Chris Paul - Overrated? (According To The Starters)

[Wammy Giveaway]

http://thestarters.nba.com/the-starters ... rt-3-of-9/

Debate starts at 11:34, but I'll post an excerpt instead:

Trey Kerby: If he's gonna be considered a top five player, then he needs to win more than one playoff series [...] He likes to make other guys better, but putting him in the ranks of [Kevin Durant] and [LeBron James] is kind of crazy.
Leigh Ellis: He's gonna be like Tracy McGrady, never going to be able to get out of the first round. Chris Paul has been able to get out of the first round, but if he can't get into a conference finals, it's gonna be a knock on him at the end of his career.

I asked Trey Kerby today about if his superstar status was in jeopardy, and this is his response:

[tweet]http://twitter.com/treykerby/status/522942954047299584[/tweet]

What is your take on The Starter's view of Chris Paul?

[2Mas]

I like all those dudes. That Leigh guy is cool & knows his stats & what not, but everything he says I disagree with. No joke every question that was raised I hated his answer.

W/ that said, CP3 is still a super star. I don't get why they haven't gotten further though. Stud in Blake, monster in DJ. Doc on the sidelines. Idk it doesn't make sense. The west is just so stacked.

[thanumba2clippersfan]

I've always been a fan of Chris Paul, even before he came to the Clippers. I honestly though that he would have been out of the 2nd round at this point in his career. Personally I would have loved to get to at least the conference finals, and we had a good shot last year, but somethings didn't go our way. I believe that Chris will make it past the 2nd round at some point in his career.

Personally I wish that Chris would pick and chose when he wants to be a distributor and when he wants to attack. I rather that he be more aggressive offensively unless it isn't working. I'm hoping that this year is the year that we can make it to at least the conference finals. However the west is tough and teams are upgrading their rosters and getting better.

[Quake Griffin]

If we go on a year by year basis, nobody has picked him to win anything and he has never lost a series that he flat out should have won.

Typical NBA fan holds these two opinions:
- Clippers can't beat SAS or OKC
- Blake Griffin isn't all that (only recently letting up to recognize he's improving)


yet will still say it's his fault if he can't get past one of those teams.
It's annoying. Does he need to get past the 2nd round? yes. You play the game to win. But the fans cannot say that this team can't win, then try to bury them under the expectations of having talented guys like Jamaal Crawford Big Baby etc. etc. (talent depth), and then try to act like this team is too talented to lose in the 2nd round

[LACtdom]

Each year I hope CP becomes a bit more aggressive and scores more but he always is a pass first PG. We all know that he can becomes Mr 4th Qtr during big games, but maybe if he started earlier in games we might get further. Here's why:
1. Scores earlier then more likely to attract the double team (pass out to open shooter)
2. Has a great ability to draw fouls (ie a couple of fouls on Westbrook would reduce his playing time)

[mttwlsn16]

I hope he stops the halfcourt 3 BS in late game foul situations

[Quake Griffin]

I hope he stops the halfcourt 3 BS in late game foul situations

that was the beginning of the worst 30-45 seconds any person could have in his career.

he said he'd never do it again in an interview. gotta love him for being open, honest and not being bull headed.

[Sofia]

Not a top 5, but couldn't name 5 better players?

Trey has gotten pretty bad on the show, he's just awkward and everything he does to be funny is cringeworthy. I wouldn't care if he got dropped from the show.

[Sofia]

Also, someone else that can bothered, what were the records/seeds of the teams that have knocked CPs teams out of the playoffs?

[Wammy Giveaway]

What were the records/seeds of the teams that have knocked CPs teams out of the playoffs?

Loss #1 (2nd seeded Hornets)
2008: San Antonio Spurs (56-26, 3rd seed), 7 games, 2nd round (Spurs would lose to Lakers in conference)
Finals champion: Boston Celtics

Loss #2 (7th seeded Hornets)
2009: Denver Nuggets (54-28, 2nd seed), 5 games, 1st round (Nuggets would lose to Lakers in conference)
Finals champion: Los Angeles Lakers

Loss #3 (7th seeded Hornets)
2011: Los Angeles Lakers (57-25, 2nd seed), 6 games, 1st round (Lakers would lose to Mavericks in 2nd round)
Finals champion: Dallas Mavericks

Loss #4 (5th seeded Clippers)
2012: San Antonio Spurs (50-16, 1st seed), sweep, 2nd round (Spurs would lose to Thunder in conference)
Finals champion: Miami Heat

Loss #5 (4th seeded Clippers via division tiebreaker)
2013: Memphis Grizzlies (56-26, 5th seed), 6 games, 1st round (Grizzlies would lose to Spurs in conference)
Finals champion: Miami Heat
Note: Chris Paul was ejected in Game 6, the first of his career. This was his 3rd first round exit.

Loss #6 (3rd seeded Clippers)
2014: Oklahoma City Thunder (59-23, 2nd seed), 6 games, 2nd round (Thunder would lose to Spurs in conference)
Finals champion: San Antonio Spurs
Note: Chris Paul committed the worst blunders of his career in Game 5. This was his 3rd second round exit.

[Sofia]

So the worst team to knock his team out is a 2 seed 54 win Denver team that made conference finals. The level of competition he has lost to seems to be ignored when bringing up CPs post season record.

[og15]

Well there's only so much you can do as a player. Paul has had a total of two teams that could have made the conference finals, 07-08 Hornets, and 13-14 Clippers. 07-08 was his first time in the playoffs against a better team and he was the best player in the series.

Last season he had the blunder in game 5, but still lost to a great team, and he had a very good 1st half as a facilitator and 4th quarter as a scorer in game 6. People say "oh he didn't shoot enough early", actually he shot a good amount in the 3rd quarter. The problem is that people judge aggressiveness or "taking over" on results, not attempt. He missed in the 3rd and had some turnovers.

12-13, Blake got injured in practice after game 4, and Paul averaged 32/5/6 on like 60%+ TS% in game 5 and 6, but he was basically doing work by himself except game 6 where Barnes chipped in, but the team didn't defend, and they lost in spite of his excellent play.

People don't look at context, that's the problem, but if the Clippers stay healthy for the next 4 years, then yes, they should have more than 2nd round success. This will be the first time he's on a continuously good team.

People mention his Hornets teams as if they were good for more than one year. They were good in 07-08, after that they were never a good team again. Chandler and Peja were injured too much later, they had no depth and they had no secondary ball handlers.

It's even worse when people make cross conference comparisons to players who play 40 win teams in the first two rounds as if it is impressive to beat those teams. Paul's teams have never even played a team with the equivalent of less than 50 wins in the playoffs, ever. Memphis was 41-25 which is like 50 wins in an 82 game season. GS their first round opponent, 51 wins, they won. The "worst" team they have lost to was the 54 win Nuggets and that team went to the conference finals and had close series with the Lakers.

[og15]

Each year I hope CP becomes a bit more aggressive and scores more but he always is a pass first PG. We all know that he can becomes Mr 4th Qtr during big games, but maybe if he started earlier in games we might get further. Here's why:
1. Scores earlier then more likely to attract the double team (pass out to open shooter)
2. Has a great ability to draw fouls (ie a couple of fouls on Westbrook would reduce his playing time)

The non-aggressive Paul thing is only a regular season thing. Paul has averaged 19.6 PPG in the playoffs as a Clippers, but remember that includes the series vs SA where he had gotten injured before vs Memphis and was just unable to do much.

Again, 12-13 vs Memphis, Blake gets injured, and Paul goes 32/5/6 with 20 FGA/G in games 5 and 6. Last two seasons 21/4/9 with 49/43/82 shooting = 60% TS. There's a problem with the team if we're saying that the issue is that Paul needs to be more aggressive or score more or really do anything more on offense.

The reality is that people are so concerned about offense, but outside of the terrible SA series, the Clippers have produced enough offense to win every series they have played, but have not done enough on defense.

[Wammy Giveaway]

The "worst" team they have lost to was the 54 win Nuggets and that team went to the conference finals and had close series with the Lakers.

I wouldn't call the Nuggets the worst team. Carmelo Anthony was paired up with Chauncey Billups, who I considered a lucky charm, a special kind of player. Every where he went, save for a few teams, he made teams better. Pistons got a title, Nuggets made the conference finals, Clippers had the miracle Game 1 comeback vs. Grizzlies and their first Pacific Division. The luck ran out on a combination of his ACL injury and the bad coaching of Vinny Del Negro.

[Quake Griffin]

Well there's only so much you can do as a player. Paul has had a total of two teams that could have made the conference finals, 07-08 Hornets, and 13-14 Clippers. 07-08 was his first time in the playoffs against a better team and he was the best player in the series.

Last season he had the blunder in game 5, but still lost to a great team, and he had a very good 1st half as a facilitator and 4th quarter as a scorer in game 6. People say "oh he didn't shoot enough early", actually he shot a good amount in the 3rd quarter. The problem is that people judge aggressiveness or "taking over" on results, not attempt. He missed in the 3rd and had some turnovers.

12-13, Blake got injured in practice after game 4, and Paul averaged 32/5/6 on like 60%+ TS% in game 5 and 6, but he was basically doing work by himself except game 6 where Barnes chipped in, but the team didn't defend, and they lost in spite of his excellent play.

People don't look at context, that's the problem, but if the Clippers stay healthy for the next 4 years, then yes, they should have more than 2nd round success. This will be the first time he's on a continuously good team.

People mention his Hornets teams as if they were good for more than one year. They were good in 07-08, after that they were never a good team again. Chandler and Peja were injured too much later, they had no depth and they had no secondary ball handlers.

It's even worse when people make cross conference comparisons to players who play 40 win teams in the first two rounds as if it is impressive to beat those teams. Paul's teams have never even played a team with the equivalent of less than 50 wins in the playoffs, ever. Memphis was 41-25 which is like 50 wins in an 82 game season. GS their first round opponent, 51 wins, they won. The "worst" team they have lost to was the 54 win Nuggets and that team went to the conference finals and had close series with the Lakers.

im convinced most people who hold his lack of a CF appearance against him do a number of things:

1) ignore context
2) think that Hornets team was good after 08
3) believe the NBA playoffs in the Western Conference today is like 80s-early 2000s where the lower seeds are these 41-47 win teams that have almost have no shot of beating the higher seed.

do people realize that Memphis was a 7th seed last year because Marc Gasol missed significant time due to injury? One could make the case (I'm not gonna comb through history) that that is probably the best 7th seed in the history of the playoffs.

[Clemenza]

The only thing I expect from CP nowadays is to close out games in the 4th quarter which is his strength. He can still shake n bake but he's not going to overpower anyone or blow by any of these newer- younger- bigger guards. His close out ability is absolutely amazing- but but its ironic he pissed me off in game 5 against OKC in last years playoffs cause he was absolutely garbage in the final minutes of that game. I'm still having trouble realizing that we were on the verge of having a close out game at Staples to reach the WCF for the first time in franchise history. Its like we pay him $100 million plus to pretty much close out games and that's what failed at in the playoffs

- I like Paul on the Clipps but honestly I'd trade for a star SF for CP in a heartbeat. He's gone now but you keep a guy like Darren Collison at point and give me a Melo or Paul George at SF... And yeah I'm still mad we drafted Aminu instead of Paul George..

[LACtdom]

The only thing I expect from CP nowadays is to close out games in the 4th quarter which is his strength. He can still shake n bake but he's not going to overpower anyone or blow by any of these newer- younger- bigger guards. His close out ability is absolutely amazing- but but its ironic he pissed me off in game 5 against OKC in last years playoffs cause he was absolutely garbage in the final minutes of that game. I'm still having trouble realizing that we were on the verge of having a close out game at Staples to reach the WCF for the first time in franchise history. Its like we pay him $100 million plus to pretty much close out games and that's what failed at in the playoffs

- I like Paul on the Clipps but honestly I'd trade for a star SF for CP in a heartbeat. He's gone now but you keep a guy like Darren Collison at point and give me a Melo or Paul George at SF... And yeah I'm still mad we drafted Aminu instead of Paul George..

I don't think you realise how hard it is to facilitate those unrealistic trades and where do you draw the line? Paul for Joe Johnson? Also would you still be happy having neither CP or PG this year because you traded CP and PG is injured? Also if we're going back then you keep Bledsoe I reckon.

[Quake Griffin]

Chris Paul is more of a net positive than Melo or Paul George.

lol at all the division PG caused in the Pacers locker room last year with his off the court foolishness.

lol at a traditionally, chubby Melo, sporatic defense and volume shooting.

i would NEVER consider getting those two for Paul.


the other guys...Bron and KD....whatever....theyre two of the best players in the league.
but lmao at Melo and PG....nothnx.

[og15]

The "worst" team they have lost to was the 54 win Nuggets and that team went to the conference finals and had close series with the Lakers.

I wouldn't call the Nuggets the worst team. Carmelo Anthony was paired up with Chauncey Billups, who I considered a lucky charm, a special kind of player. Every where he went, save for a few teams, he made teams better. Pistons got a title, Nuggets made the conference finals, Clippers had the miracle Game 1 comeback vs. Grizzlies and their first Pacific Division. The luck ran out on a combination of his ACL injury and the bad coaching of Vinny Del Negro.

I had worst in quotations implying that all these teams were pretty good. Basically they always lost to very good teams. That said, actually the Grizzlies in 12-13 could be argued as the "worst" team a team with Chris Paul has lost to, but again, worst is very relative.

[og15]

Well there's only so much you can do as a player. Paul has had a total of two teams that could have made the conference finals, 07-08 Hornets, and 13-14 Clippers. 07-08 was his first time in the playoffs against a better team and he was the best player in the series.

Last season he had the blunder in game 5, but still lost to a great team, and he had a very good 1st half as a facilitator and 4th quarter as a scorer in game 6. People say "oh he didn't shoot enough early", actually he shot a good amount in the 3rd quarter. The problem is that people judge aggressiveness or "taking over" on results, not attempt. He missed in the 3rd and had some turnovers.

12-13, Blake got injured in practice after game 4, and Paul averaged 32/5/6 on like 60%+ TS% in game 5 and 6, but he was basically doing work by himself except game 6 where Barnes chipped in, but the team didn't defend, and they lost in spite of his excellent play.

People don't look at context, that's the problem, but if the Clippers stay healthy for the next 4 years, then yes, they should have more than 2nd round success. This will be the first time he's on a continuously good team.

People mention his Hornets teams as if they were good for more than one year. They were good in 07-08, after that they were never a good team again. Chandler and Peja were injured too much later, they had no depth and they had no secondary ball handlers.

It's even worse when people make cross conference comparisons to players who play 40 win teams in the first two rounds as if it is impressive to beat those teams. Paul's teams have never even played a team with the equivalent of less than 50 wins in the playoffs, ever. Memphis was 41-25 which is like 50 wins in an 82 game season. GS their first round opponent, 51 wins, they won. The "worst" team they have lost to was the 54 win Nuggets and that team went to the conference finals and had close series with the Lakers.

im convinced most people who hold his lack of a CF appearance against him do a number of things:

1) ignore context
2) think that Hornets team was good after 08
3) believe the NBA playoffs in the Western Conference today is like 80s-early 2000s where the lower seeds are these 41-47 win teams that have almost have no shot of beating the higher seed.

do people realize that Memphis was a 7th seed last year because Marc Gasol missed significant time due to injury? One could make the case (I'm not gonna comb through history) that that is probably the best 7th seed in the history of the playoffs.

Yea, I think people thought the Hornets were good for every season after 07-08 or something. Of courses actually, the Hornets were good in 07-08 only. That was the only season they had a chance of doing more than first round talent wise In 08-09 they were a first round exit team who could be a second round exit team if everything fell into place, but the health of two starters, a poorly built roster and a team over-reliant on the playmaking and scoring of one player to function, they were doomed to fail.

After that they had barely playoff level teams, so it doesn't make logical sense to make any conclusions from that.