Around the NBA: Playoff Edition #2

[Rerisen]

Completely out of the blue but I was right about Chris Paul. Since after 2008, he's been overrated and as I stated, would never make WCF because he can't carry a team. 7 years later, I feel good about that.

Just our luck Chris Paul does get fed up and leave, comes to Chicago, then falls apart to age and injury like DWade.

And not like he's won even in his prime or been able to close playoff series.

[jumpmanjay]

Avery Bradley did not handily match and surpass Jimmy Butler. Let's not be silly. Butler 23/7/4 per game, while being trapped and doubled. Bradley 16/4/3 per game while never being trapped or doubled, in fact often left open because of IT.

SMH

This x100. Plus Jimmy doing that whilst injured.

Sent from my Pixel XL using RealGM mobile app

[DanTown8587]

Completely out of the blue but I was right about Chris Paul. Since after 2008, he's been overrated and as I stated, would never make WCF because he can't carry a team. 7 years later, I feel good about that.

Just our luck Chris Paul does get fed up and leave, comes to Chicago, then falls apart to age and injury like DWade.

And not like he's won even in his prime or been able to close playoff series.

2017 - Blake gets hurt, loses in 7.
2016 - Blake gets hurt, Paul gets hurt, loses in 6.
2015 - Beat Spurs (defending champs) in 7 when he goes for 27 + winning basket in round one, loses to Houston in round 2. Gets hurt, misses two games, goes for 21-10 on .619 TS%.
2014 - Beat Golden State (last West team to do so), loses to OKC in six averaging 22-12.

I guess my question is, how is he any worse than Jimmy Butler at closing out series or "winning" in his prime when he's lost to elite teams or had major injury issues his career?

[Rerisen]

Completely out of the blue but I was right about Chris Paul. Since after 2008, he's been overrated and as I stated, would never make WCF because he can't carry a team. 7 years later, I feel good about that.

Just our luck Chris Paul does get fed up and leave, comes to Chicago, then falls apart to age and injury like DWade.

And not like he's won even in his prime or been able to close playoff series.

2017 - Blake gets hurt, loses in 7.
2016 - Blake gets hurt, Paul gets hurt, loses in 6.
2015 - Beat Spurs (defending champs) in 7 when he goes for 27 + winning basket in round one, loses to Houston in round 2. Gets hurt, misses two games, goes for 21-10 on .619 TS%.
2014 - Beat Golden State (last West team to do so), loses to OKC in six averaging 22-12.

I guess my question is, how is he any worse than Jimmy Butler at closing out series or "winning" in his prime when he's lost to elite teams or had major injury issues his career?

Don't think he is, but CP3 is supposed to be way better than JB, a top 3 player many years.

He's also made some individual key mistakes in closing minutes of critical games.

[DanTown8587]

Strat and I were trying to tell you guys, all that fussing about the Bulls' defense was misplaced. Boston plays a midget team that is built to score, not defend. Any remaining playoff team that holds those guys to 105 points per game, as we did, will win the series.

We defended just fine. The team's offense is terrible, although the FO drafts mostly for offense, and Fred was hired for offense.

Eh, their offense was 8th, defense 13th, so neither side what you would call elite.

Ironic thing is the first 2 games the narratives here, their board, and the media, was they just don't have enough reliable backup offensively once you defend IT good (like Jimmy did down the stretch).

They've also been the team to mostly benefit from injuries. The Bulls it was Rondo, the Wizards it's Morris and while neither guy is what you can all-world, both guys are INCREDIBLY valuable to the roles their teams needed and who their backup is. We saw the Bulls struggle without Rondo calling out sets on both sides and for the Wizards, no Morris means a lot of Gortat, who simply can't guard Horford in space.

[DanTown8587]

Just our luck Chris Paul does get fed up and leave, comes to Chicago, then falls apart to age and injury like DWade.

And not like he's won even in his prime or been able to close playoff series.

2017 - Blake gets hurt, loses in 7.
2016 - Blake gets hurt, Paul gets hurt, loses in 6.
2015 - Beat Spurs (defending champs) in 7 when he goes for 27 + winning basket in round one, loses to Houston in round 2. Gets hurt, misses two games, goes for 21-10 on .619 TS%.
2014 - Beat Golden State (last West team to do so), loses to OKC in six averaging 22-12.

