Chris Paul 21-22 Thread

[Outside]

I can believe that Paul had a quad injury, but:

-- Everyone has something at this time of year.
-- No one is talking about Booker's hamstring or Luka's calf.
-- There was nothing about Paul's play that made you think he was hurt other than the fact that he stunk. It wasn't like last year when he obviously had a shoulder nerve issue and could barely lift his arm.
-- Did his quad prevent him from being a veteran leader? I don't recall him rallying the team or using his voice in huddles like his value as an ATG leader would suggest.
-- This just gives power to the "CP is always hurt in the postseason" narrative.

It's quite the fall from "why isn't he an MVP candidate?" in the RS and 14-for-14 and Luka-hunting Point God in the PS to this.

Does it affect his legacy? My brain tries to tell me no, but it also tells me that this late-career phase starting in OKC was boosting his legacy by showing the level of leadership and floor/ceiling raising that was countering the lack of PS success narratives that had dogged him. Fair or not, this tarnishes all the late-career legacy-boosting that was helping him.

So you clearly aren't here like some others just to troll Paul. So what is your explanation for his play falling off a cliff if not injury? Is it Dallas switching the matchup and he just couldn't handle Dorian Finney-Smith?

As to how any of this defines or doesn't his legacy is for everyone to decide for themselves. But I'm finding myself disturbed by the tenor of the conversation around Paul without anyone offering up any explanation other than "choker". Is that what you think he did?

I truly have no idea. It makes no sense to me.

As far as shooting goes, it wasn't like he started missing everything, because his percentages were still excellent. For the Dallas series:

55.4 FG%
47.8 3P%
91.7 FT%
66.9 TS%

I mean, that's ridiculously outstanding. But his attempts dropped big-time. He quit shooting. He quit playing aggressively.

The assists and turnovers also make no sense to me. Maybe that affected him to the point that he lost aggressiveness in all areas? But what caused his passing ability to desert him? It's about the most reliable aspect of his game.

A leg injury would be one explanation, not allowing him to move like he usually does, get to his spots, or get elevation on his shot, which he needs to get it over people. But again, I didn't see him limping out there, so that doesn't support that theory. Maybe something else physical was going on, but I just don't know.

The post-birthday Chris Paul is a mystery to me, but everything I'm hearing leads me to think it was a team-wide breakdown and he went down with everyone else.

Something is going to come out eventually. Such a massively disappointing end to their season.

[Lost92Bricks]

According to the CP3 fanboys on this site.


It is Griffin's fault that CP3 had one of the worst meltdowns of all time in game 5 against OKC in 2014 which may have cost the Clippers a chance to make the finals that year.

That series is a good example actually, CP3 had that meltdown but he actually played well and was carrying the team.

They still win the series if Griffin (at his peak) does better than 22/8 on 54 TS%. Nobody cares about it because he wasn't really a great player.

[falcolombardi]

According to the CP3 fanboys on this site.


It is Griffin's fault that CP3 had one of the worst meltdowns of all time in game 5 against OKC in 2014 which may have cost the Clippers a chance to make the finals that year.

That series is a good example actually, CP3 had that meltdown but he actually played well and was carrying the team.

They still win the series if Griffin (at his peak) does better than 22/8 on 54 TS%.

it makes more sense to blame their defense and bench units

chris paul was +16 across 4 series losses betwrrn 13-17

jamal crawford was -17 across those same 4 series while tanking both the offense and defense

those clippers needed a sixth man or backup guard thst actually was a positive in offense and more defensive players (specially wings) and less no defense scorers thst are not even that good at scoring (reddick, crawford)

[MartinToVaught]

there is a phrase called "letting perfect be the enemy of good" about people who only do thinghs that are ideal and fail to compromise/settle when it is the correct choice

i wonder if paul suffers some of it, if he was hurt he knows his shootikg is likely to be off, he probablt will shot 40% on midrange or whatever which in normal circunstances would be bad for the suns

so if he cannot shot well, he wont shot at all, sometimes being too much of a perfectionist is a bad thingh

On a similar note, I kind of think CP3 is just the NBA equivalent of a game manager QB in football. His style of playing it safe and avoiding turnovers at all costs could be compared to guys like Alex Smith who rely on dinking and dunking and are uncomfortable throwing downfield. And in both cases you get the same low ceiling come playoff time where you'd need the rest of the team to be absolutely perfect to have any real chance. It's not a perfect analogy due to the differences between the sports, but there might be something to this.

