but these comparisons often favour centers because the stats are geared more toward them.

I think his ranking among point guards is more important here. Magic. Stockton. I'm comfortable putting them ahead of CP3. Big O as well (depending on what position you have him at). Kidd and Nash were two immensely talented players, but Kidd struggled with his shot until he was an old man, and Nash was never a great defender; CP3 is an elite talent at both ends of the floor. I'm a Pistons fan and grew up watching Isiah Thomas... he's one of the reasons I love the game... but even as a Pistons fan, I have to say that watching CP3, I see everything Thomas could do amped up. I don't care about the ring count: CP3 is better than Thomas.

Payton? Frazier? Who else is there... I dunno... I don't think any one a point outside of O, Magic and Stockton were better than CP3.

You throw in PFs (Duncan, Garnett, Malone, Barkely, Dirk) and C (Hakeem, Shaq, Kareem, Wilt, Russell, DRob), SF (LBJ, Bird) SG (Jordan, Kobe) and suddenly you got 20 players who you really can't argue don't deserve top 20 ranking.... but given that the league is older and there is that much more talent than there was... what is top 50 now is on parity with what one would have called top 20 in 1990.

Best pure point guard in the league. Curry is obviously the superior scorer, but he isn't a conventional PG; he's more like a shooting guard... but... anyways... I feel like I'm rambling now, so....

lol, please
01-05-2017, 12:08 AM
extremely overrated.

As long as he finishes all time well below the splash bros, I'll live. :p

Chronz
01-05-2017, 12:19 AM
Where do you think he's currently ranked? Where do you think he will eventually get ranked? Where do you rank him?

If it's top 20 who "gets the boot so to speak"?

Definitely not top-20, was talking mostly about PG's. If we count West its basically only Magic, Oscar ahead of him IMO and those guys aren't really traditional PG in terms of their bodies, so among the prototypical PG's , whos better? Zeke? Couldn't shoot like CP3, doesn't handle or protect the rock like CP3, didn't win until his team had a historical defense behind him which had NOTHING to do with him BTW whereas a guy like CP3 would have improved that defense.

Who did Kidd ever beat to really hype up his Finals births. Nash is really tough to me, I think his offensive value went far above his production. IIRC, multiple year RAPM has hinted at his superiority (compared to CP3). Stockton and Curry are really the only guys I respect in this conversation. You could prolly talk me into GP

More-Than-Most
01-05-2017, 01:48 AM
I dont like the logic of he didnt play great in the playoffs..... He has been pretty amazing in the playoffs. We are talking about a guy avg 20/10/5 on 48 percent shooting and 38 from 3 and a 2.3 stl per to 2.7 TO.... This is insane.


That is over 69 games as well... No small sample size crap.

look! big kids
01-05-2017, 03:04 AM
I think he will experience a retrospective resurgence of sorts over the next 20 years. At first i think he will get the whole couldn't make it to arbitrary round talk even tho he's already led his teams past superior forces than some of the other pgs.

Very similar to what became of Wilt, moving up the ranks as many started appreciating his individual dominance more. I think as our knowledge of the game evolves, we might look back on the past differently. Maybe it's just wishful thinking

I thought I'd chime in that I emphatically take this perspective, and am in the offensively thin minority here regarding CP3. Top-20 type lists tend always to be legacy-first and therefore are as a rule littered with the residues of chance outcomes and random circumstance, and the vast majority of that contingency goes unacknowledged and is glazed over with a kind of normalizing veneer that establishes a particular player's set of chance-outcomes as that player's own nature. Relative to other historical players at his actual, possession-to-possession level of play (there really aren't very many who are markedly superior), Paul's consistently been victim to this kind of thinking.

Hawkeye15
01-05-2017, 10:16 AM
I think he will experience a retrospective resurgence of sorts over the next 20 years. At first i think he will get the whole couldn't make it to arbitrary round talk even tho he's already led his teams past superior forces than some of the other pgs.

Very similar to what became of Wilt, moving up the ranks as many started appreciating his individual dominance more. I think as our knowledge of the game evolves, we might look back on the past differently. Maybe it's just wishful thinking

I think you are right. Part of me remembers some of his inexplicable mistakes at crucial times, but the fact is, the dude is statistically the best PG to play the game, or at least has a great argument for it. His lack of winning will hurt, but I think he ends up being widely viewed somewhere in the 20-25 range.

ewing
01-05-2017, 10:38 AM
Definitely not top-20, was talking mostly about PG's. If we count West its basically only Magic, Oscar ahead of him IMO and those guys aren't really traditional PG in terms of their bodies, so among the prototypical PG's , whos better? Zeke? Couldn't shoot like CP3, doesn't handle or protect the rock like CP3, didn't win until his team had a historical defense behind him which had NOTHING to do with him BTW whereas a guy like CP3 would have improved that defense.

Who did Kidd ever beat to really hype up his Finals births. Nash is really tough to me, I think his offensive value went far above his production. IIRC, multiple year RAPM has hinted at his superiority (compared to CP3). Stockton and Curry are really the only guys I respect in this conversation. You could prolly talk me into GP

Homer

ewing
01-05-2017, 10:39 AM
I think you are right. Part of me remembers some of his inexplicable mistakes at crucial times, but the fact is, the dude is statistically the best PG to play the game, or at least has a great argument for it. His lack of winning will hurt, but I think he ends up being widely viewed somewhere in the 20-25 range.


Chronz doesn't care about timely hooping.

Hawkeye15
01-05-2017, 10:58 AM
Chronz doesn't care about timely hooping.

I mean, I get it, that he willed a crappy Hornets team to 6 games against the Lakers, who they had no business playing, and he has even had periods of time with the Clips where he was amazing. But it just seems, that a game 5 versus OKC shows up at times, and it just doesn't make sense.

Statistically he is as good as it gets. Ever. But he has just faded, or made a huge mistake, at some key moments, and his teams just can't get over the hump, instead at times failing to live up to expectations.

Idk, he is a hard one to rank. I think he lands in my top 25 over time.

Vinylman
01-05-2017, 11:37 AM
Great Point Guard (Easily top 5)

Where he stands all time is really about how you value different era's

This is obviously a very PG friendly era so I probably have him lower than most 25-30 overall

I think his competitiveness and hatred of losing more than offsets his lack of post season success...

Hawkeye15
01-05-2017, 12:04 PM
Great Point Guard (Easily top 5)

Where he stands all time is really about how you value different era's

This is obviously a very PG friendly era so I probably have him lower than most 25-30 overall

I think his competitiveness and hatred of losing more than offsets his lack of post season success...

results matter though. Don't they?

Heediot
01-05-2017, 12:13 PM
Top 30. If he don't have that horrific knee injury easily top 20. Paul before the injury could take over when he wanted. he could still do it against some matchups after the injury but he wasn't the same 1 on 1 guy. He's relied on iq, instincts and skill to remain one of the most efficient players, but he cold of been so much better. To give him credit, not a lot of players would have adjusted as well as he did post injury. Just look at Rose in comparison.

PAOboston
01-05-2017, 12:18 PM
Top 40. I feel like he's largely gotten a pass for not being able to get over the hump. He's had some really good teams and quite frankly has failed in the playoffs. It feels wierd to say but it's almost like he's underachieved.

ewing
01-05-2017, 12:31 PM
I mean, I get it, that he willed a crappy Hornets team to 6 games against the Lakers, who they had no business playing, and he has even had periods of time with the Clips where he was amazing. But it just seems, that a game 5 versus OKC shows up at times, and it just doesn't make sense.

Statistically he is as good as it gets. Ever. But he has just faded, or made a huge mistake, at some key moments, and his teams just can't get over the hump, instead at times failing to live up to expectations.

Idk, he is a hard one to rank. I think he lands in my top 25 over time.


