Does CP3 have any argument as being better than Durant all time?

[Ol Roy]

Two of the best all-around shooters ever.

[One_and_Done]

i believe not. cp3 is higher as a pg than kd as an sf. cp3 has turned around teams more than kd

but cp has no ring and kd supporters will always fall back to his big year @gsw, and there's no argument to counter it.
i think kd's BIG fails won't dissuade anyone because ultimately his scoring is impeccable and elite, and in the panoply of nba greats the point guard (except magic) has no sway against the big boys.

There actually is an argument to counter it which is that during the years he played for Golden State, the Warriors had a better record with Steph and no KD than they did when they both played together, and during the championship years they had a point differential of +14.7 with Steph and no KD compared to +2.7 with KD and no Steph. Durant was largely superfluous to their success. Like he helped in that he was better at hitting open 3s than Harrison Barnes, but he wasn’t a key piece in the way that Steph Curry was or arguably even Draymond Green. Chris Paul was more impactful on a Finals team at age 35 than KD ever was in Golden State.

yes, in fact that is the point i make to all the pro kd people, AND the media who doesn't even mention this disparity.
i am well aware of the IMPACT of the two, as i have often made a jeter/arod likening.

but it think because we're talking about cp3 and not steph, the kd/gsw gains a bit of momentum

Those same impact metrics would put both of these guys above Kobe, who wouldn't even crack the top 20.

[madmaxmedia]

Only at cock-punching

[Lalouie]

There actually is an argument to counter it which is that during the years he played for Golden State, the Warriors had a better record with Steph and no KD than they did when they both played together, and during the championship years they had a point differential of +14.7 with Steph and no KD compared to +2.7 with KD and no Steph. Durant was largely superfluous to their success. Like he helped in that he was better at hitting open 3s than Harrison Barnes, but he wasn’t a key piece in the way that Steph Curry was or arguably even Draymond Green. Chris Paul was more impactful on a Finals team at age 35 than KD ever was in Golden State.

yes, in fact that is the point i make to all the pro kd people, AND the media who doesn't even mention this disparity.
i am well aware of the IMPACT of the two, as i have often made a jeter/arod likening.

but it think because we're talking about cp3 and not steph, the kd/gsw gains a bit of momentum

Those same impact metrics would put both of these guys above Kobe, who wouldn't even crack the top 20.

what parameters are we talking about here.

that is always the prob. some people say it's ONLY about numbers. some people say it's only about rings. some people say it's impact. i think you can only find an athlete who checks the most boxes

so between cp3 and kd, i dunno. i think cp3 checks more boxes as a pg than kd as an sf but i understand the fascination of kd. cp3 will always be underrated in the panoply of all the great ballers, as are all pg's with the exception of magic.

[Lalouie]

Only at cock-punching

it's a talent

[iggymcfrack]

There actually is an argument to counter it which is that during the years he played for Golden State, the Warriors had a better record with Steph and no KD than they did when they both played together, and during the championship years they had a point differential of +14.7 with Steph and no KD compared to +2.7 with KD and no Steph. Durant was largely superfluous to their success. Like he helped in that he was better at hitting open 3s than Harrison Barnes, but he wasn’t a key piece in the way that Steph Curry was or arguably even Draymond Green. Chris Paul was more impactful on a Finals team at age 35 than KD ever was in Golden State.

yes, in fact that is the point i make to all the pro kd people, AND the media who doesn't even mention this disparity.
i am well aware of the IMPACT of the two, as i have often made a jeter/arod likening.

but it think because we're talking about cp3 and not steph, the kd/gsw gains a bit of momentum

Those same impact metrics would put both of these guys above Kobe, who wouldn't even crack the top 20.

If you wanna debate whether I should swap Kobe and KD in my 24/25 spots go right ahead. I will say that there's an argument for Kobe overperforming his impact metrics in the playoffs. Looking at raw on/off, Kobe goes up from +4.6 to +7.6 in the playoffs while KD drops from +5.8 to +2.4. I think most people would agree that in the postseason, Kobe's generally been at least slightly above average on defense while he's brought down by things like RAPM for his extraordinarily poor regular season defense. For instance, career RAPM rates Kobe as a bottom 5% defender in the league which is the key reason he's so low overall. Also, there's the fact that he had multiple seasons after the ACL injury where he was a very bad player even for his age and some early years where he didn't play very well relative to age either that kind of bring him down overall.

In either case though, this seems like quite a deflection, especially from someone who's posted at least 25 topics about Kobe in the last year. Regardless of what reasons might cause Kobe to overperform his impact metrics enough to be a little bit ahead of KD, there's no reason to think that Durant's undervalued by said metrics nor that he's anywhere near as impactful as CP3. His inability to win anywhere other than as the 3rd wheel on a loaded Golden State team would bring you to the same conclusion as would the records of his team when he plays vs. when he doesn't.

[One_and_Done]

yes, in fact that is the point i make to all the pro kd people, AND the media who doesn't even mention this disparity.
i am well aware of the IMPACT of the two, as i have often made a jeter/arod likening.

but it think because we're talking about cp3 and not steph, the kd/gsw gains a bit of momentum

Those same impact metrics would put both of these guys above Kobe, who wouldn't even crack the top 20.

If you wanna debate whether I should swap Kobe and KD in my 24/25 spots go right ahead. I will say that there's an argument for Kobe overperforming his impact metrics in the playoffs. Looking at raw on/off, Kobe goes up from +4.6 to +7.6 in the playoffs while KD drops from +5.8 to +2.4. I think most people would agree that in the postseason, Kobe's generally been at least slightly above average on defense while he's brought down by things like RAPM for his extraordinarily poor regular season defense. For instance, career RAPM rates Kobe as a bottom 5% defender in the league which is the key reason he's so low overall. Also, there's the fact that he had multiple seasons after the ACL injury where he was a very bad player even for his age and some early years where he didn't play very well relative to age either that kind of bring him down overall.

In either case though, this seems like quite a deflection, especially from someone who's posted at least 25 topics about Kobe in the last year. Regardless of what reasons might cause Kobe to overperform his impact metrics enough to be a little bit ahead of KD, there's no reason to think that Durant's undervalued by said metrics nor that he's anywhere near as impactful as CP3. His inability to win anywhere other than as the 3rd wheel on a loaded Golden State team would bring you to the same conclusion as would the records of his team when he plays vs. when he doesn't.

It's worth letting the poster who is agreeing with you know that the same metrics you are citing to put CP3 over KD, are the ones that have led you to rank Kobe #25 all-time. I have Kobe in the 20-25 range myself, but I doubt the person quoting you does.

[MrBigShot]

KD is more portable and I think he peaked higher.

During KD's MVP season, I genuinely thought he was going to make a run at top 5 all time when it's all said and done.

[EArl]

I don't like KD, but I would say that he is not better than CP3 on the all-time list.

[jokeboy86]

I have CP3 over KD but that's just personally because I always lean towards floor raisers and players who make other players around them better. I think more and more players like Magic, Kidd, and CP3 are going to become underrated and dismissed by future generations because scoring is looking more and more like the end all be all for a lot of fans and media. CP3 may end up being the last great traditional PG with the way things are trending.

[DaPessimist]

Maybe there's a stats argument?

I find it hard to imagine anyone would actually take prime CP3 over prime Durant. Maybe if you already had a Superstar wing player and needed a floor general?

[Lost92Bricks]

I can certainly appreciate the arguments raised, but when it comes down to a key factor that has to be looked at when comparing two greats: Durant has two championships and Paul has none. People may downplay the validity of those chips with the stacked Warriors but Durant wasn't just a passenger and was the Finals MVP for both of them.

Paul has been in the Finals once during his 19 season career and wasn't even the best player on that team. It should also be noted that Durant took teams to the Finals in 2012 and arguably 2019 as the best player (he did miss the WCF in 2019 though).

Then you factor in Olympic Gold Medals - 4 for Durant vs 2 for Paul.

Paul has had a magnificent career but I can't see how the above would put him above Durant.

CP3 > Booker.

CP3 led that team to the finals.

[NZB2323]

Kobe's team was able to win 5, because three were as Shaq's sidekick and the other 2 were on the most stacked team in the league at the time. That's the context.

Here's some more context. Kobe was on the team who was considered title favourites at least 10 times, but won only 5. A 50% grade, which is bad. From 00-07 in games without Shaq he led the Lakers to a pedestrian 135-137 record.

Chris Paul had some talented teams, but he never had the most talented team like Kobe did so many times. CP3 was a guy who made his teams punch above their weight, he wasn't a front runner or coat tail rider. If Paul had played on the same teams as Kobe he'd have more than 5 titles.

Was the 2010 Lakers the most stacked team?

The Celtics had Rondo, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, KG, Perkins, Rasheed, and Tony Allen.

The Suns had Nash, Amare, Richardson, Robin Lopez, Channing Frye.

The Spurs had Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, George Hill, Richard Jefferson.

The Mavs had Dirk, Kidd, Caron Butler, Jet Terry, Shawn Marion, and Erick Dampier.

It was after KG got hurt in 09. He was never quite the same again, and Perk was also hurt if I recall. That injury marked the end of KGs prime. Duncan's prime was 98-07. After that injuries gradually slowed him. He was well past his prime in 2010, and it showed. He was probably better in 12-14 than 2010, which is when he slimmed down so his injured legs weren't carrying so much weight. Dirk had a nice team, but not as good as the Lakers. The Suns had substantially downgraded. No more Marion, Amare was not as good post micro-fracture, and guys like Frye, Richardson and Lopez, while capable guys, were inferior to what Kobe had.

The 2010 Lakers were better than the 2010 Celtics because Kobe was better than KG that year. I’ll take Rondo, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, and Tony Allen over Pau, Lamar Odom, Andrew Bynum, Metta World Peace, and Derek Fischer.

Same thing for the Spurs. The 2010 Lakers were better than the 2010 Spurs because Kobe was better than Duncan. I’ll take Ginobili, Parker, George Hill, and Richard Jefferson over Kobe’s supporting cast.

If you want to argue that LeBron or Wade has worst supporting casts than Kobe in 2010, that’s perfectly reasonable, but the 2010 Lakers weren’t some incredibly stacked team. Kobe was the only top 75 player on that team.

[Lost92Bricks]

There's a large amount of people who like to remove achievements like MVPs, All NBA/Def teams, Championships, Finals MVPs, etc from the equation, since awards are subjective and voted on by the media, and Champs/Finals MVPs are highly dependent on your teammates. I disagree whole-heartedly, but there is a logic behind it.

Personally I don't like CP's case because he played with a lot of talent. If you're a MVP level player, like CP3's fans say he is, his Clippers supporting cast should have been enough.

Clippers supporting cast has a grand total of 0 hall of fame players.

They were not that good. They were flashy.

[NZB2323]

There's a large amount of people who like to remove achievements like MVPs, All NBA/Def teams, Championships, Finals MVPs, etc from the equation, since awards are subjective and voted on by the media, and Champs/Finals MVPs are highly dependent on your teammates. I disagree whole-heartedly, but there is a logic behind it.

Personally I don't like CP's case because he played with a lot of talent. If you're a MVP level player, like CP3's fans say he is, his Clippers supporting cast should have been enough.

Clippers supporting cast has a grand total of 0 hall of fame players.

They were not that good. They were flashy.

I think Blake Griffin will end up making the hall.

6x all-star
5x all-NBA
3rd in MVP voting in 2014
ROY
College Player of the Year

[LascelleL]

No chance in hell. I don't respect KDs Chips at ALL but I still think he's higher on the ATG than CP3 to me.

[CBS7]

There's a large amount of people who like to remove achievements like MVPs, All NBA/Def teams, Championships, Finals MVPs, etc from the equation, since awards are subjective and voted on by the media, and Champs/Finals MVPs are highly dependent on your teammates. I disagree whole-heartedly, but there is a logic behind it.

Personally I don't like CP's case because he played with a lot of talent. If you're a MVP level player, like CP3's fans say he is, his Clippers supporting cast should have been enough.

Clippers supporting cast has a grand total of 0 hall of fame players.

They were not that good. They were flashy.

Blake makes the hall probably
Him and DeAndre Jordan were all NBA multiple times.
Crawford was an elite sixth man too

[Impuniti]

Absolutely zero chance whatsoever. He's one of the best playmakers ever but his style of play is also detrimental to the game. He sucks the air out of the game by wanting to control everything.

I don't rate KD as much as other on here (latter end of top 20), but CP3 isn't even a top 25 player.

[One_and_Done]

Was the 2010 Lakers the most stacked team?

The Celtics had Rondo, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, KG, Perkins, Rasheed, and Tony Allen.

The Suns had Nash, Amare, Richardson, Robin Lopez, Channing Frye.

The Spurs had Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, George Hill, Richard Jefferson.

The Mavs had Dirk, Kidd, Caron Butler, Jet Terry, Shawn Marion, and Erick Dampier.

It was after KG got hurt in 09. He was never quite the same again, and Perk was also hurt if I recall. That injury marked the end of KGs prime. Duncan's prime was 98-07. After that injuries gradually slowed him. He was well past his prime in 2010, and it showed. He was probably better in 12-14 than 2010, which is when he slimmed down so his injured legs weren't carrying so much weight. Dirk had a nice team, but not as good as the Lakers. The Suns had substantially downgraded. No more Marion, Amare was not as good post micro-fracture, and guys like Frye, Richardson and Lopez, while capable guys, were inferior to what Kobe had.

The 2010 Lakers were better than the 2010 Celtics because Kobe was better than KG that year. I’ll take Rondo, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, and Tony Allen over Pau, Lamar Odom, Andrew Bynum, Metta World Peace, and Derek Fischer.

Same thing for the Spurs. The 2010 Lakers were better than the 2010 Spurs because Kobe was better than Duncan. I’ll take Ginobili, Parker, George Hill, and Richard Jefferson over Kobe’s supporting cast.

If you want to argue that LeBron or Wade has worst supporting casts than Kobe in 2010, that’s perfectly reasonable, but the 2010 Lakers weren’t some incredibly stacked team. Kobe was the only top 75 player on that team.

Yeh I fundamentally disagree, especially RE: the Spurs and Pau. That was literally their worst year in the 19 year Duncan era (least wins, worst D other than 2011, 3rd worst SRS, etc).

Even moreso I disagree that Pau wasn't top 75, not that 'were you top 75?' is the measure of a support cast. By that logic it wouldn't be as good if they had 4 guys who were 77, 78, 79 and 80?

[Mr Peanut]

I can certainly appreciate the arguments raised, but when it comes down to a key factor that has to be looked at when comparing two greats: Durant has two championships and Paul has none. People may downplay the validity of those chips with the stacked Warriors but Durant wasn't just a passenger and was the Finals MVP for both of them.

Paul has been in the Finals once during his 19 season career and wasn't even the best player on that team. It should also be noted that Durant took teams to the Finals in 2012 and arguably 2019 as the best player (he did miss the WCF in 2019 though).

Then you factor in Olympic Gold Medals - 4 for Durant vs 2 for Paul.

Paul has had a magnificent career but I can't see how the above would put him above Durant.

CP3 > Booker.

CP3 led that team to the finals.

CP3 was the missing piece that guided the Suns to the Finals but he wasn't the Suns best player that season, or at least not outright like Durant was on the 2012 Thunder.

Season stats:
Booker - 25.6 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 4.3 apg on 58.7% TS
CP3 - 16.4 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 8.9 apg on 59.9% TS

Playoff stats:
Booker - 27.3 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 4.5 apg on 55.8% TS
CP3 - 19.2 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 8.6 apg on 58.4% TS

CP3 was clearly the better playmaker and Booker the better scorer. I think at best you can make the argument that they were 1A and 1B, but if you're going to definitively state that CP3 > Booker then you're going to have to bring some actual facts to the table.