[Bergmaniac]

Meanwhile in reality, every Clipper not named CP3/Blake outscored every Thunder not named Durant/Westbrook that series, 60 PPG to 46 PPG. That series would have been a convincing win for the Clippers if CP3 stepped up as the "Point God" he's hyped up to be instead of getting outplayed by Westbrook.

Westbrook was my favourite player in the league by far back then and I was rooting hard for the Thunder in this series. On the other hand, I dislike Paul for his dirty play and flopping. Yet I don't think Westbrook outplayed Paul at all in this series at all. He scored a few more PPG, but Paul was the better playmaker and defender. The impact stats were very much in Paul's favour. At best it was a wash.

The Clippers won comfortably the minutes Paul was on the court. He averaged 22.5 PPG on excellent efficiency and 11.8 APG. The Clippers offense was amazing when he played (119.6 Ortg) and a complete train wreck when he was on the bench (82.1). Paul did his job, he led an absolutely elite offense against a top defensive team and did his part on D. On the other hand Jamal Crawford, the 6th man of the year that season, shot 35% for the series and 29% from 3 and was even worse on defense but I guess that's Chris Paul's fault too. The Thunder this season were even more top heavy than usual and were usually losing when their superstars were on the bench, but in this series that wasn't the case at all because the Clippers bench was a disaster. Yeah, they may have scored more points than the Thunder bench, but their efficiency was dreadful. Crawford and Collison had TS% below 47%.

[falcolombardi]

there is a phrase called "letting perfect be the enemy of good" about people who only do thinghs that are ideal and fail to compromise/settle when it is the correct choice

i wonder if paul suffers some of it, if he was hurt he knows his shootikg is likely to be off, he probablt will shot 40% on midrange or whatever which in normal circunstances would be bad for the suns

so if he cannot shot well, he wont shot at all, sometimes being too much of a perfectionist is a bad thingh

On a similar note, I kind of think CP3 is just the NBA equivalent of a game manager QB in football. His style of playing it safe and avoiding turnovers at all costs could be compared to guys like Alex Smith who rely on dinking and dunking and are uncomfortable throwing downfield. And in both cases you get the same low ceiling come playoff time where you'd need the rest of the team to be absolutely perfect to have any real chance. It's not a perfect analogy due to the differences between the sports, but there might be something to this.

not really, chris paul offenses were fantaatic in the playoffs

in his 4 series losses from 13-17 chris paul teams scored 128 points per 100 with him on court

their defense and not chris paul minutes were the dreadful ones

[Lost92Bricks]

On a similar note, I kind of think CP3 is just the NBA equivalent of a game manager QB in football. His style of playing it safe and avoiding turnovers at all costs could be compared to guys like Alex Smith who rely on dinking and dunking and are uncomfortable throwing downfield. And in both cases you get the same low ceiling come playoff time where you'd need the rest of the team to be absolutely perfect to have any real chance. It's not a perfect analogy due to the differences between the sports, but there might be something to this.

No, he just needs a volume scorer that can take pressure off him. Booker would be perfect if CP was in his prime.

His PG play is great, but he cannot carry a team through scoring. And he cannot be the best defender on the team either.

[MyUniBroDavis]

there is a phrase called "letting perfect be the enemy of good" about people who only do thinghs that are ideal and fail to compromise/settle when it is the correct choice

i wonder if paul suffers some of it, if he was hurt he knows his shootikg is likely to be off, he probablt will shot 40% on midrange or whatever which in normal circunstances would be bad for the suns

so if he cannot shot well, he wont shot at all, sometimes being too much of a perfectionist is a bad thingh

On a similar note, I kind of think CP3 is just the NBA equivalent of a game manager QB in football. His style of playing it safe and avoiding turnovers at all costs could be compared to guys like Alex Smith who rely on dinking and dunking and are uncomfortable throwing downfield. And in both cases you get the same low ceiling come playoff time where you'd need the rest of the team to be absolutely perfect to have any real chance. It's not a perfect analogy due to the differences between the sports, but there might be something to this.