He is a hell of a player. If you want to be top 25 i think you have to take over at least some of time when it is time to push your team over the hump. even if you have great #s and cant be seen as the reason you lost you still weren't the man. top 50 in my book

Vinylman
01-05-2017, 12:34 PM
results matter though. Don't they?

yeah... but for me a lot of that has to do with how guys react to losing (do they care).

And as good of a regular season team that he has had they have never really been the favorite... to me his lack of post season success is pretty much about facing real tough competition in the West...

I would love to see a team like Toronto get ahold of CP3 and then we would really see how good the Cavs are in the east.

Hawkeye15
01-05-2017, 01:30 PM
yeah... but for me a lot of that has to do with how guys react to losing (do they care).

And as good of a regular season team that he has had they have never really been the favorite... to me his lack of post season success is pretty much about facing real tough competition in the West...

I would love to see a team like Toronto get ahold of CP3 and then we would really see how good the Cavs are in the east.

and that's fair, the viewpoint on how they react.

europagnpilgrim
01-05-2017, 01:43 PM
CP3 is one of the best PointGuards ever, along with a slew of others

before his injury I felt he had more takeover ability scoring wise, I would take Oscar/Zeke/The Answer/Magic over him with possibly Payton/Kidd as well, other than that he is right there

he is not in my top 20 best players ever but there is nothing wrong with that at all, and it has nothing to do with amount of rings or postseason success

Hawkeye15
01-05-2017, 01:45 PM
Zeke is so criminally overrated by people, it's crazy to me

ewing
01-05-2017, 02:37 PM
Zeke is so criminally overrated by people, it's crazy to me

you don't like anyone that doesn't play like a pansy

Hawkeye15
01-05-2017, 02:43 PM
you don't like anyone that doesn't play like a pansy

like has nothing to do with it. Zeke is so overrated by most. He doesn't belong in the conversation with Magic, Stockton, Oscar, etc. Hell not even Paul.

ewing
01-05-2017, 02:47 PM
like has nothing to do with it. Zeke is so overrated by most. He doesn't belong in the conversation with Magic, Stockton, Oscar, etc. Hell not even Paul.

your 3 most overrated players are Ewing, Miller, and Zeke. Sorry but i see a trend

Hawkeye15
01-05-2017, 03:14 PM
your 3 most overrated players are Ewing, Miller, and Zeke. Sorry but i see a trend

that you overrate ECF players from your childhood?

valade16
01-05-2017, 03:21 PM
that you overrate ECF players from your childhood?

Perhaps your bias is showing lol but they all made the NBA Finals too

shep33
01-05-2017, 03:23 PM
2nd Greatest PG of all-time

ewing
01-05-2017, 03:41 PM
that you overrate ECF players from your childhood?

you're so Hollywood Hawk

YAALREADYKNO
01-05-2017, 05:40 PM
Top 30-40 range

mightybosstone
01-06-2017, 12:35 PM
I feel like the poll options aren't quite specific enough. It should have been top 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 or 50+. Because I think most competent NBA fans would say that Paul could retire tomorrow and easily crack the top 50. But the gap between 50 and 20 is pretty huge, and I don't think many fans would put him in the top 20.

Being more specific than that, I think he's already in the top 40 without much question or debate. And if I had to sit down and actually look at those players after those 21 locks which Valade already mentioned, my gut tells me that I'd likely have him in my top 30 in the same group as guys like Pippen, Stockton, McHale, etc. But he'd have to do something pretty spectacular—like win a ring—to get into that next group with guys like Wade, Dirk and Garnett, who all won titles and experienced more postseason success.

That being said, there's a case to be made for him in that same tier if we allow Barkley, Robinson and Karl Malone as well, all of whom didn't win rings. But, IMO, their individual production (with the exception of Malone, who I absolutely loathe) outclasses Paul, which pushes him into the next tier somewhere around 22-28.

Another conversation that will get very interesting in the next decade is the ranking of all-time point guards. If you're looking at overall careers, I think the list looks something like:
1. Magic Johnson
2. Oscar Robertson
3. Chris Paul
4. John Stockton
5. Isiah Thomas
6. Gary Payton
7. Steve Nash
8. Jason Kidd

To me, Paul and Stockton are pretty much interchangeable at 3 and 4, but I give Paul the edge because I think he was a better overall offensive player who carried a greater load for his teams offensively. And then you could make a decent case for Thomas, Payton, Nash or Kidd in any of those 5-8 spots really. But if you look at guys like Curry, Westbrook and Harden (if we identify him as a PG), then that list could look very, very different 10 years from now. Does Curry surpass them all? Do Westbrook and Harden's modern Oscar-like production continue and skyrocket them into the top 5? It will definitely be fun to continue these conversations over the next few years...

mightybosstone
01-06-2017, 12:37 PM
2nd Greatest PG of all-time

So you're ranking him ahead of Oscar? Or are you not considering Oscar as a true PG? Because I feel like you'd have a pretty tough time justifying a ranking of Paul ahead of him.

PowerHouse
01-06-2017, 12:55 PM
He may not have much postseason success yet, but what he has been doing on the basketball court statistically is nothing short of amazing, an all-timer.

Advanced stats love CP3:

#1 PG all time in career PER
#1 PG all time in career Box +/-
and forget positions, #1 ALL TIME in career WS/48

After looking at all this, its hard to keep him out of the top 20 all time.

Hawkeye15
01-06-2017, 12:57 PM
you're so Hollywood Hawk

I try to be man. I try to be

mightybosstone
01-06-2017, 01:05 PM
He may not have much postseason success yet, but what he has been doing on the basketball court statistically is nothing short of amazing, an all-timer.

Advanced stats love CP3:

#1 PG all time in career PER
#1 PG all time in career Box +/-
and forget positions, #1 ALL TIME in career WS/48

After looking at all this, its hard to keep him out of the top 20 all time.

That's easier said than done. Look at this list of 20 players and tell me who you're cutting to make room for Paul:

MJ
Kareem
Wilt
Russell
Shaq
Hakeem
Magic
Bird
LeBron
Duncan
Kobe
Oscar
Jerry West
Dwayne Wade
Julius Erving
Dirk
Charles Barkley
Kevin Garnett
Moses Malone
David Robinson

PowerHouse
01-06-2017, 02:29 PM
That's easier said than done. Look at this list of 20 players and tell me who you're cutting to make room for Paul:

MJ
Kareem
Wilt
Russell
Shaq
Hakeem
Magic
Bird
LeBron
Duncan
Kobe
Oscar
Jerry West
Dwayne Wade
Julius Erving
Dirk
Charles Barkley
Kevin Garnett
Moses Malone
David Robinson

As much as I respect their careers, Barkley and Moses can get bumped. Probably Wade and Dr. J too.

mightybosstone
01-06-2017, 02:40 PM
As much as I respect their careers, Barkley and Moses can get bumped. Probably Wade and Dr. J too.

Yeah, I'm not buying that. Especially not Moses. You're going to bump a 3-time MVP and NBA champion, a guy who averaged essentially 25/15/2/2 over his five-year peak, for Paul because of what exactly? The guys win shares and PER numbers? I love advanced stats as much as the next guy, but if that's your sole barometer for judging players historically, then you've got a very narrow viewpoint of the game, IMO.

FlashBolt
01-06-2017, 02:43 PM
CP3 should go team up with Melo. Maybe it'll be fun for both of them. I can't see them winning anything at clippers tbh. Maybe Cp3+Melo+Porzingis+wade can do something fun.

europagnpilgrim
01-06-2017, 03:31 PM
He may not have much postseason success yet, but what he has been doing on the basketball court statistically is nothing short of amazing, an all-timer.

Advanced stats love CP3:

#1 PG all time in career PER
#1 PG all time in career Box +/-
and forget positions, #1 ALL TIME in career WS/48

After looking at all this, its hard to keep him out of the top 20 all time.

