What is Chris Paul's legacy?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 3731
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:29 pm    Post subject:

On one hand, some say Paul is a strong, vocal leader. On the other hand, some say he is overrated at a leader and that he thinks he's better than he really is in terms of influencing his teammates.

I think he could've and should've won a title if he had a good enough team around him. In some ways he's been unlucky. If that trade to the Lakers were allowed, he would've played with Kobe and maybe or probably wins a ring. Players of that caliber are seen in a while different light once they win a ring.
_________________
"Lindsay Hunter is starting to make Devean George look like John Stockton" - Bill Walton, Game 4 of the 2002 WCFs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25315

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:32 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 6991

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:45 pm    Post subject:

slavavov wrote:
On one hand, some say Paul is a strong, vocal leader. On the other hand, some say he is overrated at a leader and that he thinks he's better than he really is in terms of influencing his teammates.

I think he could've and should've won a title if he had a good enough team around him. In some ways he's been unlucky. If that trade to the Lakers were allowed, he would've played with Kobe and maybe or probably wins a ring. Players of that caliber are seen in a while different light once they win a ring.


He had an DPOY in DeAndre, COY in Doc Rivers, arguably best PF (after Duncan, KG and Dirk got old), top 3 pt shooter in Reddick and 6th MOY in Jamal Crawford
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 79286
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:52 pm    Post subject:

Paul is a very good player and a competitor, and he's a marketable star, so he's going to end up in the short term as an overrated player. Prime against prime, I'd rather have deron Williams or Tony Parker, both of whom gave him trouble in the playoffs, and neither of whom is on anyone's top five list.
_________________
Tolerance is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 3731
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:08 pm    Post subject:

governator wrote:
slavavov wrote:
On one hand, some say Paul is a strong, vocal leader. On the other hand, some say he is overrated at a leader and that he thinks he's better than he really is in terms of influencing his teammates.

I think he could've and should've won a title if he had a good enough team around him. In some ways he's been unlucky. If that trade to the Lakers were allowed, he would've played with Kobe and maybe or probably wins a ring. Players of that caliber are seen in a while different light once they win a ring.


He had an DPOY in DeAndre, COY in Doc Rivers, arguably best PF (after Duncan, KG and Dirk got old), top 3 pt shooter in Reddick and 6th MOY in Jamal Crawford

Doc Rivers was an overrated coach and that team didn't have enough pieces. CP3 was their go-to guy in crunch time, but no one else on that team wanted the ball in those situations.

I almost feel bad for him. If he got to play with Kobe, or even with Lebron and one other star like Kevin Love he'd probably have a ring by now.
_________________
"Lindsay Hunter is starting to make Devean George look like John Stockton" - Bill Walton, Game 4 of the 2002 WCFs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 3731
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:11 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.

When a great player wins a ring while still playing at that same level it fully validates all of their talent and skills, and that they are now a made man. John Elway and Kevin Garnett come to mind.
_________________
"Lindsay Hunter is starting to make Devean George look like John Stockton" - Bill Walton, Game 4 of the 2002 WCFs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
CandyCanes
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Dec 2007
Posts: 27895
Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Washington, DC

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:12 pm    Post subject:

jonnybravo wrote:
CandyCanes wrote:
saetarubia wrote:
CandyCanes wrote:
saetarubia wrote:
Magic, Oscar, Isiah , Steph, Stockton would be my Top 5.

CP3, I'd place after Nash and Kidd.


Why below Nash? Chris Paul is basically Nash's court vision, passing, and shooting combined with Tony Parker's speed.


Nash was just another level shooter. Problem was he was unselfish to a fault and didn't take enough shots. He could have been a much better scorer if he played today imo. Dude was shooting 43, 44, 45.5, 47, 44, 42.6 from 3P in his first 6 years at Phoenix. 42.8% career 3P shooter. Shot over 50% from the field 6 straight years playing PG. He'd be a deadly scoring and play making guard in this era. Feel he'd have taken Blake and DJ farther than Cp3 did in the playoffs as well.