not really, chris paul offenses were fantaatic in the playoffs

in his 4 series losses from 13-17 chris paul teams scored 128 points per 100 with him on court

their defense and not chris paul minutes were the dreadful ones

Dude there’s no way that’s true lol, I think you thought off rtg in the advanced data game log in bball ref was their on court offensive rtg, that’s basically just a stat that takes into account how the team did, but it’s pretty arbitrary I think and doesn’t mean much lol

Nba.com on court offensive rtg for the team

That being said comparing offensive rtg for when a guy is on the court vs the whole team rotations of other team isn’t good practice. I’m putting Westbrook as a comparison below

2013 105.6 (17th)
110.6 brook

2014 117.6 (119.6 vs okc) (1st for both obviously)
110.2 brook

2015 108.7 (7th) (111 vs Houston) (4th)
Missedbrook

2016 105.2 (20th)
115.3 brook

2017 108.9 (15th)
108.6 brook

I’m not really agreeing that he puts a ceiling on your offense and I’m mostly meming when talking about him after game 7, but it’s not as if he was constantly leading the greatest offense of all time when he was on the court over those years

128 is better than curry in the court in 2017, there was literally no shot he did that for an extended period of time in every series he lost lol

[falcolombardi]

On a similar note, I kind of think CP3 is just the NBA equivalent of a game manager QB in football. His style of playing it safe and avoiding turnovers at all costs could be compared to guys like Alex Smith who rely on dinking and dunking and are uncomfortable throwing downfield. And in both cases you get the same low ceiling come playoff time where you'd need the rest of the team to be absolutely perfect to have any real chance. It's not a perfect analogy due to the differences between the sports, but there might be something to this.

not really, chris paul offenses were fantaatic in the playoffs

in his 4 series losses from 13-17 chris paul teams scored 128 points per 100 with him on court

their defense and not chris paul minutes were the dreadful ones

Dude there’s no way that’s true lol, I think you thought off rtg in the advanced data game log in bball ref was their on court offensive rtg, that’s basically just a stat that takes into account how the team did, but it’s pretty arbitrary I think and doesn’t mean much lol

Nba.com on court offensive rtg for the team

That being said comparing offensive rtg for when a guy is on the court vs the whole team rotations of other team isn’t good practice. I’m putting Westbrook as a comparison below

2013 105.6 (17th)
110.6 brook

2014 117.6 (119.6 vs okc) (1st for both obviously)
110.2 brook

2015 108.7 (7th) (111 vs Houston) (4th)
Missedbrook

2016 105.2 (20th)
115.3 brook

2017 108.9 (15th)
108.6 brook

I’m not really agreeing that he puts a ceiling on your offense and I’m mostly meming when talking about him after game 7, but it’s not as if he was constantly leading the greatest offense of all time when he was on the court over those years

128 is better than curry in the court in 2017, there was literally no shot he did that for an extended period of time in every series he lost lol

i usedd bball ref, and checked the series stats for his teams in losses (used 13,14,15,17) didnt include 16 cause he missed a lot of the series, which means that is actuslly a somewhat small sample size of 4 series

i was not saying his teams averaged 128 points per 100, only during those 4 series losses he is often blamed for, hence my point that offense underpeeformance was not really the issue

chris paul offensive rating in 2013 vs memphis is 131, 128 vs okc a year later, 131 vs houston and 122 vs utah

if bball ref data is wrong i would have to compare with nba.com

[JordansBulls]

They need someone like a Lonzo Ball on this team. No way they will make it back anymore without a major acquisition.