That's the tricky thing about those advanced stats, because based on looking at that he should be top 5 all time but I can name 20 players I would pick over him, for instance a healthy TMac may not be in nobody top 20 all time and I would draft him over CP3 regardless of advanced stats

europagnpilgrim
01-06-2017, 03:35 PM
That's easier said than done. Look at this list of 20 players and tell me who you're cutting to make room for Paul:

MJ
Kareem
Wilt
Russell
Shaq
Hakeem
Magic
Bird
LeBron
Duncan
Kobe
Oscar
Jerry West
Dwayne Wade
Julius Erving
Dirk
Charles Barkley
Kevin Garnett
Moses Malone
David Robinson

For you to leave out Baylor/The Answer is a joke, 2 of the most underrated players ever

valade16
01-06-2017, 04:12 PM
That's the tricky thing about those advanced stats, because based on looking at that he should be top 5 all time but I can name 20 players I would pick over him, for instance a healthy TMac may not be in nobody top 20 all time and I would draft him over CP3 regardless of advanced stats

Well I also want to point out CP3 is still in the relative prime of his career. Other players had peaks nearly as good as his and the. As they got older they dragged their stats down. We'll have to see if it happens to CP3.

Also we have to factor in with all the advanced stats departments tea,s are specifically catering their games to produce better advanced stats. Whose to say a guy like West or Dr. J wouldn't have had better stats if they had a whole department dedicated to it?

That's where we need to look at dominance vs peers and in that regard Dr. J beats out CP3

CP3 has never led the league in PER, BPM or VORP. He led the league twice in WS/48. Contrast to Dr. J who led the league in PER once, BPM twice, VORP once and WS/48 twice. And that was just the NBA, he led all those stats virtually every year in the ABA as well. Then add in his title and post-season success and I see virtually 0 argument for why CP3 should be over him

JAZZNC
01-06-2017, 05:56 PM
For you to leave out Baylor/The Answer is a joke, 2 of the most underrated players ever
You thinking Allen Iverson is a top 20 player all time is a joke.

Shammyguy3
01-06-2017, 06:08 PM
For you to leave out Baylor/The Answer is a joke, 2 of the most underrated players ever

Even if they are the most underrated players ever, you would need to explain which two players you are removing from that top-20 list and then say WHY Baylor/Iverson were better. There are multiple players in today's league that are better than both Baylor/Iverson that aren't on that list - insert Stephen Curry, Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden, Chris Paul, and maybe i'm missing a couple others

GodsSon
01-06-2017, 06:12 PM
Dude has never made a conference finals and probably won't get there unless he leaves the West.

Stockton, Payton, Kidd, Robertson, Magic, Zeke and Nash are all ahead of him; and guys like Curry and Westbrook will certainly surpass him as their careers go on.

FlashBolt
01-06-2017, 06:55 PM
Since when did reaching the conference finals or Finals become the barometer? CP3 is clearly a better player than Payton, Kidd, Zeke, Nash, and Stockton. He'll surpass them just by stats. I mean, none of these guys have won anything other than Zeke at their prime. Payton/Kidd got them as role players. Curry and Westbrook definitely have a shot but it's foolish to ignore how great CP3 has been.

Chronz
01-06-2017, 07:47 PM
For you to leave out Baylor/The Answer is a joke, 2 of the most underrated players ever

F NO. Its a joke that you think they should be included

More-Than-Most
01-06-2017, 08:51 PM
You thinking Allen Iverson is a top 20 player all time is a joke.

not even sure he would be in my top 35 let alone 20.

FlashBolt
01-06-2017, 09:07 PM
Lol @ AI being top twenty.. dude probably wouldn't be top 10 in this era...

shep33
01-07-2017, 03:22 AM
So you're ranking him ahead of Oscar? Or are you not considering Oscar as a true PG? Because I feel like you'd have a pretty tough time justifying a ranking of Paul ahead of him.

Just a PowerHouse said:

#1 all-time for PG's in PER
#1 all-time for PG's in career box +/-
#1 all-time Career WS/48

I'd take him over Oscar. CP3 is one of the most efficient players to ever play the game, and he was an elite defender in his prime too. This dude shut down KD at one point in the playoffs.

europagnpilgrim
01-07-2017, 04:42 AM
Even if they are the most underrated players ever, you would need to explain which two players you are removing from that top-20 list and then say WHY Baylor/Iverson were better. There are multiple players in today's league that are better than both Baylor/Iverson that aren't on that list - insert Stephen Curry, Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden, Chris Paul, and maybe i'm missing a couple others

KD is the only one listed that would have a chance to make that list as of right now along with Baylor/The Answer and the rest you named are not better than those two, not even close

Dirk would definitely be moved off if he is on that list

I would have to look back at it again and if Dirk is not on there never mind that choice

you don't care but some nba players/Coaches who have played/coached with or against those two have them top 5 best ever to do it

Wade/KG/Barkley are not better than them either

europagnpilgrim
01-07-2017, 04:44 AM
You thinking Allen Iverson is a top 20 player all time is a joke.

You thinking he isn't is a bigger joke

Crackadalic
01-07-2017, 04:52 AM
Im leaning more towards top 30 right now. I have to see more for an argument for top 20

europagnpilgrim
01-07-2017, 04:57 AM
Lol @ AI being top twenty.. dude probably wouldn't be top 10 in this era...

you kids make me laugh


One of the most interesting takes from this podcast was Shaq naming his top five- six players of all-time. The soon-to-be Hall of Famer believes that the perimeter players have the toughest job on the court and should be considered for the top five of all-time. The four-time champion named his top six of all-time, starting with Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Allen Iverson, Kobe Bryant and LeBron James.



“He’s an incredible player, one of the top 10 in history,” former Pistons coach Chuck Daly told a visitor before Iverson ignited and torched Detroit’s defense for game-high totals of 37 points and 15 assists in a 2005 game at Wachovia Center


Some view others in a different light, not saying what they say are correct but one player played with Penny/Kobe/Wade and the other coached Zeke and the 92' Dream Team which carries more weight than what any fanatic on PSD has to say

NYKalltheway
01-07-2017, 02:47 PM
He should be lucky to be considered Top 50.

Chronz
01-07-2017, 10:54 PM
you kids make me laugh


One of the most interesting takes from this podcast was Shaq naming his top five- six players of all-time. The soon-to-be Hall of Famer believes that the perimeter players have the toughest job on the court and should be considered for the top five of all-time. The four-time champion named his top six of all-time, starting with Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Allen Iverson, Kobe Bryant and LeBron James.



“He’s an incredible player, one of the top 10 in history,” former Pistons coach Chuck Daly told a visitor before Iverson ignited and torched Detroit’s defense for game-high totals of 37 points and 15 assists in a 2005 game at Wachovia Center


Some view others in a different light, not saying what they say are correct but one player played with Penny/Kobe/Wade and the other coached Zeke and the 92' Dream Team which carries more weight than what any fanatic on PSD has to say

That's it? That's your case?

Ugh... Ok and now what about the other cancer known as Elgin? Dude doesn't belong at all

Raps18-19 Champ
01-07-2017, 11:09 PM
2nd best PG.

mightybosstone
01-07-2017, 11:52 PM
There's literally zero case to be made for AI in the top 20. Sorry dude. He was fun to watch, but he was also one of the most inefficient stars in the history of the NBA. I don't think he cracks my top 40. Maybe 50, but I'd really have to sit down and list everybody.

mightybosstone
01-07-2017, 11:55 PM
Just a PowerHouse said:

#1 all-time for PG's in PER
#1 all-time for PG's in career box +/-
#1 all-time Career WS/48

I'd take him over Oscar. CP3 is one of the most efficient players to ever play the game, and he was an elite defender in his prime too. This dude shut down KD at one point in the playoffs.

I'm sorry, but suggesting that he's had a better career than Oscar just goes way too far, IMO. Don't have time to get into this now, but I'll try in the morning.

ManRam
01-08-2017, 10:37 AM
Where will he rank in terms of PGs and general Best players ever list... I think he is severly underrated and will likely be a top 2 PG ever and a top 20 player ever easily. Wondering other peoples thoughts.

He will be ranked lower in the consensus than what he should be.

And this poll confirms that....though maybe all those top-50s think he's like 22.

valade16
01-08-2017, 03:14 PM
He will be ranked lower in the consensus than what he should be.

And this poll confirms that....though maybe all those top-50s think he's like 22.

I have him around 30th, possibly top 25. So yeah that's probably it. I just can't see who from the top 20 we're going to bump out for CP3.

FlashBolt
01-09-2017, 02:36 PM
There was an article that adjusted Westbrook's stats to that of Oscar's triple double season. Adjusting for the pace and minutes, RWB would have averaged:

Westbrook's era-adjusted stat line is 46.9 points, 14.6 assists and 12.2 rebounds per game.

That's insane. Obviously those are manipulated numbers but it's important to realize that the game was still developing at Oscar's era and that if you were really good, you were ten times better than the next best guy on the court.

I'd take CP3 over Oscar. Hell, I'd take CP3 over any other PG not named Magic Johnson.

Edit: BTW, that comparison for RWB was done in the 2014-2015 season. His numbers would roughly be:

50 points, 17 assists, and 15 rebounds.

If we adjusted them to THIS season. Think about that.

ManRam
01-09-2017, 02:44 PM
I have him around 30th, possibly top 25. So yeah that's probably it. I just can't see who from the top 20 we're going to bump out for CP3.

I haven't made my own top-50 rankings in forever but this is what PSD came up with 2+ years ago.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Magic Johnson
5. Shaquille O'neal
6. Tim Duncan
7. Hakeem Olajuwan
8. LeBron James
9. Larry Bird
10. Kobe Bryant
11. Bill Russell
12. Oscar Robertson
13. Moses Malone
14. Jerry West
15. Julius Erving
16. David Robinson
17. Charles Barkley
18. Kevin Garnett
19. Karl Malone
20. Dirk Nowitzki
21. Bob Pettit
22. Dwyane Wade
23. John Havlicek
24. Patrick Ewing
25. Scottie Pippen
26. Elgin Baylor
27. John Stockton
28. Clyde Frazier
29. Rick Barry

I think he's definitely somewhere in there. I would entertain arguments for him between 19 and 27.

valade16
01-09-2017, 03:00 PM
I haven't made my own top-50 rankings in forever but this is what PSD came up with 2+ years ago.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Magic Johnson
5. Shaquille O'neal
6. Tim Duncan
7. Hakeem Olajuwan
8. LeBron James
9. Larry Bird
10. Kobe Bryant
11. Bill Russell
12. Oscar Robertson
13. Moses Malone
14. Jerry West
15. Julius Erving
16. David Robinson
17. Charles Barkley
18. Kevin Garnett
19. Karl Malone
20. Dirk Nowitzki
21. Bob Pettit
22. Dwyane Wade
23. John Havlicek
24. Patrick Ewing
25. Scottie Pippen
26. Elgin Baylor
27. John Stockton
28. Clyde Frazier
29. Rick Barry

I think he's definitely somewhere in there. I would entertain arguments for him between 19 and 27.

Well even if we just gift him 19 he's at least 21 unless anyone thinks he's ahead of KD and Curry, both of whom would be 19th or higher. I'd also have him below Dirk and Wade personally so he'd be 23rd at best on my list.

FlashBolt
01-09-2017, 03:06 PM
@Man, I have difficulty in seeing how he surpasses Dirk/Wade without a ring. I'm sorry but those two guys led their teams to a ring primarily through their increased performance in the playoffs whereas CP3 has the talent and roster but hasn't stepped up his game to another level just yet.

Hawkeye15
01-09-2017, 03:08 PM
There's literally zero case to be made for AI in the top 20. Sorry dude. He was fun to watch, but he was also one of the most inefficient stars in the history of the NBA. I don't think he cracks my top 40. Maybe 50, but I'd really have to sit down and list everybody.

AI is polarizing, and had a playground game. He put up baseline numbers. He will be either criminally overrated, or underrated, by most.

I think a fair ranking for him is top 45-50 ever.

ManRam
01-09-2017, 05:05 PM
@Man, I have difficulty in seeing how he surpasses Dirk/Wade without a ring. I'm sorry but those two guys led their teams to a ring primarily through their increased performance in the playoffs whereas CP3 has the talent and roster but hasn't stepped up his game to another level just yet.

I saw both their names and thought the same thing. I agree with you there. Those guys are ahead of CP3.

But guys like Pettit, Havlicek, Ewing, Stockton, Frazier, Barry, Baylor and Pippen...well, I think when CP3's career is all said and done he can pass them, ring or not. As for the rings, as always, context matters. You can't hold him not winning a ring in New Orleans against him at all. In LAC, the only two seasons where I think it's fair to criticize him for not winning a ring are the 2013-14 and 2014-15 seasons. Before that the team wasn't ready and VDN was their coach. In 2015-16 injuries ended things abruptly. Those two years they just didn't get it done. I don't think they were ever favorites in either year, but they didn't lose to eventual winners and probably should've gotten further than they did (as a 3 seed in 2014 and a 2 seed in 2015).

Rings are tricky. Not everyone has equal opportunities to win them, regardless of talent or greatness. And CP3 has been notably REALLY good in the playoffs for his career. He's played so well that rarely has he ever really shouldered any sort of blame (he took some himself after 2015 I believe, because of a bad game 7). But if he did get a ring he'd firmly be in my top-20. I don't think there have been 20 better players to step on an NBA court. A ring makes that indisputable.

ManRam
01-09-2017, 05:08 PM
There's literally zero case to be made for AI in the top 20. Sorry dude. He was fun to watch, but he was also one of the most inefficient stars in the history of the NBA. I don't think he cracks my top 40. Maybe 50, but I'd really have to sit down and list everybody.

Especially when you realize that a guy like Isaiah Thomas is having a better season than AI's MVP year.

FlashBolt
01-09-2017, 05:11 PM
Truly, we oughtta just follow a tier system. At what point do we say, "CP3 is better than Stockton because of this or that" despite neither winning a ring? An assist? More steals? CP3 is an all-time great PG who belongs in the Magic/Oscar discussion but he needs to win something before we elevate him there. I'd be fine with:

Magic/Oscar
CP3/Stockton/Isiah
Kidd/Nash/GP

Obviously Westbrook/Curry have an opportunity to get up there as well.

valade16
01-09-2017, 05:18 PM
Truly, we oughtta just follow a tier system. At what point do we say, "CP3 is better than Stockton because of this or that" despite neither winning a ring? An assist? More steals? CP3 is an all-time great PG who belongs in the Magic/Oscar discussion but he needs to win something before we elevate him there. I'd be fine with:

Magic/Oscar
CP3/Stockton/Isiah
Kidd/Nash/GP

Obviously Westbrook/Curry have an opportunity to get up there as well.

Curry isn't already there? Peak Curry > Peak CP3 so unless CP3's longevity somehow trumps Curry I don't see how he can be ranked and Curry not. Westbrook is such a unique case it's difficult to rank him.

FlashBolt
01-09-2017, 05:23 PM
Curry isn't already there? Peak Curry > Peak CP3 so unless CP3's longevity somehow trumps Curry I don't see how he can be ranked and Curry not. Westbrook is such a unique case it's difficult to rank him.

Longevity doesn't work for Curry's favor, though. If we're going peak by peak, hell, Curry is the greatest PG IMO. A few more years and he'll climb the ranks easily. Can't underestimate CP3's longevity right now. He's been amazing every year he's played and they were at a high level.

flea
01-09-2017, 05:24 PM
Especially when you realize that a guy like Isaiah Thomas is having a better season than AI's MVP year.

Not at all a fair comparison. AI played in the toughest defensive era the game has seen whereas IT plays in a niche league designed to let quick guard like him do whatever they want. I don't think either of them are much of anything in the handcheck era, but IT and all the other guards lighting it up today aren't doing that in the early 2000s.

CP3 could be top 30 maybe. I could maybe see him ahead of any guard not named MJ, Kobe, and Wade if his declines goes very well. I don't see him ahead of any big generally mentioned around 20-30, and only a handful of the forwards (like Baylor, Barry, Havlicek, Erving, Gervin, Wilkins) does he have a shot at - and mostly because they were ABA or otherwise had unique circumstances that hurt their cases.

Drexler is the guy I see compared to in terms of resume if everything goes perfectly - though I don't see that happening. Hard to climb ahead of other greats when you're 5'11 and can't impact the game as a defender or scorer like forwards and even bigger guards can.

FlashBolt
01-09-2017, 05:29 PM
Not at all a fair comparison. AI played in the toughest defensive era the game has seen whereas IT plays in a niche league designed to let quick guard like him do whatever they want. I don't think either of them are much of anything in the handcheck era, but IT and all the other guards lighting it up today aren't doing that in the early 2000s.

CP3 could be top 30 maybe. I could maybe see him ahead of any guard not named MJ, Kobe, and Wade if his declines goes very well. I don't see him ahead of any big generally mentioned around 20-30, and only a handful of the forwards (like Baylor, Barry, Havlicek, Erving, Gervin, Wilkins) does he have a shot at - and mostly because they were ABA or otherwise had unique circumstances that hurt their cases.

Drexler is the guy I see compared to in terms of resume if everything goes perfectly - though I don't see that happening. Hard to climb ahead of other greats when you're 5'11 and can't impact the game as a defender or scorer like forwards and even bigger guards can.

Over Magic too?

flea
01-09-2017, 05:35 PM
Over Magic too?

Magic is as much of a guard as Lebron is. In any case, no he doesn't have a shot at Magic.

KnickNyKnick
01-10-2017, 12:07 AM
that 18 assist game with 1 TO just moved him up to top 30. :cool:

jmaest
01-10-2017, 12:53 AM
First, I don't like the options. Either he's Top 50 or he's extremely overrated? That's just silly.

Second, questions like this are interesting because different eras are hard to compare. Since I'm one of the older guys who goes back a bit I would just look at the HOF point guards that I saw with my own two eyes: Magic, Stockton, Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, Anfernee Hardaway, Tim Hardaway, Steve Nash, Isaiah Thomas, and I'm sure I'm forgetting a few others.

Just from that group I see CP3 as "middle of the pack". Magic & Stockton are definitely ahead of CP3 IMO--and that's going beyond the numbers. Both players just did more on the court.

What gets interesting is that next group of HOF point guard like Payton & Nash. I don't know if I think Paul is better than either of those guys. And I think therein lies the problem for Paul. He's clearly not Magic or Stockton and he hasn't done enough to separate himself from the very next tier, if you will. Is he in the Isaiah Thomas, Steve Nash, Gary Payton group? Maybe. Probably. But we'll see when his career is done.

He's most certainly not a top 10 all time player. He'll never break into that group. Barring some type of explosion in his game we're not expecting, he's probably not breaking the top 20 either.

I think, as of right now, he's not a top 50 player BUT he's most certainly NOT overrated. He's a great player and most likely on his way to a Hall of Fame career.

Chronz
01-10-2017, 01:11 AM
I disagree with some of your points jmaest but I can respect people who put Stockton ahead of Isiah for the simple reason that it proves your rankings go beyond counting dem ringz.

I got CP3 at 30 range, well ahead of the likes of Iverson and Baylor

jmaest
01-10-2017, 01:36 AM
I disagree with some of your points jmaest but I can respect people who put Stockton ahead of Isiah for the simple reason that it proves your rankings go beyond counting dem ringz.

I got CP3 at 30 range, well ahead of the likes of Iverson and Baylor

To be clear, Rings matter. Not in Baseball and most certainly not in Football. But in Basketball, they matter. One player impacts 20% of the game at a minimum. Great players can impact 30% or more.

Stockton is ahead of Isaiah because he was a better player and he did more with less. The Pistons had multiple all-star caliber players with Dumars, Rodman, Aguirre, Edwards, and Johnson. Honestly looking at the Pistons roster they were just stacked everywhere.

Edit: And to be perfectly clear, I penalize players in the Jordan era less for not winning titles than I do other eras. There's only 1 title and he was the GOAT by a mile. His insatiable attitude towards winning is unmatched probably forever. Stockton was there twice and lost to Jordan both times. No shame in that.

I'm curious who you have CP3 ahead of if you have him at 30. That's a pretty high ranking for him, IMO.

I do have to say, I question your logic (maybe even your sanity) if you put CP3 ahead of Iverson. If you're just doing that based on "point guard" the position, then I agree. CP3 is a better pure point guard. BUT if you think CP3 is a better player than Iverson then I think you have a lot of basketball studying to do.

Sure Iverson didn't have the best field goal %age but that's what that era was. Guys just shot and shot and shot. Plus Iverson had no fear of driving the lane and he played the majority of his career against much more physical defenses with rules that favored those defenses. On top of all of that Iverson on his worst day was a better defender than Paul is. I'm not sure you appreciate how great AI really was. The stats don't tell the whole story.

Hawkeye15
01-10-2017, 12:41 PM
To be clear, Rings matter. Not in Baseball and most certainly not in Football. But in Basketball, they matter. One player impacts 20% of the game at a minimum. Great players can impact 30% or more.

Stockton is ahead of Isaiah because he was a better player and he did more with less. The Pistons had multiple all-star caliber players with Dumars, Rodman, Aguirre, Edwards, and Johnson. Honestly looking at the Pistons roster they were just stacked everywhere.

Edit: And to be perfectly clear, I penalize players in the Jordan era less for not winning titles than I do other eras. There's only 1 title and he was the GOAT by a mile. His insatiable attitude towards winning is unmatched probably forever. Stockton was there twice and lost to Jordan both times. No shame in that.

I'm curious who you have CP3 ahead of if you have him at 30. That's a pretty high ranking for him, IMO.

I do have to say, I question your logic (maybe even your sanity) if you put CP3 ahead of Iverson. If you're just doing that based on "point guard" the position, then I agree. CP3 is a better pure point guard. BUT if you think CP3 is a better player than Iverson then I think you have a lot of basketball studying to do.

Sure Iverson didn't have the best field goal %age but that's what that era was. Guys just shot and shot and shot. Plus Iverson had no fear of driving the lane and he played the majority of his career against much more physical defenses with rules that favored those defenses. On top of all of that Iverson on his worst day was a better defender than Paul is. I'm not sure you appreciate how great AI really was. The stats don't tell the whole story.

If Iverson was such a great defender, why did Philly have Snow cover the best backcourt player (it wasn't to save AI's energy on offense), and build a defense around AI to help his gambling, lazy tendencies?

jmaest
01-10-2017, 01:45 PM
If Iverson was such a great defender, why did Philly have Snow cover the best backcourt player (it wasn't to save AI's energy on offense), and build a defense around AI to help his gambling, lazy tendencies?

First of all that's just a ridiculous premise. I said Iverson was a better defender than Paul and your comeback is that he can't be that good because he didn't always guard the other team's best player? That's an extreme example to build a ridiculous premise.

With that out of the way, actually Iverson was protected defensively after his first couple of seasons because they were saving him on offense. Iverson was never surrounded with complementary pieces who could score with him. Eric Snow had a couple of decent years but there was never anyone who could take the pressure off AI offensively. In the year they made their title run the 2nd best player on the team was Dikembe Mutombo.

Don't forget Iverson was only 6'0' if not really 5'10 so simple physics, if not logistics, would keep you from putting Iverson on the bigger taller players on the other team.

Having a more realistic conversation regarding the point I made, Iverson did guard his position very well and, better than Paul guards his.

Are you trying to make an argument that Paul is actually a better player than Iverson?

Hawkeye15
01-10-2017, 02:51 PM
First of all that's just a ridiculous premise. I said Iverson was a better defender than Paul and your comeback is that he can't be that good because he didn't always guard the other team's best player? That's an extreme example to build a ridiculous premise.

With that out of the way, actually Iverson was protected defensively after his first couple of seasons because they were saving him on offense. Iverson was never surrounded with complementary pieces who could score with him. Eric Snow had a couple of decent years but there was never anyone who could take the pressure off AI offensively. In the year they made their title run the 2nd best player on the team was Dikembe Mutombo.

Don't forget Iverson was only 6'0' if not really 5'10 so simple physics, if not logistics, would keep you from putting Iverson on the bigger taller players on the other team.

Having a more realistic conversation regarding the point I made, Iverson did guard his position very well and, better than Paul guards his.

Are you trying to make an argument that Paul is actually a better player than Iverson?

Paul is an elite defender though. Much better than Iverson.

The reason Iverson wasn't a good defender, is because he was slight, and didn't care about that side of the ball. He couldn't possibly be tasked with checking lead guards with any strength, hence his team getting Snow/McKie to handle it.

If they were protecting Iverson for his offense, that limits his overall greatness, no? Plenty of all timers are 2 way studs.

Iverson was lazy, gambled, and didn't play defense consistently at any point in his career. I don't care how small he was, Paul is the same height, and guards lead guards with accomplished ability.

Yes, I am saying I would take Paul over Iverson any day of the week.

ManRam
01-10-2017, 03:09 PM
Yeah...I'm taking Paul over Iverson without any single sort of second thought or hesitation.

KnicksorBust
01-10-2017, 03:35 PM
Magic
Oscar
Stockton
In that order. For eternity.

For their careers I would put Cousy/Frazier/Zeke/Nash all above him despite the fact that I'd rather build a franchise around Paul than any one of them. Gary Payton is tough. He and Paul are neck and neck to me. Both as players and careers. I'd probably go CP3 and that puts him 8th best career for a PG. In terms of actual skill he is probably 4th. Considering how many wings/bigs are above him it's safe to say he is out of the top 20 and somewhere in the 35-40 range maybe?

KnicksorBust
01-10-2017, 03:36 PM
Yeah...I'm taking Paul over Iverson without any single sort of second thought or hesitation.

I am too but for kicks would Paul have taken that Sixers team to the Finals? For hawk as well.

Hawkeye15
01-10-2017, 03:38 PM
I am too but for kicks would Paul have taken that Sixers team to the Finals? For hawk as well.

Probably, go check how weak the east was that year. However, the Sixers would have made roster changes to fit around Paul. However, Paul would have gotten a lot more offensive production out of that roster (other than himself), than Iverson did.

valade16
01-10-2017, 03:49 PM
Probably, go check how weak the east was that year. However, the Sixers would have made roster changes to fit around Paul. However, Paul would have gotten a lot more offensive production out of that roster (other than himself), than Iverson did.

Would he? I don't think that 76ers team was more offensively talented than his teams in New Orleans and he couldn't get much offensive production out of them.

If he did take them to the Finals it would be because the rest of the East that season was really weak.

Hawkeye15
01-10-2017, 03:57 PM
Would he? I don't think that 76ers team was more offensively talented than his teams in New Orleans and he couldn't get much offensive production out of them.

If he did take them to the Finals it would be because the rest of the East that season was really weak.

He would have gotten a player traded to him mid season better than anything he played with in NO, in Deke. Go look at what David West and Tyson were prior to CP3. He would have brought more out of that team, while making it better defensively.

Again though, Philly is tinkering with roster changes with such an unselfish, great distributing star like Paul. They could go get him a scorer that eats shots, and not disrupt the chemistry.

valade16
01-10-2017, 04:03 PM
He would have gotten a player traded to him mid season better than anything he played with in NO, in Deke. Go look at what David West and Tyson were prior to CP3. He would have brought more out of that team, while making it better defensively.

Again though, Philly is tinkering with roster changes with such an unselfish, great distributing star like Paul. They could go get him a scorer that eats shots, and not disrupt the chemistry.

A better defensive player yes, but a better offensive player? I think of all the players in NO and on that 76ers team, the best offense outside AI/CP3 is probably David West.

We can hypothetically add players that better fit CP3's style but at that point doesn't that kind of answer the question? The answer would be no right if we have to admit he'd need a different roster construction. It's neither good or bad but a reflection of their different skillsets.

jmaest
01-10-2017, 04:06 PM
Probably, go check how weak the east was that year. However, the Sixers would have made roster changes to fit around Paul. However, Paul would have gotten a lot more offensive production out of that roster (other than himself), than Iverson did.

That's just ridiculous. How can you possibly know that Paul's style of play would have translated to a better finish than Iverson? Things work out the way they work out for a reason. Weak East or not, substituting Paul for Iverson doesn't equate to an improvement necessarily.

And Paul is most certainly not an elite defender. I don't understand where that perception comes from. Has the bar been lowered so much on defense that Paul qualifies as elite?

That said, I can't see how this is worth debating. Two different eras and two completely different styles of play. It's just too subjective. I also want to be clear, I fully believe Paul is an all-time great. 1st ballot HoF'er. I'm most certainly not disparaging him.

I would however caution you to act as if Paul is superior to Iverson without ever having watched him play. For the first 10 years of Iverson's career he was much more durable than Paul and he played in a much more physically imposing era. If I'm not mistaken he lead the league in minutes played something like 7 out of 10 years and he took a beating every night--and played with no fear of it. The same cannot be said of Paul.

In another thread there's this dialogue going on about big players in a finesse league and how the game has changed. Iverson, in a league with no hand checking, no physical centers or power forwards, defensive 3 seconds, and liberal flagrant foul calls might be an unbelievable force.

Hawkeye15
01-10-2017, 04:27 PM
That's just ridiculous. How can you possibly know that Paul's style of play would have translated to a better finish than Iverson? Things work out the way they work out for a reason. Weak East or not, substituting Paul for Iverson doesn't equate to an improvement necessarily.

It's my opinion. Paul makes others better, and doesn't carry an ego on the floor. He makes his teams better than Iverson did.


And Paul is most certainly not an elite defender. I don't understand where that perception comes from. Has the bar been lowered so much on defense that Paul qualifies as elite?

He walls off the paint in the no hand check era, makes guards turn, doesn't allow straight line passes due to ball pressure, deflections galore, rebounds better on the defensive end, constantly is a league leader in defensive RPM, and +/-, and holds players to well below what they usually do. He is flat out a much better defender than Iverson ever was.


That said, I can't see how this is worth debating. Two different eras and two completely different styles of play. It's just too subjective. I also want to be clear, I fully believe Paul is an all-time great. 1st ballot HoF'er. I'm most certainly not disparaging him.

and that is fine, I think you can translate across era's, if you understand how each era's rules will impact a players strengths, and weaknesses. But sure, it's all speculation in reality.


I would however caution you to act as if Paul is superior to Iverson without ever having watched him play. For the first 10 years of Iverson's career he was much more durable than Paul and he played in a much more physically imposing era. If I'm not mistaken he lead the league in minutes played something like 7 out of 10 years and he took a beating every night--and played with no fear of it. The same cannot be said of Paul.

I am 41, watched basketball religiously since 1984. I have seen them both play a lot. And in reality, minus the big hits of the 90's, it's actually more physical now, as a whole, even though guards have it easier on the perimeter as far as physicality goes, however they have it much rougher when they get past that first line of defense today, due to zone. Iverson is polarizing, his defenders will go down with him in flames if they need to. I get that. He played with heart. He was tenacious. But he was also a poor shot selection chucker at times, was lazy on defense, and is clearly overrated by the masses, or at least his defenders.


In another thread there's this dialogue going on about big players in a finesse league and how the game has changed. Iverson, in a league with no hand checking, no physical centers or power forwards, defensive 3 seconds, and liberal flagrant foul calls might be an unbelievable force.

Interesting enough, guys like Iverson, Kobe, Jordan, and many others of their stature, have said they would HIGHLY prefer the hand check, physical era's, to the one today. In today's game, you get to set a zone, because you don't need to wait for a basketball move to send help. The paint is walled off by the best defenses. No defender, not even Alvin Robertson, Joe Dumars, or Gary Payton, can keep an elite ball handler/slasher from getting by him. But the wall behind the defender, waiting, can stop them much easier than the era's prior. And don't even get me started on the layup drill that was the 80's...

KnicksorBust
01-10-2017, 04:32 PM
Probably, go check how weak the east was that year. However, the Sixers would have made roster changes to fit around Paul. However, Paul would have gotten a lot more offensive production out of that roster (other than himself), than Iverson did.

That's just ridiculous. How can you possibly know that Paul's style of play would have translated to a better finish than Iverson? Things work out the way they work out for a reason. Weak East or not, substituting Paul for Iverson doesn't equate to an improvement necessarily.

And Paul is most certainly not an elite defender. I don't understand where that perception comes from. Has the bar been lowered so much on defense that Paul qualifies as elite?

That said, I can't see how this is worth debating. Two different eras and two completely different styles of play. It's just too subjective. I also want to be clear, I fully believe Paul is an all-time great. 1st ballot HoF'er. I'm most certainly not disparaging him.

I would however caution you to act as if Paul is superior to Iverson without ever having watched him play. For the first 10 years of Iverson's career he was much more durable than Paul and he played in a much more physically imposing era. If I'm not mistaken he lead the league in minutes played something like 7 out of 10 years and he took a beating every night--and played with no fear of it. The same cannot be said of Paul.

In another thread there's this dialogue going on about big players in a finesse league and how the game has changed. Iverson, in a league with no hand checking, no physical centers or power forwards, defensive 3 seconds, and liberal flagrant foul calls might be an unbelievable force.

If the All-NBA defensive teams don't do it for you clear some time and read this. http://grantland.com/features/department-of-defense/

valade16
01-10-2017, 04:53 PM
Interesting enough, guys like Iverson, Kobe, Jordan, and many others of their stature, have said they would HIGHLY prefer the hand check, physical era's, to the one today. In today's game, you get to set a zone, because you don't need to wait for a basketball move to send help. The paint is walled off by the best defenses. No defender, not even Alvin Robertson, Joe Dumars, or Gary Payton, can keep an elite ball handler/slasher from getting by him. But the wall behind the defender, waiting, can stop them much easier than the era's prior. And don't even get me started on the layup drill that was the 80's...

It's hard for me to believe that this era is actually harder on guards when everywhere we look guards are tearing it up and actually getting to the rim and getting fouls at will.

MJ's highest FTr's are .459 and .442.

just this year Harden is at .554 and Butler at .561.

Those are light years higher than MJ's highest, so in terms of getting to the line it's simply not comparable. MJ would have a far easier time getting to the foul line today.

It seems like we want to have our cake and eat it too when it comes to prior generations, especially the 90's.

On one hand defensively we go "well it was easier to drive to the hoop because they didn't have zone and on the other hand offensively it's "they had no spacing or shooting"... so if they had no spacing because everyone was inside the 3pt line and in the paint how could they not have had anyone there to defend the paint?

Conversely, how can we have so much space and 3pt shooting yet apparently have a wall of defenders blocking off the paint?

Looking at the numbers, either Harden and Jimmy Butler are astronomically better at drawing fouls than MJ ever was (highly unlikely) or it's far easier to get to the line in today's NBA.

Hawkeye15
01-10-2017, 05:10 PM
It's hard for me to believe that this era is actually harder on guards when everywhere we look guards are tearing it up and actually getting to the rim and getting fouls at will.

MJ's highest FTr's are .459 and .442.

just this year Harden is at .554 and Butler at .561.

Those are light years higher than MJ's highest, so in terms of getting to the line it's simply not comparable. MJ would have a far easier time getting to the foul line today.

It seems like we want to have our cake and eat it too when it comes to prior generations, especially the 90's.

On one hand defensively we go "well it was easier to drive to the hoop because they didn't have zone and on the other hand offensively it's "they had no spacing or shooting"... so if they had no spacing because everyone was inside the 3pt line and in the paint how could they not have had anyone there to defend the paint?

Conversely, how can we have so much space and 3pt shooting yet apparently have a wall of defenders blocking off the paint?

Looking at the numbers, either Harden and Jimmy Butler are astronomically better at drawing fouls than MJ ever was (highly unlikely) or it's far easier to get to the line in today's NBA.

don't ignore the fact that spacing is at an all time high and climbing, to combat the zones.

If we want to assume Jordan (I would) would be a much better three point shooter today, because of how much more important, and seemingly efficient it has become, then we understand that many greats from before would be great today, in today's way. Same goes for sending a great to back then. Harden would have developed a killer midrange game, something he is allergic to today, all in the name of efficiency!

We are seeing offenses explode right now, because strategy and skill have surpassed the outcome of rule changes. Guys can shoot from anywhere now. Things will change to ring it back in eventually, whether that is hand check, or a shift in defensive rules.

valade16
01-10-2017, 05:16 PM
don't ignore the fact that spacing is at an all time high and climbing, to combat the zones.

If we want to assume Jordan (I would) would be a much better three point shooter today, because of how much more important, and seemingly efficient it has become, then we understand that many greats from before would be great today, in today's way. Same goes for sending a great to back then. Harden would have developed a killer midrange game, something he is allergic to today, all in the name of efficiency!

We are seeing offenses explode right now, because strategy and skill have surpassed the outcome of rule changes. Guys can shoot from anywhere now. Things will change to ring it back in eventually, whether that is hand check, or a shift in defensive rules.

I agree with all of this, I'm still dubious at the notion it was easier to get to the rim back in the "handcheck" era as it was now though.

I'm also very interested to see if the NBA even cares that there's "too much offense" so to speak, since historically offense is what sells. What changes would they implement?

ManRam
01-10-2017, 05:26 PM
I'm taking a step back.

This is CP3's age 31 season. When Iverson was 31 he was traded to Denver, and after his age 32 year he started to flounder big time. He was out of the league after his age 34 season.

CP3, this year, is averaging 17.7/9.8/5.3 on .470/.399/.874 shooting. He has a 27.68 PER.

He is putting up above-career average numbers...and he's 31. It's not quite his absolute prime production, but it's close.

He is first in the league in RPM, WS/48, offensive rating and steal percent. He is top 5 in assists, steals, PER, BPM and VoRP. He is be any statistical metric one of the 5 best players in the NBA. He is showing zero signs of slowing down. I don't have a single doubt that he will run laps around AI in terms of longevity. He might run laps around most everyone.

The only person ever to put up these numbers (17 ppg/9 apg/25+ PER) at the age of 30 or older is Magic. Chris is just humming along being his usual amazing self. And he probably will keep on doing so for years.

I think we've just become numb to how good Paul is. And that goodness is better than Iverson by a noticeable margin.

Hawkeye15
01-10-2017, 05:34 PM
I agree with all of this, I'm still dubious at the notion it was easier to get to the rim back in the "handcheck" era as it was now though.

I'm also very interested to see if the NBA even cares that there's "too much offense" so to speak, since historically offense is what sells. What changes would they implement?

It was easier to get to the rim, however spacing wasn't at premium, and you still had anchor big men in the way. What I mean is, perimeter 1-1 scorers prefer the handchecks to the zones.

I would implement hand checking back into the game. I would go more towards the college route with 1and1's, instead of right to the 2 shot bonus. Idk, probably a lot to come up with.

FlashBolt
01-10-2017, 05:35 PM
I'm taking a step back.

This is CP3's age 31 season. When Iverson was 31 he was traded to Denver, and after his age 32 year he started to flounder big time. He was out of the league after his age 34 season.

CP3, this year, is averaging 17.7/9.8/5.3 on .470/.399/.874 shooting. He has a 27.68 PER.

He is putting up above-career average numbers...and he's 31. It's not quite his absolute prime production, but it's close.

