ESPN Ranks NBA PG's
If you think the Clippers would be worse if they had Steph Curry or Westbrook instead of CP3, you are a fucking idiot. Kyle Lowery, Mike Conley, and Damian Lillard over Tony Parker (certainly slipping, but was the best PG in the NBA two years ago). Chris Paul is a very good player, but I'm surprised this bullshit is still going on. Chris Paul gets the #1 spot because of his leadership. The great leadership that gets his teams so far in the playoffs every spring. The great leadership that consists of yelling at his teammates and the refs the entire game. Meanwhile, Westbrook plays as hard as anyone in the NBA and Curry is a very humble superstar leading the best team in the NBA.
Comments
-
Rondo and Irving are too low IMHO.
-
This goes without saying but the league is stacked at PG right now. When Deron Williams is in the bottom 2/3 of NBA PGs, that's all you need to know.
-
Westbrook I would consider as a volumn scorer. Chris Paul will get other players involved, where with Westbrook, you kind of have to get yourself involved. Pure talent, skills, and athletism Westbrook hands down. But there is something to how Paul can orchestrate an offense. It's really hard to explain, but I think Paul is better at knowing his teammates strengths and weaknesses and being able to put said teammates in better positions to contribute.
-
I think you're showing your bias against the Clippers and Paul show through here.
I will agree that the seemingly large gap between Paul and Curry is probably BS at this point. I don't think you can go wrong with either at this point as they both bring a lot to the table and do so in different ways. Curry is clearly the better scorer and has improved immensely as a passer and defender. Paul is one of the better defensive PGs in the league and looks to set up his teammates more than score ... but he has shown an ability to score at a high level if/when needed.
I think Westbrook is a step behind both right now in terms of being a complete PG ... no question that he's having a great year but as was mentioned elsewhere he's more of a volume scorer and I don't get the impression that his assists totals are tied to getting others involved in the game as much as they are tied to not having an option to score if that makes sense. I don't think Westbrook would be the player that passes it to others at the expense of his point totals.
Conley is definitely underrated by the public but probably properly rated here. Wall seems a bit overrated. I don't know enough about Lillard's defense to know if that ranking is deserved. Kyrie is probably low on this list considering the strides he's made in the last couple of months - he's still very young and should be a top 3-5 PG in the league in the next 2-3 years.
Bledsoe and Dragic seem a little low to me. Rondo on the surface seems low but he's not in a situation at the moment that plays to his strengths. He's definitely a player that needs to be in the right fit to maximize his talents. -
Slick Watts' omission is tragic
-
How many rings do Chris Paul and Stephan Curry have?
Tony Parker pimp. -
Tony Parker also has Poppavich and Tim Duncan. I don't like the ring argument, because it diminishes guys like Karl Malone and Charles Barkley. But yes Parker is great, but Chris Paul and Steph Curry would also have rings if they played for Poppavich and a Tim Duncan in his prime.PurpleThrobber said:How many rings do Chris Paul and Stephan Curry have?
Tony Parker pimp. -
Parker is always under rated because he's a Spur and he's French.
Paul blew the series last year and that is hardly the only time he melts down late. Not a good thing to have on your resume if you're the best in the league. Allegedly. -
Who?greenblood said:
Tony Parker also has Poppavich and Tim Duncan. I don't like the ring argument, because it diminishes guys like Karl Malone and Charles Barkley and Patrick Ewing. But yes Parker is great, but Chris Paul and Steph Curry would also have rings if they played for Poppavich and a Tim Duncan in his prime.PurpleThrobber said:How many rings do Chris Paul and Stephan Curry have?
Tony Parker pimp.
#noring4life -
Any argument against Westbrook is ridiculous at this poont, and I've been a hater since dude entered the league. He's the best PG in the game, hands down, nuff said, case closed, end of discussion.Tequilla said:I think you're showing your bias against the Clippers and Paul show through here.
I will agree that the seemingly large gap between Paul and Curry is probably BS at this point. I don't think you can go wrong with either at this point as they both bring a lot to the table and do so in different ways. Curry is clearly the better scorer and has improved immensely as a passer and defender. Paul is one of the better defensive PGs in the league and looks to set up his teammates more than score ... but he has shown an ability to score at a high level if/when needed.
I think Westbrook is a step behind both right now in terms of being a complete PG ... no question that he's having a great year but as was mentioned elsewhere he's more of a volume scorer and I don't get the impression that his assists totals are tied to getting others involved in the game as much as they are tied to not having an option to score if that makes sense. I don't think Westbrook would be the player that passes it to others at the expense of his point totals.
Conley is definitely underrated by the public but probably properly rated here. Wall seems a bit overrated. I don't know enough about Lillard's defense to know if that ranking is deserved. Kyrie is probably low on this list considering the strides he's made in the last couple of months - he's still very young and should be a top 3-5 PG in the league in the next 2-3 years.
Bledsoe and Dragic seem a little low to me. Rondo on the surface seems low but he's not in a situation at the moment that plays to his strengths. He's definitely a player that needs to be in the right fit to maximize his talents.
If you're lining up at the gym and picking teams the only way Westbrook doesn't go before Paul and Curry is if Westbrook is a captain. Which he probably would be.
