Can we shut the book on the Williams/Paul debate?

[NO-KG-AI]

I think it's hilarious that the Jazz's backup PF over the last few years is better than any player Paul has ever played with

[NO-KG-AI]

I think it's hilarious that the Jazz's backup PF over the last few years is better than any player Paul has ever played with

[Bradford]

I guess actual evidence in favor of your argument would be too much to expect, seeing as how there isn't any.

Actually if you watch the games that's all the evidence you need.

DWill > Paul

Book Shut.

[BarneyGumble]

I think it's hilarious that the Jazz's backup PF over the last few years is better than any player Paul has ever played with

And yet, Paul has played with 2 lottery picks....so who's fault is that?

[Wavy Q]

They've never been a lottery team since CP3's been there, so i'd say the general manager's.

[dogrufus]

Actually if you watch the only the Jazz games and are a huge homer your bias supplies all the evidence you need.

Fixed that for you.

[Rapcity_11]

I think it's hilarious that the Jazz's backup PF over the last few years is better than any player Paul has ever played with

And yet, Paul has played with 2 lottery picks....so who's fault is that?

The idiot that drafted them?

That argument is so weak man.

[Bradford]

Fixed that for you.

[Sinant]

Oh good, we're back to the draft position argument.

That's my favorite.

[dogrufus]

And yet, Paul has played with 2 lottery picks....so who's fault is that?

Timberwolves' lineup contains two #2 overall picks, a #4, a #5, a #6, a #7, a #13, and a #14.

Sounds like they have the best team in the league by your standards.

But then I don't have to mock you because really you MUST know this argument is (Please Use More Appropriate Word).

[Bradford]

Oh no lets look at meaningless made up stats that random guys with too much time on their hands come up with....

Or we could look at wins, you know, the stat that actually matters.

[dogrufus]

Fixed that for you.

I agree, trying to prove your claim using such piss poor arguments is pretty much equivalent to banging your head against a wall.

Sorry, I tend to be more persuaded more by actual hard evidence. I'm not just going to ignore every number out there and take the world's most biased Jazz fan's word for it.

[Bradford]

Fixed that for you.

I agree, trying to prove your claim using such piss poor arguments is pretty much equivalent to banging your head against a wall.

Sorry, I tend to be more persuaded more by actual hard evidence. I'm not just going to ignore every number out there and take the world's most biased Jazz fan's word for it.

I prefer using the scoreboard.

[Jase]

It's not a matter of who is better, simply because the book will never be shut. Personally, I prefer Williams. A lot of the time, it's a concept of systems. Williams fits Utah's system and offensive philosophy. Paul fits New Orlean's system. He dictates it. At least we can agree that you can't lose with either player.

[dogrufus]

Oh no lets look at meaningless made up stats that random guys with too much time on their hands come up with....

Or we could look at wins, you know, the stat that actually matters.

Are you trying to come off stupid?

Do you not know that Paul's team has more wins and a 10% higher winning percentage?

Or is that stat meaningless and made up too?

[dogrufus]

It's not a matter of who is better, simply because the book will never be shut. Personally, I prefer Williams. A lot of the time, it's a concept of systems. Williams fits Utah's system and offensive philosophy. Paul fits New Orlean's system. He dictates it. At least we can agree that you can't lose with either player.

So would you care to explain why you'd take Williams over a player who is a significantly better shooter, playmaker, defender, and even rebounder? And who is worse than Williams at literally NOTHING?

Sure both of them fit their systems. Paul fits his better and is a more productive player. The difference isn't even that small. It's like arguing Joe Johnson is better than Kobe.

[Bradford]

Sure both of them fit their systems. Paul fits his better and is a more productive player. The difference isn't even that small. It's like arguing Joe Johnson is better than Kobe.

lol

[dogrufus]

Sure both of them fit their systems. Paul fits his better and is a more productive player. The difference isn't even that small. It's like arguing Joe Johnson is better than Kobe.

lol

Joe Johnson PER: 16.3
Kobe PER: 23.7

Difference: 7.4


Chris Paul PER: 27.7
Deron Williams PER: 20.7

Difference: 7.0

Chris Paul is better than Deron by about the same amount that Kobe is better than Joe Johnson.

If you can't make a better argument than "lol" when you've been owned hard multiple times, why post at all?

[Bradford]

Sure both of them fit their systems. Paul fits his better and is a more productive player. The difference isn't even that small. It's like arguing Joe Johnson is better than Kobe.

lol

Joe Johnson PER: 16.3
Kobe PER: 23.7

Difference: 7.4


Chris Paul PER: 27.7
Deron Williams PER: 20.7

Difference: 7.0

Chris Paul is better than Deron by about the same amount that Kobe is better than Joe Johnson.

If you can't make a better argument than "lol" when you've been owned hard multiple times, why post at all?

PER? Basketball isn't played with "PER's".

[Andrewchos]

Joe Johnson is a better passer.

and PER is a very valuable stat/tool often revealing good player's from "media players"

so far this year, CP3>Deron.