Stoudemire was an overrated superstar at the time given his terrible defending being a big man. Clippers were a much more balanced team. Don't remember many memorable performances from CP3 while I certainly didn't want Nash shooting in crunch time against us in playoffs. Kobe had to be at his absolute best to answer back in 2010 playoffs.


Could Nash hit those threes while being contested? So are you saying he was actually an elite scorer who just preferred to pass?


Nash is the only shooter off the dribble that you could put in the conversation as Curry. We never really saw what he could do uncorked because of the era.

I heard a podcast when they asked Nash about Curry and I found it absolutely fascinating. Nash basically said to the effect of "I see guys try to cover Curry way beyond the 3 point line and he just ends up shooting it from even further back. For me, I would have passed it off if they were sendi9ng guys my way." That's an era thing. The SSoL Suns would be almost close last in today's era in pace too btw.

Nash was the filthies shooter I'd seen until Curry. The mahjority of his 3's were off the dribble, guys weren't passing TO him like the Ray Allen's/Klay's of the world.


Why wasn't Nash anything more than a borderline All-Star in Dallas then?

Would you say Nash was a better shooter than Ray Allen and Reggie Miller overall? (Could he also spot up for threes like they could or was he limited to off the dribble?)

I always thought of Nash as being a very limited scorer like Kidd and Rondo for some reason.
_________________
Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZrbEjppnd4
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Reply with quote
bum2
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Posts: 630

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:30 pm    Post subject:

Best PG of his generation but not good enough to be the best player on a title winning team.

Would have loved to see him play the point with Dirk or Duncan...coached by Pop or Carlisle.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25315

PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 9:09 pm    Post subject:

slavavov wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.

When a great player wins a ring while still playing at that same level it fully validates all of their talent and skills, and that they are now a made man. John Elway and Kevin Garnett come to mind.


I am not sure what "made man" means in this context. For Kevin Garnett, it was a nice checklist item that eliminated the Charles Barkley "he never won a ring" criticism, but as I said I don't think the ring materially changed Garnett's reputation.

I mean, if you saw Garnett differently after he won a ring, cool but I can't say I did.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 3731
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 12:13 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
slavavov wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.

When a great player wins a ring while still playing at that same level it fully validates all of their talent and skills, and that they are now a made man. John Elway and Kevin Garnett come to mind.


I am not sure what "made man" means in this context. For Kevin Garnett, it was a nice checklist item that eliminated the Charles Barkley "he never won a ring" criticism, but as I said I don't think the ring materially changed Garnett's reputation.

I mean, if you saw Garnett differently after he won a ring, cool but I can't say I did.

When a great player has been around for a while and has lost championship opportunities, they tend to be seen as lacking something intangible. Winning a ring proves those pundits wrong. Seems like more and more people these days think rings don't matter when looking at a player's legacy (see Lebron James), but I think they do because why else do you play?

Take John Elway. Even though he had that memorable drive in the AFC championship game one year, he lost 3 Super Bowls and was thought to be a loser. Then he won a Super Bowl against Favre and suddenly he was seen as one of the greatest QBs and clutch performers in NFL history.

At the end of the day the proof is in the pudding.
_________________
"Lindsay Hunter is starting to make Devean George look like John Stockton" - Bill Walton, Game 4 of the 2002 WCFs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 121608
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 9:25 am    Post subject:

At the end of the day there is no proof, just biased opinion. Using team success to rate an individual is pretty dumb. So if Paul had been in the Spurs and won a title he would have been a better player? Despite being the exact same player? I realize people need some tipping point to say that my guy is better than your guy but why not use their play?
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 79286
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:17 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
At the end of the day there is no proof, just biased opinion. Using team success to rate an individual is pretty dumb. So if Paul had been in the Spurs and won a title he would have been a better player? Despite being the exact same player? I realize people need some tipping point to say that my guy is better than your guy but why not use their play?


I get your point, although he probably would be a better player on the spurs...
_________________
Tolerance is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
numero-ocho
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 14216
Location: Los Angeles, CA

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:45 pm    Post subject:

You don't need rings or even playoff success to get into the HoF anymore.
_________________
"Suck it up. Don't be a baby. Do your job." - Kobe Bryant
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 11733

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 2:08 pm    Post subject:

slavavov wrote:
activeverb wrote:
slavavov wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.