[MyUniBroDavis]

not really, chris paul offenses were fantaatic in the playoffs

in his 4 series losses from 13-17 chris paul teams scored 128 points per 100 with him on court

their defense and not chris paul minutes were the dreadful ones

Dude there’s no way that’s true lol, I think you thought off rtg in the advanced data game log in bball ref was their on court offensive rtg, that’s basically just a stat that takes into account how the team did, but it’s pretty arbitrary I think and doesn’t mean much lol

Nba.com on court offensive rtg for the team

That being said comparing offensive rtg for when a guy is on the court vs the whole team rotations of other team isn’t good practice. I’m putting Westbrook as a comparison below

2013 105.6 (17th)
110.6 brook

2014 117.6 (119.6 vs okc) (1st for both obviously)
110.2 brook

2015 108.7 (7th) (111 vs Houston) (4th)
Missedbrook

2016 105.2 (20th)
115.3 brook

2017 108.9 (15th)
108.6 brook

I’m not really agreeing that he puts a ceiling on your offense and I’m mostly meming when talking about him after game 7, but it’s not as if he was constantly leading the greatest offense of all time when he was on the court over those years

128 is better than curry in the court in 2017, there was literally no shot he did that for an extended period of time in every series he lost lol

i usedd bball ref, and checked the series stats for his teams in losses (used 13,14,15,17) didnt include 16 cause he missed a lot of the series, which means that is actuslly a somewhat small sample size of 4 series

i was not saying his teams averaged 128 points per 100, only during those 4 series losses he is often blamed for, hence my point that offense underpeeformance was not really the issue

chris paul offensive rating in 2013 vs memphis is 131, 128 vs okc a year later, 131 vs houston and 122 vs utah

if bball ref data is wrong i would have to compare with nba.com

Dude, I’m trying to tell you that
his offensive rating =/= the teams offensive rtg with him on the court.

Bball ref glossary:

ORtg -- Offensive Rating
An estimate of points produced (players) or scored (teams) per 100 possessions

Let me put it this way, compare his offensive rtg from that data, to his on/off data in 2013 and 2017 where he got bounced in the first round

I put the offensive rtg for the team when they got bounced in the second round in parenthesis too lol

Bball ref data is a bit off, but I usually use it because it’s easier and they’ll be a bit off for everyone ish anyways

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paulch01/on-off/2013

It was clearly not 131 against memphis, here it’s 107.4

[falcolombardi]

Dude there’s no way that’s true lol, I think you thought off rtg in the advanced data game log in bball ref was their on court offensive rtg, that’s basically just a stat that takes into account how the team did, but it’s pretty arbitrary I think and doesn’t mean much lol

Nba.com on court offensive rtg for the team

That being said comparing offensive rtg for when a guy is on the court vs the whole team rotations of other team isn’t good practice. I’m putting Westbrook as a comparison below

2013 105.6 (17th)
110.6 brook

2014 117.6 (119.6 vs okc) (1st for both obviously)
110.2 brook

2015 108.7 (7th) (111 vs Houston) (4th)
Missedbrook

2016 105.2 (20th)
115.3 brook

2017 108.9 (15th)
108.6 brook

I’m not really agreeing that he puts a ceiling on your offense and I’m mostly meming when talking about him after game 7, but it’s not as if he was constantly leading the greatest offense of all time when he was on the court over those years

128 is better than curry in the court in 2017, there was literally no shot he did that for an extended period of time in every series he lost lol

i usedd bball ref, and checked the series stats for his teams in losses (used 13,14,15,17) didnt include 16 cause he missed a lot of the series, which means that is actuslly a somewhat small sample size of 4 series

i was not saying his teams averaged 128 points per 100, only during those 4 series losses he is often blamed for, hence my point that offense underpeeformance was not really the issue

chris paul offensive rating in 2013 vs memphis is 131, 128 vs okc a year later, 131 vs houston and 122 vs utah

if bball ref data is wrong i would have to compare with nba.com

Dude, I’m trying to tell you that
his offensive rating =/= the teams offensive rtg with him on the court.