I guess my question is, how is he any worse than Jimmy Butler at closing out series or "winning" in his prime when he's lost to elite teams or had major injury issues his career?

He's also made some individual key mistakes in closing minutes of critical games.

So does every player who ends up losing. It's the nature of basketball.

My point was it's weird you STAUNCHLY defend Jimmy Butler v Derrick Rose and then comment on lack of teammates, etc yet with Paul, you break out into what is essentially anti-Jimmy arguments

"He can't lead a team"
"He doesn't take over late"
"He's not a winner"

Jimmy Butler and Chris Paul are in virtually similar situations. Paul is older but he's also had a very good run of success in the playoffs and lost in some heart breaking ways.

I mean, Paul was the only reason there was a game 7 anyway.

[Rerisen]

So does every player who ends up losing. It's the nature of basketball.

Historically trying to win with your best player being the smallest guy on the floor hasn't gone too well, makes me uneasy.

I'm not sure if its to do just with the height though, but perhaps by virtue of the position, these team builds involve one little guy controlling everything, which ends up easier to gameplan than the more ensemble type attack.

[Rerisen]

2017 - Blake gets hurt, loses in 7.
2016 - Blake gets hurt, Paul gets hurt, loses in 6.
2015 - Beat Spurs (defending champs) in 7 when he goes for 27 + winning basket in round one, loses to Houston in round 2. Gets hurt, misses two games, goes for 21-10 on .619 TS%.
2014 - Beat Golden State (last West team to do so), loses to OKC in six averaging 22-12.

I guess my question is, how is he any worse than Jimmy Butler at closing out series or "winning" in his prime when he's lost to elite teams or had major injury issues his career?

He's also made some individual key mistakes in closing minutes of critical games.

So does every player who ends up losing. It's the nature of basketball.

My point was it's weird you STAUNCHLY defend Jimmy Butler v Derrick Rose and then comment on lack of teammates, etc yet with Paul, you break out into what is essentially anti-Jimmy arguments

"He can't lead a team"
"He doesn't take over late"
"He's not a winner"

Jimmy Butler and Chris Paul are in virtually similar situations. Paul is older but he's also had a very good run of success in the playoffs and lost in some heart breaking ways.

I mean, Paul was the only reason there was a game 7 anyway.

Check my edit, I said Jimmy hasn't done any better. Then again Butler's never been rated a top 3 league player, and he's only been in 2 series as a star.

Also JB is already here, its either keep him or blow it up. Not like our choice is sign JB or sign Chris Paul, so not seeing a lot of relevance in the comparison.

[Rerisen]

My point was it's weird you STAUNCHLY defend Jimmy Butler v Derrick Rose

Make no mistake, I'm under no illusion Butler OR Rose was a great enough superstar of the type historically give you good odds to win a title with.

I don't think either were. And the amount of posts I dedicated to arguing Butler over Rose is not indicative of thinking there was some huge gap between those two, I think it is relatively close actually.

The difference with Paul is many DO/DID think he is on that LeBron, Curry, MJ level of a superstar and I'm skeptical of it being true.

[DanTown8587]

He's also made some individual key mistakes in closing minutes of critical games.

So does every player who ends up losing. It's the nature of basketball.

My point was it's weird you STAUNCHLY defend Jimmy Butler v Derrick Rose and then comment on lack of teammates, etc yet with Paul, you break out into what is essentially anti-Jimmy arguments

"He can't lead a team"
"He doesn't take over late"
"He's not a winner"

Jimmy Butler and Chris Paul are in virtually similar situations. Paul is older but he's also had a very good run of success in the playoffs and lost in some heart breaking ways.

I mean, Paul was the only reason there was a game 7 anyway.

Check my edit, I said Jimmy hasn't done any better. Then again Butler's never been rated a top 3 league player, and he's only been in 2 series as a star.

Who the **** has called Chris Paul a top 3 player in at least the past five years?

