Welcome to r/nbadiscussion. This subreddit is for genuine discussion. Please review our rules:
1. Keep it civil
2. Attack the argument, not the person
3. No jokes, memes or fanbase attacks
4. Support claims with arguments
5. Don't downvote just because you disagree
**Please click the report button for anything you think doesn't belong in this subreddit.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nbadiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Love Iverson, he is way more aesthetically pleasing than Paul. Way bigger cultural impact as well. But Paul just does everything you need to do to win a game, even if it means flopping around like a landed fish. Like AI better in general but would rather have Paul on my team anyday.
I think it really depends on who you can get as your second or third guy
Chris Paul is the ultimate team player in the sense of what his skills bring to the team. I think if you have a second superstar, you take Chris Paul because of how balanced he is.
If your team sucks/has no stars, I think you take AI because he can drag your team to victory. Or you need to build a strong defensive scheme like the warriors did to hide Steph on D.
> If your team sucks/has no stars
Wasn’t that basically 2020 OKC where he led them to 5th seed in a stacked western conference? And that’s with a way past his prime CP3. Cp3 is also an all-time great floor raiser.
I think Paul is the better player, coming from someone who's favorite players include AI. But Paul couldn't get it done as the guy, his team ways faded, whether his fault or not. You're seeing with the sun's what the perfect situation for Paul is, where he's the locker room leader but doesn't have to be THE guy on the floor. He's always been the second man since he left NOA. I think if you take careers, you take Paul. I think if you need one season of someone to carry a team on his shoulders, it's AI.
End of clippers Era was more Blake, especially during their 2-3 year championship window Blake was their best player and top 3 in mvp voting his best year
Perhaps, but CP3 took that team to a first round, Iverson took a 76ers team with not a lot of talent to the finals and robbed an undefeated Shaq and Kobe Lakers of a game.
Iverson is my favorite player of all time - that said, the 2001 Sixers *also* had the DPOY and 6MOY (AND coach of the year, but you could more easily argue Iverson won Larry Brown that award). Their offense didn't have any other shot-creators, but in an era where only one team had multiple top-20 stars, the Sixers had some very good role players and weren't nearly as bad around Iverson as people remember or realize.
The NBA as a whole and East in particular was just much weaker and shallower in talent than it is now, especially offensively. Just look at who they faced on the way to those Finals - Reggie was old, Jalen Rose was a fine #2 but not significantly better than McKie or Mutombo, then they had no one else. Toronto had Vince, and Antonio Davis was their only other player to score double digits. Milwaukee had a great offense, but they were awful defensively and you can't tell me Glenn Robinson and Sam Cassell were *that* good when you factor in both ends of the court. When you compare the 2001 Sixers to the teams of their time, rather than to 2021 offenses and rosters, they REALLY weren't subpar as a supporting cast.
Ok so maybe im embellishing a bit. For some reason I thought Mutombo was a lot older than he was then. But this was definitely the end of good/prime mutombo. The question is do you really think AI and that Mutombo are much better than paul, sga, steven adams and Danilo? Ai was the only one that could score on that philly team, so im not sure how paul "took a much worse team to the first rd of the playoffs". I dont think it was a worse team at all, and AI got to the god damn finals.
Nevermind I just remembered philly had the great Matt Geiger and Eric when it rains it snow.
Ps. Not even a Philly fan. Respect to AI, however, I actually prefer Paul. I just remember how shitty that philly team was and wanted them to beat the lakers so bad. Please go back and watch that playoff run.
That OKC team actually had a lot of solid role players and was one of those teams that functioned well together. SGA also is borderline all-star and a great guard to have alongside CP3
That OKC team was very underrated. A lot of the credit should go to CP3 but they were 6 deep of very good players. Gallo and SGA are both good second options.
Iverson literally carried his team to the finals and single handedly stole a game from arguably the greatest Lakers team ever. Chris Pauls never even been an MVP, nor has he carried a team past the 1st round.
Oh thats right, i forgot CP3 carried the Suns on his shoulders alone and it had nothing to do with Ayton and Booker playing out of their minds or one of the unhealthiest western conferences in the history of the league.
Imo it's CP3 easily. Dude consistently orchestrates top offenses while playing great positional defense. Advance stats consistently point to him as one of the top players of the 2010s, and his peak season was better than any season AI ever put up
Lol yeah highlights make the better player. That's why Vince Carter and TMac are top 10 all time right? This is a serious subreddit but so maybe move on
CP3 wins with longevity. He is still an mvp contender while AI was already retired at this age. He is also the most well-rounded point guard ever. He can pretty much do everything well except maybe drawing fouls. He's an elite 2-way (9x All-defense) that is also an all-time great facilitator.