When a great player wins a ring while still playing at that same level it fully validates all of their talent and skills, and that they are now a made man. John Elway and Kevin Garnett come to mind.


I am not sure what "made man" means in this context. For Kevin Garnett, it was a nice checklist item that eliminated the Charles Barkley "he never won a ring" criticism, but as I said I don't think the ring materially changed Garnett's reputation.

I mean, if you saw Garnett differently after he won a ring, cool but I can't say I did.

When a great player has been around for a while and has lost championship opportunities, they tend to be seen as lacking something intangible. Winning a ring proves those pundits wrong. Seems like more and more people these days think rings don't matter when looking at a player's legacy (see Lebron James), but I think they do because why else do you play?

Take John Elway. Even though he had that memorable drive in the AFC championship game one year, he lost 3 Super Bowls and was thought to be a loser. Then he won a Super Bowl against Favre and suddenly he was seen as one of the greatest QBs and clutch performers in NFL history.

At the end of the day the proof is in the pudding.


Elway was always seen as clutch, based on the stuff he did to get teams to the SB that had no business there. Everyone knew how outmatched he was in those games. Folks applauded his efforts to even get there in the first place.

Winning did change the perception for Dirk though. Hakeem too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilkes52
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 02 Jun 2009
Posts: 2177
Location: Far from home

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 3:43 pm    Post subject:

His legacy is not defined yet. Happy to wait until he completes his career to comment further.
_________________
"Do your best and take comfort in the knowing that things will turn out the way they should most of the time. That's all any of us can do."

John Wooden
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VegasLakerFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 1755

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:05 pm    Post subject:

He's probably not really going to have one. He'll be largely forgotten, except by true NBA dorks (the kinds with Clyde Drexler or Kevin Johnson avatars) and Laker fans still bitter about 2011. ::raises hand::
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25315

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:17 am    Post subject:

slavavov wrote:
activeverb wrote:
slavavov wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.

When a great player wins a ring while still playing at that same level it fully validates all of their talent and skills, and that they are now a made man. John Elway and Kevin Garnett come to mind.


I am not sure what "made man" means in this context. For Kevin Garnett, it was a nice checklist item that eliminated the Charles Barkley "he never won a ring" criticism, but as I said I don't think the ring materially changed Garnett's reputation.

I mean, if you saw Garnett differently after he won a ring, cool but I can't say I did.

When a great player has been around for a while and has lost championship opportunities, they tend to be seen as lacking something intangible. Winning a ring proves those pundits wrong. Seems like more and more people these days think rings don't matter when looking at a player's legacy (see Lebron James), but I think they do because why else do you play?

Take John Elway. Even though he had that memorable drive in the AFC championship game one year, he lost 3 Super Bowls and was thought to be a loser. Then he won a Super Bowl against Favre and suddenly he was seen as one of the greatest QBs and clutch performers in NFL history.

At the end of the day the proof is in the pudding.


I don't think it's worthwhile to compare NBA and NFL players since the games are so different, and one player doesn't make as much of a difference in the NFL so even for the greatest guys winning just one ring is a big deal.

So I won't get into the Elway comparisons.

Certainly, in the NBA, there are guys whose reputations are elevated significantly by winning one ring, notably Dirk, but that's rare.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Laker's Fan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 27 Jun 2002
Posts: 6962

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:58 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
Paul is a very good player and a competitor, and he's a marketable star, so he's going to end up in the short term as an overrated player. Prime against prime, I'd rather have deron Williams or Tony Parker, both of whom gave him trouble in the playoffs, and neither of whom is on anyone's top five list.


Peak Paul was in the convo for best player in the game (year Kobe won MVP). Don't recall either DW or Parker hitting that airspace. Plus, Paul has been a great 2-way player for many years.

My biggest gripe with Paul is that he has always been so ball dominant his teams have lived and died with his ability to be great (and not injured). That's why this year is so intriguing. You could make the case he should have given up more control to Blake but this is Harden's team.
_________________
2-3-7-14 Los Angeles
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
unleasHell
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 8449
Location: Stay Thirsty my Friends

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:36 pm    Post subject:

Right up there with Dwight Howard, except Howard at least made it to the finals...!
_________________
BRING ON THE DANCING HORSES...!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 19150

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:45 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.


I think it depends. If the player beats all odds as the #1 guy, I think it can. Example of that is Dirk.

But if you're older and no longer the guy, or, play on a team that was a favorite to win anyway, I think yeah, it doesn't change it THAT much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VegasLakerFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 1755

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:01 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.


I think it depends. If the player beats all odds as the #1 guy, I think it can. Example of that is Dirk.

But if you're older and no longer the guy, or, play on a team that was a favorite to win anyway, I think yeah, it doesn't change it THAT much.


Switching teams is what'll screw up Paul's legacy more than anything.

If he'd been able to stick it out in New Orleans and find a way to sneak a title like Dirk did I think he'd be an absolute legend.

Even if they didn't win a 'chip I think a 20 year career there (or however long he plays) would've helped him. As it stands I don't think he'll be remembered. More people will remember Steve Nash.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25315

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:21 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.


I think it depends. If the player beats all odds as the #1 guy, I think it can. Example of that is Dirk.

But if you're older and no longer the guy, or, play on a team that was a favorite to win anyway, I think yeah, it doesn't change it THAT much.


In this discussion, I realized everyone is giving the example of Dirk, but no one else.

But when I thought about it, I realized the number of superstars who won a single ring is really small --Bob Pettit, Rick Barry, Moses Malone, Jerry West, Wes Unseld, Elvin Hayes, and Kevin Garnett. That's about all I can think of.

And with most of those guys we can debate if they were even the #1 guy on their teams when they won. Hayes and Unseld won theirs together; West had Wilt; KG had Pierce; Moses had Dr. J (who I don't include because he also won an ABA ring).

So it's a really small universe of superstars with only one ring. And other than Dirk, I am not sure if the ring significantly changed any of their reputations
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 28771

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:39 pm    Post subject:

The Clippers MVP....man the Clippers are horrible without him and the Rockets are on top of the western conference.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25315

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:21 pm    Post subject:

VegasLakerFan wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.


I think it depends. If the player beats all odds as the #1 guy, I think it can. Example of that is Dirk.

But if you're older and no longer the guy, or, play on a team that was a favorite to win anyway, I think yeah, it doesn't change it THAT much.


Switching teams is what'll screw up Paul's legacy more than anything.

If he'd been able to stick it out in New Orleans and find a way to sneak a title like Dirk did I think he'd be an absolute legend.

Even if they didn't win a 'chip I think a 20 year career there (or however long he plays) would've helped him. As it stands I don't think he'll be remembered. More people will remember Steve Nash.


I don't think too many people care if players switch teams. Most of the guys in the Hall played on multiple teams and switching is becoming even more common. I think the one team player is becoming a thing of the past, when players had less freedom to move around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VegasLakerFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 1755

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:41 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
VegasLakerFan wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
A ring won't change his legacy IMO because he's now just a role player and not the guy.

Plus, HOU isn't winning a ring any time soon.


I don't think a single ring changes the perception of a player as much as some fans think.


I think it depends. If the player beats all odds as the #1 guy, I think it can. Example of that is Dirk.

But if you're older and no longer the guy, or, play on a team that was a favorite to win anyway, I think yeah, it doesn't change it THAT much.


Switching teams is what'll screw up Paul's legacy more than anything.

If he'd been able to stick it out in New Orleans and find a way to sneak a title like Dirk did I think he'd be an absolute legend.

Even if they didn't win a 'chip I think a 20 year career there (or however long he plays) would've helped him. As it stands I don't think he'll be remembered. More people will remember Steve Nash.


I don't think too many people care if players switch teams.


Yeah I doubt anyone really cares that he switched teams. I think it'll affect his legacy, though. He's not good enough to be a transcendent one-word player (Kobe, Michael, Magic, Bird, LeBron, etc.) and now he most likely won't be identified with a team or city, either.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB