Replace Steph with CP3 on the 2015-2019 Warriors

[ardee]

How many titles do they win, if any?

[Lamelo Anthony]

Probably not as much given his injury history. But when healthy, Paul is probably more valuable given he is the primary ball handler and led elite offenses with less talent.

[Rich Michmond]

Does Curry play with the Clippers and then the Rockets in this scenario?

[jalengreen]

Interpreting this as Steph no longer exists and CP3's injuries still occur

- 2015: Probably still win, though ? with CP3's injury
- 2016: CP3 broke his hand at start of playoffs, not sure when/if he would've returned, would say they lose regardless though
- 2017: Win
- 2018: Kinda tricky if we're envisioning a HOU-GSW WCF that's missing both Steph and CP3 at the end essentially, but probably win?
- 2019: Lose

2017's a clear win to me if all else remains the same, 2015 and 2018 probably should be wins but less clear.

[Ol Roy]

Draymond instantly becomes less valuable on offense.

[LukaTheGOAT]

He has 3 rings like Curry, assuming he has reasonable health.

This really depends on his own health, but I could see him winning every year from 15-18. More times than not, I think 15, and 17 are the surest bets, and he wins them most of the time. 18 is a bit less likely, but still in the probable category (I'm assuming GSW Paul has better success with the hamstring, and Rockets Paul still goes down with the hamstring). 16 is a real possibility. Curry was not at a strong MVP level in the Finals series, in part due to health. A healthy Paul deals with Cleveland's physicality better, and I don't think Cleveland has anyone they could afford to stick on him at the POA (Bron is probably occupied trying to play safety). The Thunder might be a tougher match that they don't get by though.

[KingofTheClay]

2015 the Warriors win with CP3. 2015 was a joke easy lemon squeezy road.

2016 the Warriors win with CP3. The OKC series would have been done in 6. Curry laid eggs almost every game until they were down 1-3. Cleveland was a joke until their backs were against the wall, Warriors would still have been up 3-1, with Cleveland getting blown out every game regardless. A galvanized Cleveland in games 5-7 make it close but CP3 brings it home in 5. Worst case 7. CP3 is not going 6-19 in a G7.

2017 Warriors win obviously.

2018 Warriors also win but it’s tighter. Warriors needed CP3 injured to squeak by in 7 in the WCF.

2019- Lose.

In summary, if you want a true point guard then pick CP3. If you want some gimmicky dances and some 35 ft heaves, pick Curry.

CP3 goes 4/5 and wins 2 FMVPs, whereas Curry was carried to 3 rings with no FMVPs.

[migya]

Changes alot. Curry's value was his shooting, CP isn't the off ball player he was. With sane rosters it can be true they win none but also they win 2015, 2017 and 2018. CP with Durant would've been a good fit.

[ardee]

In summary, if you want a true point guard then pick CP3. If you want some gimmicky dances and some 35 ft heaves, pick Curry.

CP3 goes 4/5 and wins 2 FMVPs, whereas Curry was carried to 3 rings with no FMVPs.

Is this satire?

[CodeBreaker]

CP0

[Throwawaytheone]

.

[KingofTheClay]

In summary, if you want a true point guard then pick CP3. If you want some gimmicky dances and some 35 ft heaves, pick Curry.

CP3 goes 4/5 and wins 2 FMVPs, whereas Curry was carried to 3 rings with no FMVPs.

Is this satire?

That part was satire and hyperbole.

I do think CP3 gets atleast 3. 2017, 2018 and 2015 should be in the bag. CP3 could get 2016, Steph was just went missing too often since the WCF.

I was most impressed by Steph 2022 Finals performance. First finals performance as a true bus driver on insane efficiency and volume, leading an average roster past the resurgent Celtics. CP3 is obviously not sniffing that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lessthanjake]

I think we should probably recognize that Chris Paul likely would not have been nearly as good of a fit for the Warriors as Steph was, and that that probably makes a huge difference.

For instance, what offense do you run with that team? Do you still run Kerr’s motion offense if the team is centered around Chris Paul as its major star? If you do, then Chris Paul’s impact would probably get minimized and be a lot less than it was for him on other teams and far less than Steph’s was in that offense. It just doesn’t fit CP3 as well. But if you run an offense more suited to CP3 (which is likely what would’ve happened), you don’t really have a roster that’s very well suited to that. Suddenly, Draymond becomes a lot more of a liability offensively, because he wouldn’t be able to leverage his passing abilities as well. Meanwhile, CP3 wouldn’t have a particularly good pick-and-roll partner, and would lack a real lob threat. To have a better pick and roll partner, they might feature David Lee more, but then the defense would suffer a good deal. The drive-and-kick game wouldn’t have ideal potency on those Warriors either, since you’d have a non-shooting center, Draymond, Iguodala, and Livingston all as major roster pieces. I do at least think CP3 could work pretty well with Klay (similar to how he did with Redick), but that’s just one piece. Overall, I don’t think it’s a roster that is well suited to play with Chris Paul, similar to how it wasn’t played optimally in 2014. Which means this is not just a question of how much of a downgrade Chris Paul is from Steph Curry, but rather how much of a downgrade Chris Paul is when you add on top of it that the team would fit far less well. I think the overall difference would be pretty drastic.

