I'm not suggesting that the Hornets are loaded in any way. Or that Chris Paul could be doing "more" to help his team. Or that Byron Scott is in the wrong for letting Paul micromanage things on the court with the players around him. But you have to consider what has been successful in this era and what translates to winning on a bigger level. I think Chris Paul is overrated in this regard. Nash, Kidd and Billups are all much bigger than Paul and have bigger games. Not as dominant or awe inspiring, but they find ways to manage games by getting the ball out of their hands earlier in possessions. By making passes that don't directly lead to assists. By quick touch passes. And Nash and Billups are capable of taking matters into their own hands down the stretch. They've never been guys who've felt the need to dominate the ball from the get-go. They play based on their teams position in the game which allows the team to develop a flow. Northside Storm - This is an argument that goes beyond statistics as the first post mentioned. It's easy to be an accountant and make PER the end all, be all of your "advanced" basketball related discussions. But it takes a little more to notice the minor and major differences between era's, how a player impacts the flow of the team he's on, projecting how he translates to winning on a bigger level, and whether he allows a team to realize it's true potential (although this point is moot as he hasn't had much to work with in his career - which suits him IMO).
If this era has taught us anything, it's that one player can't win a championship alone against the zone. That point is critical to my argument, and why you can't make an analogy to Ronny dominating unofficiated, helter skelter pick up games. Remember what the Philadelphia team Allen Iverson took the finals was like? A bunch of great defenders with no offensive firepower. Because Iverson just couldn't make it work with a real offense around him. Because he constantly tried to get the ball in his hands and force the issue, which works to a certain extent when you're as dynamic as a Chris Paul or Allen Iverson, but it's not championship basketball in the NBA. Chris Paul, while having a much higher bball IQ and court vision than AI (but less offensive firepower), will need a couple hall of fame defenders who constantly defer the ball to be as successful as AI was in the playoffs. So my primary arguments are: 1. His size 2. His play relative to his position 3. Him not being a LeBron/Wade type threat who can put up 20 points in the 4th quarter, so his team needs to develop a flow or some kind of rhythm throughout a game. Which is what the Nash's, Kidd's and Billup's of the world excel at.
Ronny, I know exactly what you mean. I watched CP3 a lot during his years in okc and the they year they went back to NO. (still showed their game locally). He does dominate the ball a lot, to the point that watching him do so becomes unnatural and a bit unsettling. I mean, when you see him do stuff like dribbling under the basket and bringing the ball back out twice on one possession without passing, it's pretty weird. But the thing is, I don't blame him for this. i saw enough of him in college to know that it's not an essential part of his makeup as a player. The problem resides with the crappy roster he has around him, and the crappy coach running the offense. He can't pass the ball off to his teammates because none of them besides West can create for themselves or others (and West can just barely create in the post). Normally, in such situations, instead of placing the pg in a position where he has to create all the plays, most teams would run a system or set of plays designed to get players shots off of passing and ball movement. This is what Utah does. Deron doesn't dominate the ball, despite being the only player that can create off the dribble. This what we're used to seeing, and why Paul's ball domination looks a bit weird. The Hornets don't run this type of system. Why, I have no idea. I think it might be because Byron Scott is offensively inept (and you can probably credit a lot of his previous offensive success in Jersey to Jason Kidd and Eddie Jordan's princeton system). Thus, kinda like Rudy (dump it to Dream. Iso Steve and Cat), he just lets his best player do everything. CP3 literally HAS to do everthing in order to make up for his teammates's offensive shortcomings and his coach's lack of ability to implement a system that can better hide those shortcomings.
I forgot about that. Great point. The issue is that the do-it-all approach just doesn't work in this era, due to the issues I mentioned to Shroopy. I only watched Wake Forest during the NCAA tourneys, but he appeared to be doing the same thing over there. It remains to be seen how he adapts his game around better talent or within some sort of a system.
uh, well, we could just argue this based on feeling and the one or two glimpses we've had of him in games as well as our subjective biases. OR you could look at the stats. which all scream that Chris Paul needs the ball. NOW. Yes, yes, all the new age crap about how we need to balance irrationality with rationality...these should hold court with our lives. But not with how we evaluate basketball players. #2 in the league in win shares (2008-09 NBA 17.5) Active #1 player in offensive rating; 120.5. All-time; #5. #1 in assist percentage at 54.5% PLAYER +/- WITH +/- WITHOUT TOTAL IMPACT (with + without) 1. JAMES +749 -127 876 2. PAUL +403 -218 621
uh, well, we could just argue this based on feeling and the one or two glimpses we've had of him in games as well as our subjective biases. OR you could look at the stats. which all scream that Chris Paul needs the ball. NOW. Yes, yes, all the new age crap about how we need to balance irrationality with rationality...these should hold court with our lives. But not with how we evaluate basketball players. Chris Paul #2 in the league in win shares (2008-09 NBA 17.5) Active #1 player in offensive rating; 120.5. All-time; #5. #1 in assist percentage at 54.5% PLAYER +/- WITH +/- WITHOUT TOTAL IMPACT (with + without) 1. JAMES +749 -127 876 2. PAUL +403 -218 621
I agree though i feel between him and Dwight they will have extended careers and the sky is the limit. imagine them on the same team and all those ally-oops. All they would need is a Joe Johnson type player and they would be fearful.
There are other players who play with the ball in their hands quite a bit. Lebron is a good examples. I would say that Lebron James had the ball in his hands, just as much as Chris Paul ever has, in 2007 when they lost to the Spurs in the finals. That team was comparable to some of those Iverson teams (they even had Eric Snow!). They had elite defense, but a squad full of mediocre players. Kobe Bryant was in an even more similar situation to Chris Paul. He dominated the ball on most plays in LA back in 2006. Some people say that he miraculously became much more of a team player over the next couple years when in reality his team improved, drastically. The player who was easily the 2nd best player on the lakers was now a bench player. He became a team player because he had a good team. You are making the right conclusion that the New Orleans Hornets cannot win a championship if they continue to play this way but you are using the wrong assumptions. There is no evidence to support your claim that Chris Paul dominates the ball too much. Sure, he has the ball in his hands all the time but there is no way of knowing how necessary it is unless we see him with a better team the way that we have seen Iverson and now Lebron. And, how do you know that you cannot beat the zone and win a championship with one person dominating the ball? We haven't seen a good team with this type of player ever in this era. Again, I would like to see some examples to show how you know what Chris Paul is doing is wrong. For that you would need to show me players in his situation (awful team) who have won championships and other great players who play his style (dominate the ball) who have failed with very good teams surrounding them.
this ball stopper thing is nonsense. chris paul has to dominate the ball b/c no one else can create for the other players. it's that simple. you bring in another player (pargo a few years ago) who can do that, paul will give the ball up gladly. the same applies with tracy mcgrady, or any other star. lebron dominates the ball just as much as chris paul, if not more. and look at his career. it's been brilliant. but if you give lebron a legit PG, he'll gladly give the ballhandling duties up. billups and nash give up the damn ball b/c they have other players who can create. nash had diaw a few years ago, barbosa, and guys who can create in the paint. billups obviously has melo and jr smith. you want your best player to do less: GET MORE TALENT. it's that simple. michael jordan is a perfect example. he said the same thing.
And that is a prime example of misusing statistics. Nobody in their right mind would choose Paul over Magic. Paul is very good but, I do see a little Marbury in him. Marbury average over 8 assists a season for most of his career.
Try out league pass, it's worth the money. http://www.nba.com/leaguepass/index.html http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=4804799&postcount=23 Point 3. You can't make the LeBron-Paul or Wade-Paul comparison here. Or any elite WING player to your elite PG, based on their abilities and roles within a team. Kobe Bryant and Chris Paul both have "being amazing" in common, but that doesn't mean we compare them using the same situations. As AstroRocket mentioned, this isn't a clear cut case of right or wrong considering what Paul has to work with in contrast to someone like Deron. Chris Paul will always be shielded from criticism of any sort as long as he's surrounded by mediocre players and a coach incapable of orchestrating an offense, so right now all these posts by me are blasphemy.
If the ball isnt in Chris Paul or David Wests hands, its a wasted possession for the Hornets. Giving the ball to somebody else to try to create something in some attempt to distribute for god knows what reason is going to result in a turnover or brick.
so...you're saying based on your own perception that Chris Paul is a ballhog, he should not have the ball as much, that he should change his playing style...because he'll never win a championship the way he plays? well, can't argue with you. your logic is spotless, netizen. "Just watch League Pass lol, i observe the game and i'm an expert and can't be countered with anything" Hornets record without Paul? Hornets record with Paul? I won't even bother researching them. I've watched some games; Hornets are my third favorite team. The difference between the Hornets with Paul and Hornets without Paul (especially on offense) is so astounding that you have to be literally blind not to realize them. Tyson becomes a standing post, Peja can't do ANYTHING but pray that his defender has a brain cramp and runs around the court to reenact some whoop de whoop Indian ritual. Seriously. The Hornets are only a playoff team because Paul holds them up. Chris Paul is not dominating the ball too much...he's not doing it enough considering his sad-sack team. Given a supporting cast with more then one guy who can create his own shot (and even then, West benefits so much from P&R and open jumpshots), you're right, he may not win a championship hogging the ball but that point is moot since his team is crap. right now, he needs to have the ball or else the Hornets suck, plain and simple. All the stats scream it and if you watch the games well, you'll know this fact as well.
Mr. Starbury? Is that you? I thought you were done refering to yourself as a third person. Please don't insult CP3 like that, HOF bound CP3.
Wow. It's eery how good you are. Does anyone want to tell me what Darren Collison's stats are since Chris Paul went down? Does anyone want to tell me what the Hornets record is since Chris Paul went down? Coincidence, or no?
Collison's stats go up because he's playing big minutes and he's a good player. Hornets record is worse because Paul is their MVP.