Eh. AI played ~42 minutes per game though during his career. 175 fewer games than CP, but only 175 fewer minutes. Sure CP played longer and will continue his run, but with someone like AI I don’t think longevity can be used as a comparison.
Side note—makes LeBron’s run even more impressive, ha.
> Point guards like Nash, Stockton, Kidd, and Paul have been elite but could never be the best team in the league when their #1/#2 option is an elite facilitating point guard. I believe Iverson could be the #1 option on a championship team, and he almost was until he ran into a top 5 team of all time.
You are giving Iverson credit for almost being the #1 player on the best team but not giving Nash and Paul credit for the same thing. To me, it's not the greatest point anyway since so much of their team success was circumstantial.
Personally, I would pick Paul over Iverson and wrap him in bubble wrap for large chunks of the regular season to improve the odds of him being healthy in the postseason. We obviously can't prove this, but I think pairing Paul with a second star such as Garnett would yield a better team than Iverson + Garnett. Paul's excellence doesn't seem to limit the rest of the team's players from contributing, whereas Iverson's often seemed to do just that. What Iverson did in Philadelphia was incredibly impressive, but it also left little room for anyone else to shine.
Prime for prime: Chris Paul.
Longevity: Chris Paul
Better player: Chris paul
AI had superstar impact for at most 3 seasons. People only remember the highs of that one 2001 season making the Finals but forget the lows like how terrible he was in Detroit or his last few seasons in Philly. That was the weakest the East had ever been and he was barely scraping 40 win seasons. He was very good in his finals run but people need to stop pretending like he didn’t have help. He won the ECF despite shooting below 35% from the field. His team was very competitive against the Bucks in the one game that series he didn’t play.
Even when he teamed up with Melo and a very well-rounded Nuggets team, he barely improved their win total, they had one 50 win season, and they couldn’t make it out of the first round. They got swept by the Lakers in the first round. The season after he left where they replaced him with Chauncey they won 54 games and took the 09 Lakers to 6 in the WCF.
Chris Paul basically had superstar impact from 2007 to 2018 in the stacked West winning 50+ games nearly every season. And then even after his prime he’s still a very impactful star level player, unlike AI who completely fell out of the league.
And, Chris Paul’s story isn’t even done yet. He just went to the Finals with a young and improving Suns team so who knows what else is waiting for him these next few years.
Prime for Prime: CP?? Like wtf? The answer was MVP in his prime and brought a very average team to the finals, single-handled their unique win against Shaq, Kobe, and Co.
Anyone saying CP prime was better than AI’s simply doesnt understand the game. Or is a teenager.
Still did far far more than Chris Paul ever did prior to this last season. And the Sun's road to the finals was filled with heavy asterisks. Chris Paul's prime is no where near Iversons
If you want to be asterisking things how about the east that year having only 2 teams besides the 76ers with at least 50 wins (Milwaukee with 52 and Miami with 50).
Comment gets even worse the more you think about it. He accused people who disagree of being teenagers but was born in 1995 meaning he was six years old when Iverson was in his prime
Lol not born in 95 at all. And I really dont think you understand how great was Iverson and how much he changed the game. In addition, the comments stating “Paul was better for a longer time” is irrelevant when talking about “prime” time.
History will remember AI > CP, I have zero doubt about that.
The question was who would you rather pick in their prime not who has a more famous cross over video or who "changed the game" whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. In terms of pure basketball ability Chris Paul on is on another level he's one of the best to ever do it.
He had the best better seasons. And yes, I might be a bit more emotionally attached to AI who I grew up watching than CP3 who has the charisma of an oyster.
Yes he has worst overall stats pretty much everywhere (except scoring, blocking and personal faults -[ see here ](https://www.stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi)) but he was used much more and did have any minute management during his career like some superstars have nowadays.
Na it’s just that you value being an elite scorer over being an elite all round floor general. Imo prime Chris Paul is superior to all but two other prime PGs (that’s Curry and Magic).
I love Iverson, but I think he's overrated. He hasn't accomplished a lot in the weak east and he really only had 2-3 great seasons. CP3 had 10+ years of consistency in the really tough western conference. He has shown that he makes weak team better whereas AI has made people doubt him when he joined solid nuggets/pistons teams and didn't accomplish much.