He is first in the league in RPM, WS/48, offensive rating and steal percent. He is top 5 in assists, steals, PER, BPM and VoRP. He is be any statistical metric one of the 5 best players in the NBA. He is showing zero signs of slowing down. I don't have a single doubt that he will run laps around AI in terms of longevity. He might run laps around most everyone.

The only person ever to put up these numbers (17 ppg/9 apg/25+ PER) at the age of 30 or older is Magic. Chris is just humming along being his usual amazing self. And he probably will keep on doing so for years.

I think we've just become numb to how good Paul is. And that goodness is better than Iverson by a noticeable margin.

That's simply amazing. Age 31, highest WS48 in his career, 3rd highest PER. He and LeBron have been super efficient their entire career. I really don't know what AI did better than CP. Scoring wise, CP just never wanted to score and preferred to get others involved. He could easily drop 25+ if he wanted. CP's just a better player than AI.

valade16
01-10-2017, 05:45 PM
CP3 goes under the radar because his stats aren't eye popping by themselves, they have to be taken together to show the true appreciation.

20 PPG isn't a crazy number
11 APG isn't an all-time assist amount
2.2 SPG isn't close to the most ever
40% 3PT isn't break the NBA great

But you have to stop and see he's doing all of them, and very few players have ever been able to be that good at all those different areas.

FlashBolt
01-10-2017, 05:50 PM
CP3 goes under the radar because his stats aren't eye popping by themselves, they have to be taken together to show the true appreciation.

20 PPG isn't a crazy number
11 APG isn't an all-time assist amount
2.2 SPG isn't close to the most ever
40% 3PT isn't break the NBA great

But you have to stop and see he's doing all of them, and very few players have ever been able to be that good at all those different areas.

Can't name a more well-rounded PG. Hell, can't name many guys who has had such an all-around game. I want to see him win a ring but it probably won't happen with the Clippers.

Chronz
01-10-2017, 10:57 PM
I'm curious who you have CP3 ahead of if you have him at 30. That's a pretty high ranking for him, IMO.
I feel i might be under selling him.



I do have to say, I question your logic (maybe even your sanity) if you put CP3 ahead of Iverson. If you're just doing that based on "point guard" the position, then I agree. CP3 is a better pure point guard. BUT if you think CP3 is a better player than Iverson then I think you have a lot of basketball studying to do.
As a player for sure. I don't know what you want me to study but I've already graduated, AI isn't even close.



Sure Iverson didn't have the best field goal %age but that's what that era was.
That's putting it nicely and no his era doesn't exonerate his plethora of weaknesses, plenty of others found a way to be efficient, it just wasn't his game because he had dreams of being like Mike instead of doing the smart thing and actually learning the position his height required of him. Couldn't defend his own position, forced his PGs into guarding bigger players, that he wasn't much of a PG is what makes this a no brainer.



Plus Iverson had no fear of driving the lane and he played the majority of his career against much more physical defenses with rules that favored those defenses.
I wish he had no fear learning how to space the floor and protect the ball.



On top of all of that Iverson on his worst day was a better defender than Paul is. I'm not sure you appreciate how great AI really was.

Far from it, I'm not sure you understand What a liability a midget playing the 2 is, particularly when they incessantly gamble the way AI did. You have to craft a team very carefully with Iverson.



The stats don't tell the whole story.
Agreed, he was arguably worse than his pedestrian production dictated. Stats don't tell the whole story for cp3 either, the difference is he doesn't have to apologize for being VASTLY more productive (on both ends) than the likes of Iverson. AI is top60 great but we talking about true greatness here.

Chronz
01-10-2017, 11:01 PM
First of all that's just a ridiculous premise. I said Iverson was a better defender than Paul and your comeback is that he can't be that good because he didn't always guard the other team's best player? That's an extreme example to build a ridiculous premise.

He's got a point tho. Could you ever imagine Iverson taking the task of defending a damn near 7footer like Kevin Durant the way CP3 has? Much less actually have some success against him?

Chronz
01-10-2017, 11:06 PM
I am too but for kicks would Paul have taken that Sixers team to the Finals? For hawk as well.

Who cares? Wake me up when AI topples a team as talented as the defending champion spurs. AI nearly losing every series (not to mention having donaghy do him favors) on route to that finals isn't that impressive. I actually think AI was outplayed every series he partook in.

Jets012
01-11-2017, 01:59 AM
Answer me this. In his prime (or now actually), name one important quality CP3 isn't good at. He literally is great at everything you need from a PG. He's an elite defender. He's an elite passer. He's an elite finisher. He's an elite shooter. Elite ball handler. Elite decision maker. The guy literally has no weakness.

Now Point Guards are very tricky to rank. It's proven that a great PG cannot carry a team as much as a great wing or great big man can. So I think in Paul's case, that probably helps him all time since I do think Rings and Finals Appearances hold less weight when ranking Point Guards historically.

CP3 has also been playing in a dominate Western Conference his whole career. If he was playing in the East, there's no doubt he would have made it into the Finals at least once in my opinion. Not to mention, his Hornets teams were pretty bad.

Paul should have an MVP. It's an absolute travesty he didn't win one in 2007-2008 since he really deserved to. His 2008-2009 season was historic too, but LeBron was just a god that year. It really is something to wonder if things would have been different if he hadn't suffered that knee injury in 2010. It took him a season or so to get back into the swing of things and it literally happened right during his peak.

There isn't a single player I would like to win a ring more than Paul. To me, he's literally perfection on a basketball court. Like I said, his game is complete and I truly can say there are not many players in history that are as well-rounded. And he's one of the most efficient players I've ever seen. So impactful with lower usage rates than most stars.

To me, he absolutely will go down as a top 20 player of all time. The people that are saying he will fall in the top 30-40 range are absolutely ludicrous in my opinion. It's an absolute joke to compare AI to him. CP3 is miles better. That would be like comparing ****ing Grant Hill to LeBron.

Hell Paul deserves to be right in the MVP race this year. Right in the conversation with Harden and Westbrook. Now he won't win since he's not nearly as flashy as them, but it just goes to show how ****ing good he is still even over 30.

ewing
01-11-2017, 08:27 AM
Answer me this. In his prime (or now actually), name one important quality CP3 isn't good at. He literally is great at everything you need from a PG. He's an elite defender. He's an elite passer. He's an elite finisher. He's an elite shooter. Elite ball handler. Elite decision maker. The guy literally has no weakness.

Now Point Guards are very tricky to rank. It's proven that a great PG cannot carry a team as much as a great wing or great big man can. So I think in Paul's case, that probably helps him all time since I do think Rings and Finals Appearances hold less weight when ranking Point Guards historically.

CP3 has also been playing in a dominate Western Conference his whole career. If he was playing in the East, there's no doubt he would have made it into the Finals at least once in my opinion. Not to mention, his Hornets teams were pretty bad.

Paul should have an MVP. It's an absolute travesty he didn't win one in 2007-2008 since he really deserved to. His 2008-2009 season was historic too, but LeBron was just a god that year. It really is something to wonder if things would have been different if he hadn't suffered that knee injury in 2010. It took him a season or so to get back into the swing of things and it literally happened right during his peak.

There isn't a single player I would like to win a ring more than Paul. To me, he's literally perfection on a basketball court. Like I said, his game is complete and I truly can say there are not many players in history that are as well-rounded. And he's one of the most efficient players I've ever seen. So impactful with lower usage rates than most stars.

To me, he absolutely will go down as a top 20 player of all time. The people that are saying he will fall in the top 30-40 range are absolutely ludicrous in my opinion. It's an absolute joke to compare AI to him. CP3 is miles better. That would be like comparing ****ing Grant Hill to LeBron.

Hell Paul deserves to be right in the MVP race this year. Right in the conversation with Harden and Westbrook. Now he won't win since he's not nearly as flashy as them, but it just goes to show how ****ing good he is still even over 30.

He's not selfish enough


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk