Explain to me, rationally, why/how CP3 is the "best PG in the league".

[masonanddixon]

Magic and isiah say hi. Whereas score first pgs hasnt won since the creation of this league as the best player.. LOL These low IQs

Did you miss where I said the 'MODERN NBA'?

[knicksman]

Did you miss where I said the 'MODERN NBA'?

LOL history is modern now. How old are you?

[BlackWhiteGreen]

**I am not going to troll or respond rudely to any replies on here.

I will say that of all the (non-trolling) beliefs on this forum, I do not disagree with any of them more than I disagree with the one mentioned in the title of this thread. CP3 is talented on both sides of the floor, and he is an all-star in the league, those are facts...but I have no idea why anyone thinks he is the "best" PG in the league. He has proven time and time again that he is not at that superstar level that would take a team over the hump. If he were the best PG in the league, certainly it would have been enough to get past OKC last season (round 2), or Memphis the year before (round 1) on loaded Clippers teams. But he has never made it to the conference finals.

He is very talented on a technical level, an excellent passer, good shooter, and good on-ball defender. But those skills have never translated into any notable playoff success, and I cannot blame that on his current team (you could in NOLA), and neither should you. I would take Westbrook, Parker, Curry over him easily.

So, I'm going to sit back, read your responses, and respect what you have to say. There are enough people who believe he is the best PG to the point where I feel I am missing something.

mmmkay

[masonanddixon]

LOL history is modern now. How old are you?

32.

[turnaroundJ]

Magic and isiah say hi. Whereas score first pgs hasnt won since the creation of this league as the best player.. LOL These low IQs

Okay so 2 PGs in the history of the league. One was listed 6'9 and paired with another GOAT candidate and one won in the transition between the Lakers/Sixers/Celtics era and 90s Bulls era on a stacked team.

This is also because you can have bigger players that can do everything PGs can do and more - Kobe, MJ, LBJ, any all-around superstar wing in NBA history. For superstars who can will teams in the playoffs, any other position is simply superior to the point guard.

[kshutts1]

Has anyone considered that the current NBA is not set up to be a true PGs league, but rather a scoring guard's league?

And while Paul is the best pure point in the league today, he's STILL elite because he can score. It's just not his natural inclination to take 15-20+ shots a game. But when he does, he's quite efficient.

I'm pretty sure Paul has averaged more steals than turnovers for the majority of his career. Not looking it up, but it's close regardless. Add in his solid percentages, and he's one of the most efficient, well-rounded players in the game, at any position.

I personally believe Westbrook is the better player, but CP3 is the better PG.

[knicksman]

Okay so 2 PGs in the history of the league. One was listed 6'9 and paired with another GOAT candidate and one won in the transition between the Lakers/Sixers/Celtics era and 90s Bulls era on a stacked team.

This is also because you can have bigger players that can do everything PGs can do and more - Kobe, MJ, LBJ, any all-around superstar wing in NBA history. For superstars who can will teams in the playoffs, any other position is simply superior to the point guard.

kobe and mj were scorers tho. Ill give you lebron but he had better teammates than magic yet struggled to win 2. if we compare pure pgs(isiah, cp3, nash, stockton, johnson) to score first pgs(westbrook, iverson, rose, marbury) at the same height, it seems like the pure pgs impact more.

[kshutts1]

kobe and mj were scorers tho. Ill give you lebron but he had better teammates than magic yet struggled to win 2. if we compare pure pgs(isiah, cp3, nash, stockton, johnson) to score first pgs(westbrook, iverson, rose, marbury) at the same height, it seems like the pure pgs impact more.

I never considered them "pure" (aka: passing) PGs. More of a scoring guard.
Another scoring guard that was overlooked is Parker.
If we're discussing Kevin Johnson, then Tim Hardaway needs to be mentioned.

So my count is...
Pure: Magic, Stockton, Nash, CP3, Mark Jackson, Kidd, Cousy, Rondo, Price
Scoring: Westbrook, Rose, AI, Marbury, Thomas, Johnson, Hardaway, Parker, Archibald, Oscar, Frazier

I'm sure I missed some, but the bolded players are the ones generally (at least, in my estimation) considered winners, even if they didn't win a title.
An obvious caveat to this is that passing PGs are more difficult to remember, so we only remember the current (Rondo) or truly great (all others). Partially explains why a higher percentage of listed Pure PGs are considered winners than Scoring.

[knicksman]

I never considered them "pure" (aka: passing) PGs. More of a scoring guard.
Another scoring guard that was overlooked is Parker.
If we're discussing Kevin Johnson, then Tim Hardaway needs to be mentioned.

So my count is...
Pure: Magic, Stockton, Nash, CP3, Mark Jackson, Kidd, Cousy, Rondo, Price
Scoring: Westbrook, Rose, AI, Marbury, Thomas, Johnson, Hardaway, Parker, Archibald, Oscar, Frazier

I'm sure I missed some, but the bolded players are the ones generally (at least, in my estimation) considered winners, even if they didn't win a title.
An obvious caveat to this is that passing PGs are more difficult to remember, so we only remember the current (Rondo) or truly great (all others). Partially explains why a higher percentage of listed Pure PGs are considered winners than Scoring.

I guess agree to disagree with isiah, johnson. But if they can average 10+ apg, I consider them pure pgs. I dont consider AI as a winner with his 1 50+ win team throughout his career. Parker won because of pop and him and oscar werent really the best players on the team. Westbrook recently made his team worse and rose's team won the same win % despite him missing almost half the season. And if AI was a winner then jackson and price are too. Those guys had multiple 50+ win teams which is more than AI

[Optimus Prime]

He's the best regular season PG in the league. For whatever that's worth.

[navy]

Dragic

Didnt even make the playoffs and choked in the clinching games.

How is that putting his team over the hump? I swear you are one of the dumbest people on this forum.

[navy]

Tony Parker controls the game better than Paul. Parker also gets up for every game better than Paul does and his team offensively runs a lot better when challenged. His games steps up a bit better than Paul's game does. He's noticeably more experienced and wouldn't get suckered into running with Westbrook.

.

What is this nonsense? Parker is a net negative on his team. He doesnt control the game at all.

[Encre92]

He's not. Westbrook is.

1) Westbrook
2) Paul
3) Dragic
4) Lillard
5) Curry

[navy]

He's not. Westbrook is.

1) Westbrook
2) Paul
3) Dragic
4) Lillard
5) Curry

Curry is better than Lillard, but this list is solid.

[FatComputerNerd]

Kyrie should crack back into that top 5 list this season.

In fact, I'm still not sold on either Lillard, Curry, or Dragic being better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABC0BukoeRQ