I mean, you realize that 12 times this series a Clipper scored 20 points

Paul - 6
Griffin - 2
Crawford - 2
Jordan - 1
Reddick - 1

Call me when Chris Paul has someone "go with him" in a series and they lose when they're healthy. The problem isn't that Chris Paul is small or can't play well in the playoffs, the problem is that the entire team he plays on RELIES on him to get them looks (Jordan at the rim, Griffin in the mid-range, Reddick on the perimeter) to the point that in a playoff series, those guys get scouted out. If Chris Paul was here, the Bulls would be a top 3 team in the East if you did NOTHING else but swap Rondo for Paul.

I don't think he'll come here but if he did because Wade convinced him (and you gave Wade more money over two years to do it), it wouldn't be the worst move this franchise has ever done. Paul at 32, playing alongside a guy like Butler to keep him fresh and allow him to not be 100% on, should give you enough to be good. This isn't Wade at 35 or Gasol at 35.

[kulaz3000]

As great as Chris Paul is, we really need to get younger.

Sure, we could go to the Celtics route, and try to win one Championship, but we put all our chips on older players, the fall from grace is a lot steeper if all goes to sh**.

[Rerisen]

Who the **** has called Chris Paul a top 3 player in at least the past five years?

You must not read the Player Comparison board.

Chris Paul had the #1 RPM in the league this year, but because he missed 20 games he couldn't get in a discussion with guys like Russ or Harden. But if not for that, then by the metrics he would certainly have had arguments.

the problem is that the entire team he plays on RELIES on him to get them looks

That's because with Chris Paul that's the only way you'll ever play. It's like having Steve Nash or Rondo.

Funny when Paul was injured for long periods the last couple years, they ran offense through Blake, and he was looking like Point Forward averaging up near 10 assists most games.

(Jordan at the rim, Griffin in the mid-range, Reddick on the perimeter) to the point that in a playoff series, those guys get scouted out. If Chris Paul was here, the Bulls would be a top 3 team in the East if you did NOTHING else but swap Rondo for Paul.

I agree, because the East sucks.

We'd be top 3 in the East if Gordon Hayward came here too. But Gordon Hayward is just considered an All-Star, while CP3 is considered the greatest PG since Magic Johnson. But I'm not sure which would help more tbh.

[DanTown8587]

My point was it's weird you STAUNCHLY defend Jimmy Butler v Derrick Rose

Make no mistake, I'm under no illusion Butler OR Rose was a great enough superstar of the type historically give you good odds to win a title with.

I don't think either were. And the amount of posts I dedicated to arguing Butler over Rose is not indicative of thinking there was some huge gap between those two, I think it is relatively close actually.

The difference with Paul is many DO/DID think he is on that LeBron, Curry, MJ level of a superstar and I'm skeptical of it being true.

I mean, this is a horrible strawman argument. Who on this earth has made a legit argument that CP3 is a top 5-10 of all time player like Curry the past two years, LBJ, and Jordan are? I mean, come on man. That's laughably stupid to the point that no one believes that. Chris Paul is what Jimmy Butler is: good enough to be in that top 7-12 range depending on how you want to rank and if he played with another guy who had that level, I think you'd see him win more. To be honest, I think his problem is that he makes players around him better to the detriment of how people evaluate his team. Because he makes guys better, people say "why don't they win more" when in fact, his team is mostly hot garbage without him.

Chris Paul net rating in LAC
2016-17 - +19.6
+16.5
+20.9
+9.1
+6.7
+14

[Rerisen]

Chris Paul is what Jimmy Butler is: good enough to be in that top 7-12 range depending on how you want to rank

When Derrick Rose won MVP, many said Chris Paul was better. How is that not Top 3?

Back then he was *always* in discussions of the top 3 player, precisely because of some of the stats you cited (and I did earlier).

He was never just considered on a Butler 7-12 range.

You say well that isn't the last 5 years anymore, but I say, why not, when he actually plays, all his numbers are just about the same as 5 years ago, PER, TS%, On/off, etc, so the only reason he's not considered up there is he tends to miss regular seasons games.

My point, playoff Chris Paul, just might not be quite as good as his regular season stats/impact make out, do to the nature of 'He is the system' PG builds.

[Dan Z]

As great as Chris Paul is, we really need to get younger.

Sure, we could go to the Celtics route, and try to win one Championship, but we put all our chips on older players, the fall from grace is a lot steeper if all goes to sh**.

The problem is we don't have the assets that the Celtics had to build that team. Al Jefferson and others for KG. #5 pick for Ray Allen. Plus they already had Paul Pierce and Rondo was there to develop.