Bball ref glossary:

ORtg -- Offensive Rating
An estimate of points produced (players) or scored (teams) per 100 possessions

Let me put it this way, compare his offensive rtg from that data, to his on/off data in 2013 and 2017 where he got bounced in the first round

I put the offensive rtg for the team when they got bounced in the second round in parenthesis too lol

Bball ref data is a bit off, but I usually use it because it’s easier and they’ll be a bit off for everyone ish anyways

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paulch01/on-off/2013

It was clearly not 131 against memphis, here it’s 107.4

ok, i got it

that is very confusing then why they put a 131 for him in the clipper series stats

thanks for catching my mistake there

[MyUniBroDavis]

i usedd bball ref, and checked the series stats for his teams in losses (used 13,14,15,17) didnt include 16 cause he missed a lot of the series, which means that is actuslly a somewhat small sample size of 4 series

i was not saying his teams averaged 128 points per 100, only during those 4 series losses he is often blamed for, hence my point that offense underpeeformance was not really the issue


if bball ref data is wrong i would have to compare with nba.com

Dude, I’m trying to tell you that
his offensive rating =/= the teams offensive rtg with him on the court.

Bball ref glossary:

ORtg -- Offensive Rating
An estimate of points produced (players) or scored (teams) per 100 possessions

Let me put it this way, compare his offensive rtg from that data, to his on/off data in 2013 and 2017 where he got bounced in the first round

I put the offensive rtg for the team when they got bounced in the second round in parenthesis too lol

Bball ref data is a bit off, but I usually use it because it’s easier and they’ll be a bit off for everyone ish anyways

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paulch01/on-off/2013

It was clearly not 131 against memphis, here it’s 107.4

ok, i got it

that is very confusing then why they put a 131 for him in the clipper series stats

Okay

So when you go to the series stats, and it shows all the off rtg data in the advanced box score

That stat is NOT the offensive rtg of the team with him on the floor, it’s an estimate of points produced by the player per 100 possessions (or something like that)

In either case that stat isn’t from play by play data, so when u said

“chris paul offensive rating in 2013 vs memphis is 131, 128 vs okc a year later, 131 vs houston and 122 vs utah“

None of this was the teams offensive rtg with Paul on the floor

Think about the off rtg and def rtg stats on the series like PER, in terms of what it is honestly. They aren’t the same things at all but it’s more similar to PER than “play by play data showing how well a team scored with that player on the court” in terms of it being direct play by play data vs just a metric that isn’t based on that

But yeah relatively speaking the offenses aren’t crazy during those series, I’m not saying that as a knock on Paul, since I don’t really agree he limits your offenses in the playoffs, but like, yeah he hasn’t been like steroids curry and bron in that regard

131 for example would be better than any lebron series in 2017, in fact 122 would be 2nd in that run I think, so it’s just completely unrealistic lol

[falcolombardi]

Dude, I’m trying to tell you that
his offensive rating =/= the teams offensive rtg with him on the court.

Bball ref glossary:

ORtg -- Offensive Rating
An estimate of points produced (players) or scored (teams) per 100 possessions

Let me put it this way, compare his offensive rtg from that data, to his on/off data in 2013 and 2017 where he got bounced in the first round

I put the offensive rtg for the team when they got bounced in the second round in parenthesis too lol

Bball ref data is a bit off, but I usually use it because it’s easier and they’ll be a bit off for everyone ish anyways

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paulch01/on-off/2013

It was clearly not 131 against memphis, here it’s 107.4

ok, i got it

that is very confusing then why they put a 131 for him in the clipper series stats

Okay

So when you go to the series stats, and it shows all the off rtg data in the advanced box score

That stat is NOT the offensive rtg of the team with him on the floor, it’s an estimate of points produced by the player per 100 possessions (or something like that)

In either case that stat isn’t from play by play data, so when u said

“chris paul offensive rating in 2013 vs memphis is 131, 128 vs okc a year later, 131 vs houston and 122 vs utah“

None of this was the teams offensive rtg with Paul on the floor

Think about the off rtg and def rtg stats on the series like PER, in terms of what it is honestly. They aren’t the same things at all but it’s more similar to PER than “play by play data showing how well a team scored with that player on the court” in terms of it being direct play by play data vs just a metric that isn’t based on that

But yeah relatively speaking the offenses aren’t crazy during those series, I’m not saying that as a knock on Paul

got it, thanks

and man, that is misleading by bball reference to call the stat like a completely different one lol

[Outside]

I can believe that Paul had a quad injury, but:

-- Everyone has something at this time of year.
-- No one is talking about Booker's hamstring or Luka's calf.
-- There was nothing about Paul's play that made you think he was hurt other than the fact that he stunk. It wasn't like last year when he obviously had a shoulder nerve issue and could barely lift his arm.
-- Did his quad prevent him from being a veteran leader? I don't recall him rallying the team or using his voice in huddles like his value as an ATG leader would suggest.
-- This just gives power to the "CP is always hurt in the postseason" narrative.