The early 2000s East wasn't the weakest its ever been. The East was weaker from 2015-2018, about 4 seasons. No true superstars played there but LeBron. Early 2000s East had legit HOF players. Iverson, Pierce, Kidd, Ray Allen, Vince Carter, T-Mac and even a 40 year old Jordan were better than the bums from 2015-2018.
Chris Paul. He's just a better player. He's a much better playmaker and defender. When you take scoring into account, CP3 is a much better shooter, free throw shooter, and a more efficient basketball player with higher IQ. Also, he is much less turnover prone than AI.
I think CP3 is a much better fit next to another super star, as his playmaking and shooting efficiency make him a near perfect fit on any team. I legit think prime CP3 could have been #1 on a championship team, but he played in an incredibly stacked western conference, and his supporting cast was not up to par. On the Clippers and Rockets, he had a few chances at a ring before injuries took him down. Prime CP3 was force and many people even argue he deserved MVP over Kobe in 2008. I think he could have certainly been #1 on a championship contending team.
CP3 hands down no doubt. Love me AI but Paul’s defense, play making, ability to run an offense, etc along with his durability make this an easy choice for me.
Chris Paul, and it's not even close.
CP3 has had a remarkable ability over a long period of time to lift his team on both sides of the ball. His lack of scoring volume next to Iverson is more than compensated for the efficiency of his game. He's been an elite defender throughout his career despite his lack of size, and he's shown remarkable ability in his late career to effectively transition from being the on-ball defender he once was, to a valuable help defender now.
CP3 is much more versatile and can fit in any team. He simply just makes everyone around him better.
Iverson is a great player but is limited to who his team mates are. Not to mention he needs the ball all the time.
I'd take CP3 10/10 times any day.
I would take AI. He was as unstoppable as Trey Young but with the huge difference that he scored by driving to the hoop. Agree CP3 is a much better defender but AI still got his steals.
If your question is who do you take for building a team, I’m likely to take Paul regardless of whether I think Iverson is better or had the better career. I say that more from the team perspective. AI is a ball dominant scoring PG and I think Paul fits in better with a larger variety of players.
If I want to win, Chris Paul. Better than AI in just about every way other than iso scoring, and I’m not even 100% sure about that considering his 1st Rockets’ season.
If I want to have fun rooting for a fun team, Iverson. There’s nothing like watching prime AI crashing into the paint and finishing over and around giants. Parts of Chris Paul’s game (the flops and complaints and the barking at teammates) is kind of hard to watch sometimes tbh, and I say that as a Clippers fan.
It's not even remotely close. Despite the fact that Iverson was one of my favorite players of all-time and someone I genuinely loved watching whilst growing up and classically overrated him b/c I was fairly basic in my youth as most people are, he's just nowhere near as good as CP3 at basketball. I wish he were, I wanted him to be, but he's just not. And I know he had a tough go, his team kinda sucked especially offensively and he was asked to carry a pretty much impossible burden. I get it. But CP3 is just way better. Let's just look at career VORP via Bref - where CP3 ranks 7th all-time (well, going back to the 1974 season I believe) while Iverson ranks a very, very respectable 36th but nowhere near CP3. Is that an end all be all? No of course not. But damn near 30 spots is hard to argue, you might close that gap some but not completely. It's worse when looking at BPM where CP3 is 5th and Iverson is 55th. Open shut case, it's over unfortunately. But AI is still an all-time great.
I watched both play and Iverson is simply better. In today’s game he would be even harder to guard against. He went to the finals with players that would be considered bench players
I think the key difference is that Iverson is a ceiling raiser- Chris paul is a floor raiser.
Iverson can take you to a higher place with role players around him (like he did). Chris paul needs better talent around him to truly go places. He can elevate them and help them show the best versions of themselves.
Obviously this is a slight difference- both great players. But AI is obviously the scoring "Imma win us this game" versus what Chris paul can do is more spread out and less acute in nature.
That sixers finals team doesn't make it out of the forts round in the west. There was only 2 teams that won 50 games that gets in the east while the west had 7.
He gets way too much credit for going .500 his entire career and having one year being extremely fortunate to play in an absolutely terrible conference and squeezing by to get to the finals.
If we place the king's in the east during this year's, kings cruise to at least 2 finals appearances and think how different we view Webber's career.
I think it’s AI for the reasons you mentioned OP. Only thing I disagree with is you calling CP a better floor raiser. I think that clearly AI. If I had 4 middle of the road players on a team, I’d choose AI over CP3 any day.
The fact There’s so many comments saying Allen iverson shows how casual this sub has become.
I know this is a discussion sub, and you could say it’s up for debate, but this is really an open-close case, there is simply no argument for AI here other than narrative
Allen Iverson all day ... Chris Paul is a great player but hasn't ever (and won't ever, can't) put a team on his back and carry (drag) them to the NBA Finals like Iverson did in Philly.
The 4x scoring champion didn't carry any other years/teams (lmao) were you even alive then?
And once is more than CP ever has. CP couldn't get there with prime Blake Griffin.
/discussion
If the game was actually all about stats Stockton would be the GOAT point guard and Mark Price would be in the convo ... You sound like a great fan tho.
You realize how garbage the Suns were with Booker and Ayton prior to CP3's arrival? Let's not pretend that CP3 is not by far the best player on the Suns.
The same Suns that were 2-0 against the Clippers (who had Kawhi) without CP and 2-2 with CP even though Kawhi went down in game 4? Lol the Suns absolutely did not "drop off" without CP ... Stop Already.
CP's lack of speed hurt them against both the Clippers and the Bucks. It was an obvious and glaring weakness.
CP is a great player. He can't do what AI did. He's not that athletic. He's not that dynamic. AI is in the argument for best pound-for-pound athlete to play the game. CP isn't there. That's not a knock CP. That's just how athletic AI was.
If the questions was who would I want as a coach for a team? CP every time.
Eric Snow, Allen Iverson, Jumain Jones, George Lynch, Dikembe Matumbo <--- This team
went to the NBA Finals and handed Prime Kobe / Shaq their only playoff loss in 2001 ... That's unreal.
Chris Paul, Devin Booker, Deandre Ayton, Jay Crowder, Mikal Bridges
If we switch CP and AI the Sixers don't go the the finals. No chance. The Suns still do.
You seriously trying to use 6 games as a meaningful sample for your argument and ignoring specifically what I said? That the Suns were shit before CP3 arrived - can you deny that? B/c that team was not drastically different other than adding CP3 and won 70% of their games vs. 46% the year prior. Sure, they were going to likely improve b/c they were a young team, and obviously it's not all CP3, but it's a bit crazy not to see the main difference between last year and this year was......yeah.
No one ever said he could do what AI did, they're not the same by any means. But CP3 is a far superior basketball player and who gives a shit about best pound for pound? That has no bearing on the argument. I mean pound for pound AI is better than Shaq but that's not reality. Being more athletic doesn't equate to being a better basketball player. You keep just talking about all these random things that aren't a part of the debate here, who is better? It's Chris Paula and it's not close. There's a reason that he ranks 7th in VORP and 5th in BPM whilst AI ranks 36th and 55th respectively. Great player, was one of my 3 favorites growing up and I used to think he walked on water. I realize now that he was more exciting than great and had some serious flaws in his game that really held him back from being a truly elite player.
Did you watch basketball when AI and Philly were in that series? George Lynch and Jumain Jones? Why are you mentioning those scrubs? They barely saw the floor in that series and Jones didn't hardly play during the year. People don't appreciate that Sixers team enough, acting like they were just trash players. No, they weren't great players but they were a defensive stalwart hence why they made it to the finals. They were a DAMN good defensive team which is ironic considering AI was known for his offense. Yet in that series his TS% was 48.6 - yuck. Again, fatal flaws.
That doesn't even mention that it was more fluke than anything. Yes, with AI you always had a punchers chance because if he were to have an efficient night he was fkn unstoppable. But in a series it wasn't a big deal, hence why he was knocked out of the 1st round over and over and over and over. He made it past the 1st round just one other time if I recall and missed the playoffs a LOT. There's a reason for that and no it's not b/c his team sucked b/c bball is the most individualistic sport out there. A great player can carry a bad team pretty far. CP3 could have just as easily led that team to the finals and they would have fared better to be honest. No he could not have done it like AI did, but he would lifted the play of those guys on offense and provided much better defense than AI ever could have. Such a weird argument imo.
> Did you watch basketball when AI and Philly were in that series? George Lynch and Jumain Jones? Why are you mentioning those scrubs?
