CP3 is not a top 5 player nor is he the best PG in the league.

[ralph_i_el]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.

your only argument is he hasn't got past the second round, and ONE bad series of plays...then you list a bunch of dudes who haven't got past the second round....

[knicksman]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.

maybe because if you have knowledge about this game, you would realize that score first pgs are cancerous like iverson, marbury, robertson while pass first are impactful like nash, stockton, magic, isiah. So if you really think that westbrook, who made his team from the number 1 in the league to almost losing the 2nd seed to pauls clippers when he came back, is better than paul. Then you clearly dont understand this game.

[knicksman]

It is because too many people are enamored with the idea of the quintessential pass first point guard and want to ignore a player like Russell Westbrook, while not playing a traditional point guard role as much, is actually more dominant and a better player.

Essentially, Russell Westbrook doesn't fit the paradigm that many believe a point guard should be and it's penalized for it.

maybe if history didnt prove that score first cant win and worse is that they are considered cancers by teammates, then maybe i would love to have westbrook/iverson/marbury on my team. But they are cancers. Westbrook made his team from number 1 to almost losing the 2nd seed. Iverson didnt have more than 50+ win throughout his career. So maybe its the reason. Were just not stupid like you brah. Thats why im not a fan of bran coz his impact is nowhere near his stats says.

[wakencdukest]

Because he's one of the few players left that can efficiently run an offense, can score 20 and give you elite playmaking at the same time, can rebound better than most SG's, and can play solid defense in the reg season and the playoffs.

YES he did **** up in that game and cost his team (wouldn't have mattered if the refereeing wasn't horrible) and deserves alot of criticism for it but that's still only one game. It's not like players greater than Paul haven't ****ed up in a similar fashion.

In terms of his lack of deep playoff runs, when has he lost to a team weaker than his?

The media thinks an 19/11/4 player who leads the league in assists and steals on one of the leagues best teams is a top 5 player, nothing ridiculous about that.

And why would you take Curry, Lillard, Aldridge, Rondo and Love above him when none of them got further in the playoffs last season? Doesn't make any sense. You're saying Paul is overrated because he didn't get far in the playoffs yet rank players who made it less further? lol

That's a pretty good argument. Paul runs the point better than any of them. He might not be in Westbrooks class as an athlete, or be in Curry's class as a shooter, but he definitely makes better decisions with the ball and doesn't take a lot of bad shots. His all around game is better than any guard listed.

[tpols]

Equal and better players than Chris Paul have taken more talent and lost in the first and second round with it. If you need to ask who I mean its clear you have little knowledge of history with which to make the "If ___ were ___ then he wouldn't ____" claim to begin with.

All these topics ever are....is people who have a small basketball case to make so they resort to what is basically trivia.

I don't care if you find Paul top 5 or not. I don't care about arbitrary top ____ rankings that act like multiples of 5 or 10 are significant breaks in basketball rankings. Its nothing to me.

What is something to me...is a sound basketball explanation. If you cant explain why all these people are better using between the lines ball in play basketball skills your opinion means next to nothing to me.

And it seems none of you EVER do so when making some "Chris paul isn't ____" argument. Which is very telling.

If you cant explain it...why should I take you serious?

And if you can explain it....why not do that instead of making false assumptions about what top ____ players do that ignores 70 years of top ___ players not doing it time and again?

Like Paul losing to the MVP and Westbrook in disappointing fashion matters but Kareem and Magic taking 2 additional all stars and a DPOY to a second round loss to the MVP and Calvin Murphy...on a 40 win team at that...doesn't.

Chris Paul might not be top 5. He might not be top 10. Whatever.

The way you and others go about explaining it is ridiculous.

What do you want him to say? His skills are top 5 but his performances are not.. he chokes all the time. The skills argument flies out the window when they arent being used for winning.. Joe Johnson might be one of the most skilled players in the league.. way more skilled than, say, westbrook is, but he never performs on his level.

[knicksman]

What do you want him to say? His skills are top 5 but his performances are not.. he chokes all the time. The skills argument flies out the window when they arent being used for winning.. Joe Johnson might be one of the most skilled players in the league.. way more skilled than, say, westbrook is, but he never performs on his level.

why are people expecting too much from pgs anyway? esp for a pg that has been a damaged good. Pgs hasnt won in this league since isiah. And compare cp3 to other pgs.

westbrook-has durant and made his team worse
parker-has pop
rondo-big3 and in the east
rose-his team won the same with him missing almost half the season
curry-he just beat them last playoffs.

[tpols]

why are people expecting too much from pgs anyway? esp for a pg that has been a damaged good. Pgs hasnt won in this league since isiah. And compare cp3 to other pgs.

westbrook-has durant and made his team worse
parker-has pop
rondo-big3 and in the east
rose-his team won the same with him missing almost half the season
curry-he just beat them last playoffs.

eh.. PG's can still win it as the best. Chris Paul has an amazing supporting cast and coaching around him.. the clippers should have won against the thunder in the playoffs this year. Paul choked like no other.. if his name was Lebron that series wouldve been 2011. He threw it away. Theres really no excuse.. His stats are top 5 PG of all time worthy and you have guys who stan him on his efficiency and orating and per etc but he doesnt bring it when it counts. Who knows tho, maybe hell pull a 2011 dirk one year

[masonanddixon]

He's the most skilled offensive PG I have seen since Nash but his style of play doesn't make anyone better and he doesn't have the ability to take over games.

Thats why he's overrated and will never lead a team to a championship.

[Young X]

To everybody saying "hell never lead a team to a championship". How many players in their current forms are good enough to do that then? If you can't name more than 5 players how is he overrated?

[CelticBalla32]

maybe because if you have knowledge about this game, you would realize that score first pgs are cancerous like iverson, marbury, robertson while pass first are impactful like nash, stockton, magic, isiah. So if you really think that westbrook, who made his team from the number 1 in the league to almost losing the 2nd seed to pauls clippers when he came back, is better than paul. Then you clearly dont understand this game.

Oscar Robertson is cancerous



You don't understand the game either, big fella lol

[oarabbus]

maybe because if you have knowledge about this game, you would realize that score first pgs are cancerous like iverson, marbury, robertson while pass first are impactful like nash, stockton, magic, isiah. So if you really think that westbrook, who made his team from the number 1 in the league to almost losing the 2nd seed to pauls clippers when he came back, is better than paul. Then you clearly dont understand this game.

Robertson? Oscar Robertson? The guy who averaged a triple double over his entire career, is cancerous.

Bro, are you:
-Off your meds
-Mentally challenged
-Just stupid

[MastaKilla]

Equal and better players than Chris Paul have taken more talent and lost in the first and second round with it. If you need to ask who I mean its clear you have little knowledge of history with which to make the "If ___ were ___ then he wouldn't ____" claim to begin with.

All these topics ever are....is people who have a small basketball case to make so they resort to what is basically trivia.

I don't care if you find Paul top 5 or not. I don't care about arbitrary top ____ rankings that act like multiples of 5 or 10 are significant breaks in basketball rankings. Its nothing to me.

What is something to me...is a sound basketball explanation. If you cant explain why all these people are better using between the lines ball in play basketball skills your opinion means next to nothing to me.

And it seems none of you EVER do so when making some "Chris paul isn't ____" argument. Which is very telling.

If you cant explain it...why should I take you serious?

And if you can explain it....why not do that instead of making false assumptions about what top ____ players do that ignores 70 years of top ___ players not doing it time and again?

Like Paul losing to the MVP and Westbrook in disappointing fashion matters but Kareem and Magic taking 2 additional all stars and a DPOY to a second round loss to the MVP and Calvin Murphy...on a 40 win team at that...doesn't.

Chris Paul might not be top 5. He might not be top 10. Whatever.

The way you and others go about explaining it is ridiculous.

If we look deep into league history we see a telling story of highly skilled players who are considered to be ranked in the top ___ of the league because they haven't accomplished ___ or ___.

Just because a player doesn't ___ with ___ when he has ___ does that really mean he's not __ in the league?

I mean if a person doesn't know the origin of that trivial tidbit of basketball assumption that it's clear he or she has absolutly no knowledge on the history of the game. "You have to ___ before you can ___" as they say..

Break down his shooting form, his ability to dribble without looking, his footwork, the way he keeps his dribble low in traffic,,etc etc if somebody wants to judge a player and rank them among their peers in the league

who cares about playoff wins, rings, coming up big when it matters, Magic Johnson & Shaq have both lost in the 2nd round with good teams, what makes them different than Paul? Because they have won multiple rings and FMVPS? pshh, can Shaq dribble without looking down? Have you seen how unskilled Magics jumpshot looked?

i'm so damn tired of player ___ having to do ___ to be considered ___

please people, learn the history of the ___

[BrownEye007]

I want a rational, non trolling explanation as to why anyone thinks Chris Paul is a top 5 player or the top PG in the league. Most agree that he isn't, but there are some out there, including the media itself, who insist that he is and I cannot understand it at all. Let me be clear: He is a a great player and he is a star, but he is not a superstar and there are several franchise players I would take over him in the "starting a team" scenario. It has gotten ridiculous the amount of adulation this guy gets for seemingly no tangible reasons.

Let me put it this way: if he were the best PG, and one of the 5 best players in the NBA, wouldn't his Clippers team have made it out of the second round? Instead, he choked away game 5 by trying to draw a backcourt 3-point foul against Westbrook and got the ball stolen. That foul review crap aside, Paul made several mistakes in that crucial game. I'm not hating, we all saw the same thing. He was, in general, outplayed by Westbrook in that game. Is that a top 3-5 player? **** no.

Players that I would currently take over CP3 for a team: Westbrook, Durant, Lebron, Griffin, Anthony Davis, Curry, Damian Lillard, Aldridge, Tony Parker, Rondo, Love, and probably more I can't think of right now.

Unless your factoring in age you'd be making a big mistake in taking any of the bold over Paul. And taking Rondo over Paul would be a terrible choice even if you do factor in age.

[masonanddixon]

To everybody saying "hell never lead a team to a championship". How many players in their current forms are good enough to do that then? If you can't name more than 5 players how is he overrated?

'This is very true. If he were listed along with those guys I wouldnt mind. What pissed me off the most was how ESPN ranked him #4, above Dirk, after the 10-11 playoffs. I'll never recover from that insult.

[BoutPractice]

It's difficult to explain why CP3 is the best PG in the league... he just sort of is, you can tell by watching him he's in the different class than the others.

It's the way he controls the game, the basketball IQ, the leadership, the total package of skills used in complete mastery, the equal threat as a passer and scorer, and yes, the ability to take over down the stretch (just because he "choked" this one time doesn't mean he isn't one of the best closers in the game).

Parker is THE scoring maestro at the PG position (it's not as fancy as Steph or Kyrie but he's seemingly able to score at will) though not quite the playmaker Paul is... although the system doesn't work the same way, it's telling about both the Spurs and Parker that he is not the best passer on his own team (Diaw, Ginobili). Rondo and Rubio are maestros at setting up the offense, but aren't real scoring threats. Russell Westbrook has an intimidating presence on the game and fills up the stat sheet, but he's less in control of his own talents and abilities, making him a lot more mistake prone.

Only Paul has the whole package.