It's quite the fall from "why isn't he an MVP candidate?" in the RS and 14-for-14 and Luka-hunting Point God in the PS to this.

Does it affect his legacy? My brain tries to tell me no, but it also tells me that this late-career phase starting in OKC was boosting his legacy by showing the level of leadership and floor/ceiling raising that was countering the lack of PS success narratives that had dogged him. Fair or not, this tarnishes all the late-career legacy-boosting that was helping him.

So you clearly aren't here like some others just to troll Paul. So what is your explanation for his play falling off a cliff if not injury? Is it Dallas switching the matchup and he just couldn't handle Dorian Finney-Smith?

As to how any of this defines or doesn't his legacy is for everyone to decide for themselves. But I'm finding myself disturbed by the tenor of the conversation around Paul without anyone offering up any explanation other than "choker". Is that what you think he did?

I truly have no idea. It makes no sense to me.

As far as shooting goes, it wasn't like he started missing everything, because his percentages were still excellent. For the Dallas series:

55.4 FG%
47.8 3P%
91.7 FT%
66.9 TS%

I mean, that's ridiculously outstanding. But his attempts dropped big-time. He quit shooting. He quit playing aggressively.

The assists and turnovers also make no sense to me. Maybe that affected him to the point that he lost aggressiveness in all areas? But what caused his passing ability to desert him? It's about the most reliable aspect of his game.

A leg injury would be one explanation, not allowing him to move like he usually does, get to his spots, or get elevation on his shot, which he needs to get it over people. But again, I didn't see him limping out there, so that doesn't support that theory. Maybe something else physical was going on, but I just don't know.

The post-birthday Chris Paul is a mystery to me, but everything I'm hearing leads me to think it was a team-wide breakdown and he went down with everyone else.

Something is going to come out eventually. Such a massively disappointing end to their season.

Thinking more about this, I think there may be another factor -- Jason Kidd. He knows point guard play, and he knows defense, and he may have come up with defensive tactics to neutralize Paul. I didn't watch the games closely enough to pick up something like that. But that could be an explanation.

[TroubleS0me]

For the series vs Mavs CP3
AST 5.7
TOV 3.1

Bridges
3pt FG% 27.8
Overall FG% 40

[GSP]

So you clearly aren't here like some others just to troll Paul. So what is your explanation for his play falling off a cliff if not injury? Is it Dallas switching the matchup and he just couldn't handle Dorian Finney-Smith?

As to how any of this defines or doesn't his legacy is for everyone to decide for themselves. But I'm finding myself disturbed by the tenor of the conversation around Paul without anyone offering up any explanation other than "choker". Is that what you think he did?

I truly have no idea. It makes no sense to me.

As far as shooting goes, it wasn't like he started missing everything, because his percentages were still excellent. For the Dallas series:

55.4 FG%
47.8 3P%
91.7 FT%
66.9 TS%

I mean, that's ridiculously outstanding. But his attempts dropped big-time. He quit shooting. He quit playing aggressively.

The assists and turnovers also make no sense to me. Maybe that affected him to the point that he lost aggressiveness in all areas? But what caused his passing ability to desert him? It's about the most reliable aspect of his game.

A leg injury would be one explanation, not allowing him to move like he usually does, get to his spots, or get elevation on his shot, which he needs to get it over people. But again, I didn't see him limping out there, so that doesn't support that theory. Maybe something else physical was going on, but I just don't know.

The post-birthday Chris Paul is a mystery to me, but everything I'm hearing leads me to think it was a team-wide breakdown and he went down with everyone else.

Something is going to come out eventually. Such a massively disappointing end to their season.

Thinking more about this, I think there may be another factor -- Jason Kidd. He knows point guard play, and he knows defense, and he may have come up with defensive tactics to neutralize Paul. I didn't watch the games closely enough to pick up something like that. But that could be an explanation.

