LOL. Now it's not about ball dominant, but about facilitating? Are you claiming that Paul is not a good facilitator? All perimeter superstars dominate the ball. From Paul, to Harden, to LeBron, to Wade, to Kobe, to ... you name it.
In a series, Player A averages 17 ppg on 41% shooting, 3.5 rpg, 8.3 apg, 1.2 spg, and 1.7 turnovers per game. Player B averages 23 ppg on 53% shooting, 4 rpg, 6.3 apg, 1.8 spg, and 1.5 turnovers per game. In your opinion, which player played better....A or B?
Really.... IMO, a "ball dominant" PG is oxymoron. Any great PG (in every since of the word) is "ball dominant." Magic was ball dominate in the fact that he had to get his teammates the ball in their sweet spots. Kareem on the block, Worthy on the wing/elbow, Scott off the pick, Cooper behind the arc. Stockton didn't win a championship b/c it was Jordan's era, plain and simple, not b/c he was "ball dominate". The Jazz offense was predicated on the pick'n roll, hence dominating the ball. The reason CP has failed playoff appearances are not all on him. He's hindered by the roster and coach he's had. He's "ball dominate" b/c the teammates can't create for themselves (except Crawford). Outside of 3ft DeAndre Jordan is a non-factor, Griffin is the same way just out to about 10ft, and the rest of the supporting cast is nothing to shout about. You surround any PG (or any facilitator) w/ this supporting cast and you have no choice but to be "ball dominant." I think you are someone that just likes the more athletic PG, and thats fine, but when that goes what do you have left?
Games have to mesh. I don't like Chris Paul's game meshing with another caliber player like him. It isn't difficult to understand. Chris Paul is not a good player off the ball. Lebron and Wade are. Chris Paul is overrated.
I mean it in a sense of how they have control over a game. CP3's game has a real slow flow to it. He dictates who when and where will get the ball almost every possession. I don't think that he is the best pg for a complete team. Blake Griffin is capable of being a good 2nd option. Chris does not get it done. He gets out played by lesser players in the playoffs.
Can you clarify what you mean by "off the ball"? Are you talking about moving without the ball? Or being able to space the floor? In your opinion, who are some point guards who are good off the ball?
LeBron and Wade were two guys who were used to doing 100% of the ball handling for their team and had no outside shooting ability, and in fact won one championship before LeBron became a good outside shooter. They made the adjustments. CP3 and Harden would have to do way less work than LeBron/Wade to fit together, they can already shoot, Harden knows how to play off the ball, CP3 can figure it out I'm sure.
Look man. I don't think Chris Paul is the third best player in the league. I don't like his game in regards to winning championships. He is too involved.
Slashers Derrick Rose, Westbrook, Parker I think they are championship PG's. I do not personally think that PG's should be the best players on the team. They command too much usage with the ball. The three I mentioned could be the best players on team and compete for rings. Why? Because they play like two guards. Kyrie Irving is one to watch as well. I do not dislike Chris Paul. He is the most skilled pg in the league, but he is too passive offensively. If he looked to score more, the Clippers would be a team to look out for.
But guys who can 'get their own shot' can't co-exist with ball-dominant distributors. See the Bryant/Nash experiment. Also look at Gary Payton on the Lakers. Those guys are relegated to spot-up shooters in that scenario. Guys who's strength is distributing are still reliant upon others to make shots. If said distributor is making the max, you're tying up a lot of money in a guy who isn't dominant offensively or defensively. This is why guys like CP don't win championships. If CP3 played with Horace Grant or Rodman, they wouldn't win anything, because no one could score the ball. That's a joke. The reason those other bigs were able to win is that they didn't have a guy taking up a big chunk of cap who wasn't dominant offensively or defensively, not b/c GMs don't know what they're doing.
I'm sorry but how good is your understanding of basketball fundamentals? If you give Rose space that helps the defense not the offense.
He had 17 pts that's enough scoring. LMAO just admit the Grizz' window has closed, you still haven't eaten your crow about the Rudy Gay trade making the team worse. You predicted Grizz will fall apart and Toronto will rise and Toronto went 50% and Grizz went on a tear after that trade.
That's what I said too. Hell williams made it to conf finals in like his 3rd yr. Cp3 hasn't even been close. He gets a pass for some reason. Nash had the suns knocking on the finals door like 3 times.
I'm with you on this one OP. I have been saying the same thing for a while (and have gotten flamed on this board for saying it). I think because he is so amazing to watch people will always make excuses for him. Well he got his money, he got his coach and he got some guys that can stretch the floor. If the Clippers crash out of the playoffs early this year there shouldn't be any excuses left. Prove me wrong Chris.
Nash had D'Antoni, Stoudemire and Marion when they were better than they are now (not to mention 3pt shooters all around). That PHX team also didn't have to play defense, because they would just score on you, like every possession. Williams had Sloan, Boozer, Millsap, Okur, and some other players who could actually hit a shot outside of layups and dunks. Paul hasn't had a hall of fame caliber coach until now. And all Paul had, in terms of players, was Chandler, then West, and now Griffin / Jordan. Out of the big men that Paul has had on his team, only West was able to knock down jumpers with consistency. And for the people who are saying that Dwight dragged a team to the finals while Paul hasn't done squat? You guys DO realize that Dwight took a team from the East to the finals, right? The non-competitive top heavy EC as compared to the always-competitive West?