And then we get to injuries, which Chris Paul often had in the playoffs. To be fair to Chris Paul, Steph had some playoff injuries too, but I think you’re liable to have serious issues with Chris Paul’s playoff health, probably moreso than what the Warriors had with Steph.

I also think there’s probably an element to which team chemistry would suffer from having Chris Paul—who is not someone that people get along with easily, as I understand it. Especially on a team with Draymond, I think you run a real risk of having things blow apart chemistry-wise. Even with Steph, that has ended up happening, and I think the problems would be worse with Chris Paul. That’s obviously inherently speculative though.

All that said, if we keep the rosters constant, I can see the Warriors winning in 2017 just on the basis of sheer talent. I don’t think they’d blitz the league like they did, because the fit wouldn’t be as good, but the 2017 Warriors had plenty of room to be less good and still be able to win the title. I can also see the Warriors winning in 2018 if we are taking CP3 off the Rockets and not replacing him with Steph or some other major player. But that’s more a function of the hypothetical happening to also cripple the league’s best opposing team. If the hypo is more of a cloning situation (i.e. we aren’t taking CP3 off the Rockets), then I don’t think the Warriors beat the 2018 Rockets.

On the 2017 thing though, I think the reality is that it’s unlikely that Durant goes to the Warriors in this hypothetical. If the fit is less good and the team is not as good, Durant probably doesn’t go. That sort of butterfly-effect thinking is probably outside the scope of what the thread is getting at, but I do think that’s realistically how it would’ve gone if we really played it out.

[Lost92Bricks]

I think we should probably recognize that Chris Paul likely would not have been nearly as good of a fit for the Warriors as Steph was, and that that probably makes a huge difference.

For instance, what offense do you run with that team? Do you still run Kerr’s motion offense if the team is centered around Chris Paul as its major star? If you do, then Chris Paul’s impact would probably get minimized and be a lot less than it was for him on other teams and far less than Steph’s was in that offense. It just doesn’t fit CP3 as well. But if you run an offense more suited to CP3 (which is likely what would’ve happened), you don’t really have a roster that’s very well suited to that. Suddenly, Draymond becomes a lot more of a liability offensively, because he wouldn’t be able to leverage his passing abilities as well. Meanwhile, CP3 wouldn’t have a particularly good pick-and-roll partner, and would lack a real lob threat. To have a better pick and roll partner, they might feature David Lee more, but then the defense would suffer a good deal. The drive-and-kick game wouldn’t have ideal potency on those Warriors either, since you’d have a non-shooting center, Draymond, Iguodala, and Livingston all as major roster pieces. I do at least think CP3 could work pretty well with Klay (similar to how he did with Redick), but that’s just one piece. Overall, I don’t think it’s a roster that is well suited to play with Chris Paul, similar to how it wasn’t played optimally in 2014. Which means this is not just a question of how much of a downgrade Chris Paul is from Steph Curry, but rather how much of a downgrade Chris Paul is when you add on top of it that the team would fit far less well. I think the overall difference would be pretty drastic.

And then we get to injuries, which Chris Paul often had in the playoffs. To be fair to Chris Paul, Steph had some playoff injuries too, but I think you’re liable to have serious issues with Chris Paul’s playoff health, probably moreso than what the Warriors had with Steph.

I also think there’s probably an element to which team chemistry would suffer from having Chris Paul—who is not someone that people get along with easily, as I understand it. Especially on a team with Draymond, I think you run a real risk of having things blow apart chemistry-wise. Even with Steph, that has ended up happening, and I think the problems would be worse with Chris Paul. That’s obviously inherently speculative though.

All that said, if we keerp the rosters constant, I can see the Warriors winning in 2017 just on the basis of sheer talent. I don’t think they’d blitz the league like they did, because the fit wouldn’t be as good, but the 2017 Warriors had plenty of room to be less good and still be able to win the title. I can also see the Warriors winning in 2018 if we are taking CP3 off the Rockets and not replacing him with Steph or some other major player. But that’s more a function of the hypothetical happening to also cripple the league’s best opposing team. If the hypo is more of a cloning situation (i.e. we aren’t taking CP3 off the Rockets), then I don’t think the Warriors beat the 2018 Rockets.

