I will not even discuss or link to the moronical ESPN's NBA front page

[chocolatethunder]

There is little to no reason to rank Kidd, Nash, Stockton, and Payton over CP3. I'm not saying CP3 is for sure better, but that he is on that level for sure.

I think Magic was obviously the best pg ever. I'd take Thomas and Oscar over CP3 as well.

But this notion that a guy like Nash or Stockton are on a different level than Paul needs to ****ing stop.

Especially if the argument is that CP3 hasn't done enough winning. Nash couldn't even make the ****ing finals playing on loaded Suns teams. Stockton made the finals twice and never won playing his entire career with a top 20 GOAT player? LOL...you really think CP3 and Barkley playing their entire careers together never win? Or CP3 and Dirk? Come on now...

I'll take your bait. Nash led a team minus Amare deep into the playoffs. They weren't stacked because of injury. Nash had never needed to be a scorer but in the playoffs he absolutely tore it up. I dunno if you were around for that.

As far as Stockton goes, playing with some other hall of famer doesn't mean that you're going to win it all. They may have had Jeff Malone for a while but if you think that those Jazz teams in any way compared to the other teams like the Bulls who they faced in the finals then you're nuts. No, I don't think Barkley and Paul would win a championship. What did it take for Paul Pierce and Rondo to win? It took Ray Allen and Garnett. Dirk and Nash couldn't win by themselves so why do you think that Stockton and Malone could? Stockton was awesome. He was a really good man defender for a lot of his career and later a great team defender. He didn't score a lot not because he couldn't but because he wasn't asked to. Those teams were overachieving well coached teams. Paul is not on his level. Paul is about on Payton and Kidds level. Maybe by the end of his career but not now. It's not even close. To even mention him with Zeke or Magic or Stockton is just stupid.

[Young X]

CP is already a more complete and more productive player than Stockton and Kidd ever were. This is a guy who almost fairly won MVP over prime Kobe while putting up better numbers than him, think about it.

[DMAVS41]

I'll take your bait. Nash led a team minus Amare deep into the playoffs. They weren't stacked because of injury. Nash had never needed to be a scorer but in the playoffs he absolutely tore it up. I dunno if you were around for that.

As far as Stockton goes, playing with some other hall of famer doesn't mean that you're going to win it all. They may have had Jeff Malone for a while but if you think that those Jazz teams in any way compared to the other teams like the Bulls who they faced in the finals then you're nuts. No, I don't think Barkley and Paul would win a championship. What did it take for Paul Pierce and Rondo to win? It took Ray Allen and Garnett. Dirk and Nash couldn't win by themselves so why do you think that Stockton and Malone could? Stockton was awesome. He was a really good man defender for a lot of his career and later a great team defender. He didn't score a lot not because he couldn't but because he wasn't asked to. Those teams were overachieving well coached teams. Paul is not on his level. Paul is about on Payton and Kidds level. Maybe by the end of his career but not now. It's not even close. To even mention him with Zeke or Magic or Stockton is just stupid.

Well, we have different views on Stockton, but I have to just laugh a bit at the notion that Barkley and Paul or Paul and Dirk just never win.

But it's kind of irrelevant considering all the guys you are talking about never won. Paul has played with straight up horrible teams compared to the Nash Suns, Stockton Jazz, and Payton Sonics. These Clippers teams and that one Hornets team simply doesn't compare.

So all we have is a guard that gives you 19/10/4 in the regular season and 21/10/5 in the playoffs for his career. On very good efficiency all while being a very good defender at his position as well.

He's absolutely on the Nash, Stockton, Kidd, and Payton level...already. Seriously...this notion that Stockton was on a different level than Paul is just laughable. Paul was a better rebounder and scorer for sure. Stockton was a better passer and defender, not by a huge margin defensively.

So what makes Stockton better? That he made the finals twice playing with a top 20 GOAT for his entire career? Because it sure as hell isn't individual play...

So if Paul makes the finals a couple times he's now as good as Stockton? Well, give him Karl Malone or Barkley or Dirk...and he'd do more than make the finals.

[chocolatethunder]

Well, we have different views on Stockton, but I have to just laugh a bit at the notion that Barkley and Paul or Paul and Dirk just never win.

But it's kind of irrelevant considering all the guys you are talking about never won. Paul has played with straight up horrible teams compared to the Nash Suns, Stockton Jazz, and Payton Sonics. These Clippers teams and that one Hornets team simply doesn't compare.

So all we have is a guard that gives you 19/10/4 in the regular season and 21/10/5 in the playoffs for his career. On very good efficiency all while being a very good defender at his position as well.

He's absolutely on the Nash, Stockton, Kidd, and Payton level...already.

Why is it laughable? I'm saying that it takes more than just two awesome players to win a championship. I'm not saying they never win. I'm saying that it doesn't matter how good Stockton and Malone were, they weren't good enough to win. There are lots of reasons why. First of all, they played in the best era of basketball against Magic and Jordan and Hakeem and Bird and people like that. Not to mention those early 90s Blazer teams. I hated Utah at the time but now I can say that they certainly weren't a stacked team in any way. They didn't even come close in comparison (as far as talent goes) to the teams they were playing against. They happened to have an awesome coach and they were disciplined and played well. So no, I don't think that Barkley and Paul or Dirk and Paul would just automatically win a championship. I do not think he's on their level already. I want to be honest and you can flame me all you want but with Paul, I just don't feel like he makes the guys around him better as much as those other guys did (excluding payton). You can go off on me all you want but I have seen him play plenty. That's just my opinion.

[HurricaneKid]

I'll take your bait. Nash led a team minus Amare deep into the playoffs. They weren't stacked because of injury. Nash had never needed to be a scorer but in the playoffs he absolutely tore it up. I dunno if you were around for that.

As far as Stockton goes, playing with some other hall of famer doesn't mean that you're going to win it all. They may have had Jeff Malone for a while but if you think that those Jazz teams in any way compared to the other teams like the Bulls who they faced in the finals then you're nuts. No, I don't think Barkley and Paul would win a championship. What did it take for Paul Pierce and Rondo to win? It took Ray Allen and Garnett. Dirk and Nash couldn't win by themselves so why do you think that Stockton and Malone could? Stockton was awesome. He was a really good man defender for a lot of his career and later a great team defender. He didn't score a lot not because he couldn't but because he wasn't asked to. Those teams were overachieving well coached teams. Paul is not on his level. Paul is about on Payton and Kidds level. Maybe by the end of his career but not now. It's not even close. To even mention him with Zeke or Magic or Stockton is just stupid.

So wrong...

Jazz basketball was predicated on essentially one play that defenses weren't allowed to defend. The rules re: defense have been loosened immensely.

The one year you are talking about in regards to Nash when he took the team to the WCF, he still had a REALLY good supporting team and they beat the 7 seed when Kobe refused to shoot in game 7 then beat the 6 seed Clipps in 7 games. SO WHAT?? Nash loses any conversation with any great PG because he was almost inarguably one of the worst defenders in the history of the NBA. And in the playoffs he wasn't great either. His career playoff PER is <20 and his highest in any year is 23.4. CP3's playoff career PER is 25.5 and he has had 3 playoff runs at 28.9 or higher. And he is an elite PG defender.

I don't think a lot of people are willing to put CP3 with Magic. Nor should they. But Zeke? WTF not? You could argue Zeke wasn't as important to those teams as Dantley, Rodman, Dumars at times, Microwave at times, etc (Laimbeer, Salley, Aguirre were also massive contributors). His playoff PER is <20 as well and he rarely separated himself from the other 3-4 guards on the team.

[DMAVS41]

Why is it laughable? I'm saying that it takes more than just two awesome players to win a championship. I'm not saying they never win. I'm saying that it doesn't matter how good Stockton and Malone were, they weren't good enough to win. There are lots of reasons why. First of all, they played in the best era of basketball against Magic and Jordan and Hakeem and Bird and people like that. Not to mention those early 90s Blazer teams. I hated Utah at the time but now I can say that they certainly weren't a stacked team in any way. They didn't even come close in comparison (as far as talent goes) to the teams they were playing against. They happened to have an awesome coach and they were disciplined and played well. So no, I don't think that Barkley and Paul or Dirk and Paul would just automatically win a championship. I do not think he's on their level already. I want to be honest and you can flame me all you want but with Paul, I just don't feel like he makes the guys around him better as much as those other guys did (excluding payton). You can go off on me all you want but I have seen him play plenty. That's just my opinion.

I know that is what you think. And that is fine. I find it laughable. Why? Because I think Paul is way better than you do...lol

I'm trying to understand why you think it's laughable to put Paul and Stockton's level? Individually by all accounts they were very similar (I'd argue Paul is better, but that doesn't matter here)...and I don't see any reason to think Stockton makes his teams better than Paul does.

So could you try to explain why Stockton is so much better than Paul to date? Thanks.

[DMAVS41]

So wrong...

Jazz basketball was predicated on essentially one play that defenses weren't allowed to defend. The rules re: defense have been loosened immensely.

The one year you are talking about in regards to Nash when he took the team to the WCF, he still had a REALLY good supporting team and they beat the 7 seed when Kobe refused to shoot in game 7 then beat the 6 seed Clipps in 7 games. SO WHAT?? Nash loses any conversation with any great PG because he was almost inarguably one of the worst defenders in the history of the NBA. And in the playoffs he wasn't great either. His career playoff PER is <20 and his highest in any year is 23.4. CP3's playoff career PER is 25.5 and he has had 3 playoff runs at 28.9 or higher. And he is an elite PG defender.

I don't think a lot of people are willing to put CP3 with Magic. Nor should they. But Zeke? WTF not? You could argue Zeke wasn't as important to those teams as Dantley, Rodman, Dumars at times, Microwave at times, etc (Laimbeer, Salley, Aguirre were also massive contributors). His playoff PER is <20 as well and he rarely separated himself from the other 3-4 guards on the team.

I agree with almost all of this. I do think Zeke deserves to be thought of as better than Paul to date due to some of his playoff performances and his playoff play in 1990 to be more specific. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Zeke was way better, but to date I think he deserves the nod over Paul...even though as players they are close in my opinion.