He also went against Cp3 in playoffs when he was ironically a Mavs player. If you say Hornets Cp3 is a lot different than Suns Cp3........ okay but the similarity of that Denver beatdown by 58 to this one was eerie. There's def a major flaw in Cp3s game or approach that teams pick up on specially as series go longer

[TroubleS0me]

So you clearly aren't here like some others just to troll Paul. So what is your explanation for his play falling off a cliff if not injury? Is it Dallas switching the matchup and he just couldn't handle Dorian Finney-Smith?

As to how any of this defines or doesn't his legacy is for everyone to decide for themselves. But I'm finding myself disturbed by the tenor of the conversation around Paul without anyone offering up any explanation other than "choker". Is that what you think he did?

I truly have no idea. It makes no sense to me.

As far as shooting goes, it wasn't like he started missing everything, because his percentages were still excellent. For the Dallas series:

55.4 FG%
47.8 3P%
91.7 FT%
66.9 TS%

I mean, that's ridiculously outstanding. But his attempts dropped big-time. He quit shooting. He quit playing aggressively.

The assists and turnovers also make no sense to me. Maybe that affected him to the point that he lost aggressiveness in all areas? But what caused his passing ability to desert him? It's about the most reliable aspect of his game.

A leg injury would be one explanation, not allowing him to move like he usually does, get to his spots, or get elevation on his shot, which he needs to get it over people. But again, I didn't see him limping out there, so that doesn't support that theory. Maybe something else physical was going on, but I just don't know.

The post-birthday Chris Paul is a mystery to me, but everything I'm hearing leads me to think it was a team-wide breakdown and he went down with everyone else.

Something is going to come out eventually. Such a massively disappointing end to their season.

Thinking more about this, I think there may be another factor -- Jason Kidd. He knows point guard play, and he knows defense, and he may have come up with defensive tactics to neutralize Paul.I didn't watch the games closely enough to pick up something like that. But that could be an explanation.

Kidd took away Cp3 strength, his passing, TOV management & the MAvs went after him on offense too

[Doctor MJ]

there is a phrase called "letting perfect be the enemy of good" about people who only do thinghs that are ideal and fail to compromise/settle when it is the correct choice

i wonder if paul suffers some of it, if he was hurt he knows his shootikg is likely to be off, he probablt will shot 40% on midrange or whatever which in normal circunstances would be bad for the suns

so if he cannot shot well, he wont shot at all, sometimes being too much of a perfectionist is a bad thingh

On a similar note, I kind of think CP3 is just the NBA equivalent of a game manager QB in football. His style of playing it safe and avoiding turnovers at all costs could be compared to guys like Alex Smith who rely on dinking and dunking and are uncomfortable throwing downfield. And in both cases you get the same low ceiling come playoff time where you'd need the rest of the team to be absolutely perfect to have any real chance. It's not a perfect analogy due to the differences between the sports, but there might be something to this.

I completely agree with this with a major caveat:

As you say these are different sports, and so it's not clear that the same tendency toward risk-taking will be wise in each sport.

To me the question of whether Paul's approach is more or less scalable compared to more aggressive playmaking is far from obvious.
What's most important is to recognize that approaches are indeed different, and that we should expect them to have differing strengths and weaknesses.

[Doctor MJ]

Kidd took away Cp3 strength, his passing

Disagree on two fronts:

1. Paul's strength is not passing but turnover reduction and opponent error generation.

2. And while Paul's assists were low, that's not where the Mavs hit Paul hardest from game 3 on.

Paul Game 1 & 2: APG - 5.5, TOPG - 2.0, FTPG - 4.0
Paul Game 3 - 7: APG - 5.8, TOPG - 3.6, FTPG - 0.8

Notice that while Paul's assists were down the whole series, that didn't stop the team from having insane ORtg's in the first couple games. But once Paul started being forced into more mistakes, that seemed to disrupt the whole scheme.

There's always more to the story than what these stats can say, but at least for this series I'd say that the problem with Paul as a game-manager floor general is that he stopped being able to manage the game.