On the 2017 thing though, I think the reality is that it’s unlikely that Durant goes to the Warriors in this hypothetical. If the fit is less good and the team is not as good, Durant probably doesn’t go. That sort of butterfly-effect thinking is probably outside the scope of what the thread is getting at, but I do think that’s realistically how it would’ve gone if we really played it out.

Fit doesn't matter with Chris Paul. Look at all the teams he's been on. Who cares.

On defense alone it's him, Green, Igoudala, Thompson, Bogut. they would be by far the most dominant defense.

[lessthanjake]

I think we should probably recognize that Chris Paul likely would not have been nearly as good of a fit for the Warriors as Steph was, and that that probably makes a huge difference.

For instance, what offense do you run with that team? Do you still run Kerr’s motion offense if the team is centered around Chris Paul as its major star? If you do, then Chris Paul’s impact would probably get minimized and be a lot less than it was for him on other teams and far less than Steph’s was in that offense. It just doesn’t fit CP3 as well. But if you run an offense more suited to CP3 (which is likely what would’ve happened), you don’t really have a roster that’s very well suited to that. Suddenly, Draymond becomes a lot more of a liability offensively, because he wouldn’t be able to leverage his passing abilities as well. Meanwhile, CP3 wouldn’t have a particularly good pick-and-roll partner, and would lack a real lob threat. To have a better pick and roll partner, they might feature David Lee more, but then the defense would suffer a good deal. The drive-and-kick game wouldn’t have ideal potency on those Warriors either, since you’d have a non-shooting center, Draymond, Iguodala, and Livingston all as major roster pieces. I do at least think CP3 could work pretty well with Klay (similar to how he did with Redick), but that’s just one piece. Overall, I don’t think it’s a roster that is well suited to play with Chris Paul, similar to how it wasn’t played optimally in 2014. Which means this is not just a question of how much of a downgrade Chris Paul is from Steph Curry, but rather how much of a downgrade Chris Paul is when you add on top of it that the team would fit far less well. I think the overall difference would be pretty drastic.

And then we get to injuries, which Chris Paul often had in the playoffs. To be fair to Chris Paul, Steph had some playoff injuries too, but I think you’re liable to have serious issues with Chris Paul’s playoff health, probably moreso than what the Warriors had with Steph.

I also think there’s probably an element to which team chemistry would suffer from having Chris Paul—who is not someone that people get along with easily, as I understand it. Especially on a team with Draymond, I think you run a real risk of having things blow apart chemistry-wise. Even with Steph, that has ended up happening, and I think the problems would be worse with Chris Paul. That’s obviously inherently speculative though.

All that said, if we keerp the rosters constant, I can see the Warriors winning in 2017 just on the basis of sheer talent. I don’t think they’d blitz the league like they did, because the fit wouldn’t be as good, but the 2017 Warriors had plenty of room to be less good and still be able to win the title. I can also see the Warriors winning in 2018 if we are taking CP3 off the Rockets and not replacing him with Steph or some other major player. But that’s more a function of the hypothetical happening to also cripple the league’s best opposing team. If the hypo is more of a cloning situation (i.e. we aren’t taking CP3 off the Rockets), then I don’t think the Warriors beat the 2018 Rockets.

On the 2017 thing though, I think the reality is that it’s unlikely that Durant goes to the Warriors in this hypothetical. If the fit is less good and the team is not as good, Durant probably doesn’t go. That sort of butterfly-effect thinking is probably outside the scope of what the thread is getting at, but I do think that’s realistically how it would’ve gone if we really played it out.

Fit doesn't matter with Chris Paul. Look at all the teams he's been on. Who cares.

On defense alone it's him, Green, Igoudala, Thompson, Bogut. they would be by far the most dominant defense.

Fit matters for absolutely everyone. Chris Paul has been on a lot of teams, and he has never won a title (and only even made the Finals once), so I don’t see your point. He’s also been on teams that were a better fit for him than the Warriors likely would’ve been. The sheer talent of the Warriors might’ve been enough to outweigh that (particularly in 2017, as I mentioned), but fit is a huge concern here.

[SportsGuru08]

None. CP3 has cornered the market on blowing series leads.

[Djoker]

One ring in 2017. CP3 just isn't reliable health wise nor is he as good as Steph Curry is. He won't warp space with his gravity and get his teammates open shots. I don't think GS reaches the offensive heights they did with Curry.

[Lost92Bricks]

Fit matters for absolutely everyone. Chris Paul has been on a lot of teams, and he has never won a title (and only even made the Finals once), so I don’t see your point. He’s also been on teams that were a better fit for him than the Warriors likely would’ve been. The sheer talent of the Warriors might’ve been enough to outweigh that (particularly in 2017, as I mentioned), but fit is a huge concern here.

The talent outweighs the enormous fit problems of Chris Paul passing to Thompson and Durant on the wing.