We have our Pierce type of player in Butler, but don't have the rest. Also with Wade opting in we don't have the cap space.

[Rerisen]

Would I take Chris Paul for the Bulls next year?

Sure, what else do we have going. Nothing, and he's about 20x better than the charlatan Rondo that people have elevated to messiah on 2 games.

But would it be some coup de grace move that solves our problems, likely not. And the threat of more injury and age decline IS actually real at his age, and owing to his past injuries, which tend to shorten careers.

[Rerisen]

Today CP3 was 6-19 with 13 points in a closing game. That's not good enough, even without Blake Griffin.

I think at the end of the day, critical situation, the NBA is won via take over scoring guys far more often than setup guys, which tend to be better for churning out regular season wins.

[DanTown8587]

Would I take Chris Paul for the Bulls next year?

Sure, what else do we have going. Nothing, and he's about 20x better than the charlatan Rondo that people have elevated to messiah on 2 games.

But would it be some coup de grace move that solves our problems, likely not. And the threat of more injury and age decline IS actually real at his age, and owing to his past injuries, which tend to shorten careers.

You'd be hardpressed to find a 32-35 year old run of play from HOF level players that you wouldn't want. Sure they get older but signing him does four things

1. It drastically makes you a contender in your conference tomorrow outside of Cleveland
2. It drastically improves the odds you sign another player in 2018 or 2019 when Wade's money comes off the books
3. It saves the franchise from dipping in to an abyss where they can't get enough value from Jimmy to justify trading him but they also can't add enough to win with him either
4. It attracts a certain coach to your team in a year if you move on from Fred

I understand that smaller players "age" quicker but Paul is one of the most cerebral players in the league that I assume he falls more on the Stockton/Nash age curve (Guys who threw up 20+ PER well in to their 30s) than say Iverson types who once they lost a step, were basically out of the league.

[kyrv]

Would I take Chris Paul for the Bulls next year?

Sure, what else do we have going. Nothing, and he's about 20x better than the charlatan Rondo that people have elevated to messiah on 2 games.

But would it be some coup de grace move that solves our problems, likely not. And the threat of more injury and age decline IS actually real at his age, and owing to his past injuries, which tend to shorten careers.

You'd be hardpressed to find a 32-35 year old run of play from HOF level players that you wouldn't want. Sure they get older but signing him does four things

1. It drastically makes you a contender in your conference tomorrow outside of Cleveland
2. It drastically improves the odds you sign another player in 2018 or 2019 when Wade's money comes off the books
3. It saves the franchise from dipping in to an abyss where they can't get enough value from Jimmy to justify trading him but they also can't add enough to win with him either
4. It attracts a certain coach to your team in a year if you move on from Fred

I understand that smaller players "age" quicker but Paul is one of the most cerebral players in the league that I assume he falls more on the Stockton/Nash age curve (Guys who threw up 20+ PER well in to their 30s) than say Iverson types who once they lost a step, were basically out of the league.

I don't know about Paul's health or desire, but I agree he should have good old man game.

As Re said, not like we would have much better going on.

I love the way Pierce had the self awareness about his play and his role as he aged. I will admit I thought we *might* get that from Wade. It's generally easier and more common when leaving your title team. Maybe Wade will next year, coming back from his injury would have made a nice easy move to 6th man.

[Rerisen]

FWIW while I'm not convinced on Chris Paul's past or even current ceiling as measured by some statistics, I do think he'd be a relatively strong fit with Butler.

I think Rondo needs to control the ball a little *too* much to be maximized, such that it diminishes Butler, but not in a way that is maximizing the team. Jimmy is good enough to do significant playrunning every game, just not as much as a LeBron or Harden, the problem is when Jimmy has the ball, Rondo is a big liability off ball, and makes it harder for JB, which in turn makes people think Jimmy stinks as a playmaker.

Chris Paul could run the majority of your offense, let Jimmy do 25-33% of the playmaking as well (in fact I think this is what Chris Paul has needed himself!) but when Jimmy has the ball, CP3 would not be a liability due to his excellent shooting.

But how or why he would come here, other than being friends with Wade -and Wade said he's not going to recruit 'just to have a friend on the team' - is much harder to rationalize.