Chris Paul on Magic's Level? (Regular Season)

[D.Brasco]

Comaprable statistically at most you can say.

[KNICKS1970]

I say yes.

Paul is having an historic season. I don't think people are properly recognizing his accomplishments. Let's face it, without Paul, that New Orleans team simply isn't very good. Paul has them vying for the best record in the West when the West is playing its best ball in memory.

Here's how they compare statistically on a pace-adjusted per-40 basis. I'm using Magic's 1986 campaign:

Code: Select all

Player        PTS  REB  AST  STL  BLK   TO eFG%  TS%  PER
johnson,magi 25.8  6.8 13.2  1.9  0.5  4.0 .525 .602 26.8
paul,chris   23.7  4.3 12.3  3.0  0.0  2.8 .534 .582 28.8

Statistically, it's pretty much a wash. Magic has slightly better numbers, but Paul's higher PER is probably an indication that it's simply harder to achieve high numbers in today's NBA. The PER score is saying that Paul is superior to his contemporaries by a greater margin that Magic was superior to his. And I'd argue that Paul is a better defensive player as well. Paul also plays an additional minute per game. Over the course of the regular season, I don't see why it's so blasphemous to say that Paul is comparable to Magic, or even a touch better.

It's really not. I mean, look at that Assist/Turnover ratio. And there's absolutely no evidence that suggests that he won't improve as a basketball player. But people are always hesitant to give too much credit to a young player. And the Chris Paul being ONLY a step ahead of KJ talk is ridiculous. KJ was a good PG, but he was NEVER a legit MVP contender like Paul is. The Hornets are currently the #1 seed in the best conference race ever, and he's "a step behind KJ"? I'm convinced that if the internet was around in 1981, people in here would be saying "Larry Bird is having a pretty good year, but let's not get carried away by saying he could be as good as Havlicek. He might not even be as good as Dan Issel in his prime."

[Patterns]

Paul is closer to Magic than Kobe to MJ.

Gotta love your jabs at Kobe whenever you can.

[NO-KG-AI]

Haha, he wasn't better than Brandon Roy over the summer

[d-will8]

I hate it when people bring in PER and per-40 numbers as if they are indisputable proof of something. They are purely statistical measurements. They are not useless, but they don't tell anywhere near the full story. Statistically, Paul has had an incredible, historic season, especially according to a bald guy who doesn't know all that much about actual basketball, but as good or better than Magic's best season?
Paul's had a great season, but don't tell me he's on Magic's level. I think you have to look past stats and see that Magic was not only quite possibly the greatest passer of all time and a triple double machine, but also that he had the ability to fill in at center and score 42 points in a finals game. The guy was quite possibly the most versatile player ever and an absolute nightmare to try to match up with. Paul simply is not on his level and probably will never be, no matter how great his stats are. That's not a knock on Paul, just an acknowledgement of the fact that Magic was one of the top five or so players of all time. If all you care about is PER and per-40 numbers then you would believe that Carl Landry compares favorably to Carlos Boozer and Kevin Garnett, among others, and we all know that this is far from reality.

[That Nicka]

I hate it when people bring in PER and per-40 numbers as if they are indisputable proof of something. They are purely statistical measurements. They are not useless, but they don't tell anywhere near the full story. Statistically, Paul has had an incredible, historic season, especially according to a bald guy who doesn't know all that much about actual basketball, but as good or better than Magic's best season?
Paul's had a great season, but don't tell me he's on Magic's level. I think you have to look past stats and see that Magic was not only quite possibly the greatest passer of all time and a triple double machine, but also that he had the ability to fill in at center and score 42 points in a finals game. The guy was quite possibly the most versatile player ever and an absolute nightmare to try to match up with. Paul simply is not on his level and probably will never be, no matter how great his stats are. That's not a knock on Paul, just an acknowledgement of the fact that Magic was one of the top five or so players of all time. If all you care about is PER and per-40 numbers then you would believe that Carl Landry compares favorably to Carlos Boozer and Kevin Garnett, among others, and we all know that this is far from reality.

[NO-KG-AI]

PER is a pretty good measure, I don't know of any scrubs or even marginal players that boast a high PER, despite it being per minute, and pace adjusted.

[JordansBulls]

I hate it when people bring in PER and per-40 numbers as if they are indisputable proof of something. They are purely statistical measurements. They are not useless, but they don't tell anywhere near the full story. Statistically, Paul has had an incredible, historic season, especially according to a bald guy who doesn't know all that much about actual basketball, but as good or better than Magic's best season?
Paul's had a great season, but don't tell me he's on Magic's level. I think you have to look past stats and see that Magic was not only quite possibly the greatest passer of all time and a triple double machine, but also that he had the ability to fill in at center and score 42 points in a finals game. The guy was quite possibly the most versatile player ever and an absolute nightmare to try to match up with. Paul simply is not on his level and probably will never be, no matter how great his stats are. That's not a knock on Paul, just an acknowledgement of the fact that Magic was one of the top five or so players of all time. If all you care about is PER and per-40 numbers then you would believe that Carl Landry compares favorably to Carlos Boozer and Kevin Garnett, among others, and we all know that this is far from reality.

Don't forgot that Jamal Wilkes got 37 and 10 in that game.

[That Nicka]

-= original quote snipped =-



Don't forgot that Jamal Wilkes got 37 and 10 in that game.

your point is?

[nate33]

I hate it when people bring in PER and per-40 numbers as if they are indisputable proof of something. They are purely statistical measurements. They are not useless, but they don't tell anywhere near the full story.

I hate when people make the argument that PER doesn't tell the whole story when nobody is saying PER tells the whole story.

The stats are just a starting point. Their stats are basically equal.

So now, why is Magic better in the regular season? Magic had two Hall-of-Fame, #1-overall-pick teammates in Kareem and Worthy; plus one of the greatest defenders of all time in Cooper. Those Lakers teams won 60-62 games a year.

Paul has one borderline-all-star-caliber teammate in West, and a couple of quality starters in Peja and Chandler, and little else. His teammates aren't anywhere near as good as Magic's. Yet Paul is poised to lead his team to about 56 victories against the toughest competition in memory.

Paul has similar stats. He's a better defender. And he is arguably doing a more impressive job at leading his teams to wins. That's why I say Paul is playing every big as good as prime Magic (in the regular season), maybe even better.

[The MVPlaya]

-= original quote snipped =-


Gotta love your jabs at Kobe whenever you can.

LOL. My favorite is when he throws in "and this is coming from a Kobe fan" to try and make his statements of hating look more credible.

[d-will8]

-= original quote snipped =-


I hate when people make the argument that PER doesn't tell the whole story when nobody is saying PER tells the whole story.

The stats are just a starting point. Their stats are basically equal.

So now, why is Magic better in the regular season? Magic had two Hall-of-Fame, #1-overall-pick teammates in Kareem and Worthy; plus one of the greatest defenders of all time in Cooper. Those Lakers teams won 60-62 games a year.

Paul has one borderline-all-star-caliber teammate in West, and a couple of quality starters in Peja and Chandler, and little else. His teammates aren't anywhere near as good as Magic's. Yet Paul is poised to lead his team to about 56 victories against the toughest competition in memory.

Paul has similar stats. He's a better defender. And he is arguably doing a more impressive job at leading his teams to wins. That's why I say Paul is playing every big as good as prime Magic (in the regular season), maybe even better.

That's fair. I apologize for misinterpreting your post and I will admit that these are all sound arguments for Paul's season being as good or better than any that Magic had. However, it's really hard to quantify the "goodness" of a season and to compare the "goodness" of two seasons from entirely different eras, and, knowing how incredible of a player Magic was during his prime, I guess I just have a hard time believing that Paul, who is great, but just not as great, is capable, especially so early in his career, of having as good of a season as Magic ever did. That's just me, though, and I respect the fact that some people don't feel the same way.

[d-will8]

One other thing is that, while Paul's teammates obviously aren't in the same stratosphere as Magic's (who's are?), the Hornets, who have two pretty good frontcourt players who compliment Paul pretty well, one great shooter and a couple other guys who can shoot pretty well, which is huge when you have a player like Paul, and (finally) a halfway decent bench, do compare pretty favorably to pretty much all of the other teams in the West, and not just because of Paul. This is just one reason why it's hard to compare seasons from vastly different eras.

[kooldude]

One other thing is that, while Paul's teammates obviously aren't in the same stratosphere as Magic's (who's are?), the Hornets, who have two pretty good frontcourt players who compliment Paul pretty well, one great shooter and a couple other guys who can shoot pretty well, which is huge when you have a player like Paul, and (finally) a halfway decent bench, do compare pretty favorably to pretty much all of the other teams in the West, and not just because of Paul. This is just one reason why it's hard to compare seasons from vastly different eras.

but I'm not asking which season(s) are better or worse, the question was just if Paul's season is on the same level as Magic's in terms of production and stats.