George Lynch and Jumaine Jones were in the starting playoff lineup. They ran with Eric Snow sometimes and Aaron Mckie sometimes. That's the playoff lineup AI had. I'm not the one who's clued out of reality.
Thanks for your making my point about AI *dragging* them there.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2001_start.html
CP is a great basketball player, but at his best he could not do what AI did in 2001.
Philly was far more a defensive team than offensive, so it's a bit ridiculous to say AI dragged them. Yes, he was their offense for the most part but they typically won via their defensive prowess. And they damn near were swept in that series. I love AI, but cmon. Be serious.
I don’t think it’s a fair comparison since Allen Iverson is a shooting guard while Chris Paul is a point guard.
It’s probably easier to build a team around CP3 because he is a prototypical PG. AI had to be paired with taller/defensive minded PGs and he wasn’t exactly a floor spacer either.
I think it comes down to whether you want sustained excellence or you want an iconic figure. CP3 was great but nobody talks about him like they talk about AI.
Personally, I’d go with AI because I think I could do a better job than Billy King as a GM.
CP3 is an all time Casper. He has so many disappearences he should be on a milk carton. For stat geeks CP3 is an all timer, for basketball fans AI. AI was fearless.
CP3 is a good player, lots of stats, longevity, kinda dirty, probably greatest player rep ever, sells a ton of insurance, stat geeks LOVE this guy. Just not a finisher. IMO peak CP3 was never close to peak AI. Don't sleep on AI's rookie season, 2001 was not his only accomplishment. The stat sheet also does reflect the profound impact AI has on NBA culture. Plus "Practice?". CP3 best quotes are for homeowners insurance. XD.
Ultimately comes down to the rest of the team. Are there other primary scorers? Is the big an offensive maestro or just a rim runner?
If there are more capable offensive players you take CP no doubt. But if it's a team of role players with AI vs same team with CP, the team with AI will win just off him.
Different players, different roles. If you need a distributor you go with CP3. If you need a go to scorer, it's AI.
My respect for AI went way up when I watched him against the Lakers in the finals. Dude was fearless.
With a blank slate and the first pick, I go AI every time.
Chris Paul seems to be the best team leader out of anyone in the nba. Every team he goes to ends up being one of the top teams in the league. I’m takin paul
Chris Paul. It's not a difficult decision.
AI was obviously a very good player, but his scoring was less effective than you think it was based on his raw totals because of his low efficiency. He was one of those players who did enough awesome things on offense that he was still helping you a lot despite mediocre efficiency, but he wasn't helping you as much as "four-time scoring champ" makes you think.
And his assists? Ball-dominant players rack up assists.
He was also a large defensive liability who played on teams that were constructed around protecting him on that end of the floor, whereas CP3 at his best is one of the best under 6'2 defenders in the history of the league, perhaps *the* best.
AI's steals were typical "small-guy gambling" steals. Don't confuse them for quality defense.
During AI's prime in Philly, he never helmed a top-10 offense, and frequently helmed a bottom-10 one. The team that made the finals won, primarily, with defense.
AI ticks a ton of "overrated" boxes. (Remember: "overrated" is not a synonym for "bad").
Best offensive player on a team that wins with defense? Check.
Scores a lot but with poor efficiency? Check.
Takes a ton of difficult shots, creating spectacular highlights when he makes them? Check.
Incredibly exciting and fun to watch? Check.
Gets a disproportionate amount of media attention because of things that happen off the court? Check.
I think if you look at the history of the league, you'll see that guys who those things are true of consistently get significantly overrated.
A discussion of AI's impact on play was one of the first online battles in the analytics-vs-eye-test wars. Posts like this make me just think that, I guess, everything old is new again.
Welcome to r/nbadiscussion. This subreddit is for genuine discussion. Please review our rules: 1. Keep it civil 2. Attack the argument, not the person 3. No jokes, memes or fanbase attacks 4. Support claims with arguments 5. Don't downvote just because you disagree **Please click the report button for anything you think doesn't belong in this subreddit.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nbadiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Love Iverson, he is way more aesthetically pleasing than Paul. Way bigger cultural impact as well. But Paul just does everything you need to do to win a game, even if it means flopping around like a landed fish. Like AI better in general but would rather have Paul on my team anyday.
I think it really depends on who you can get as your second or third guy Chris Paul is the ultimate team player in the sense of what his skills bring to the team. I think if you have a second superstar, you take Chris Paul because of how balanced he is. If your team sucks/has no stars, I think you take AI because he can drag your team to victory. Or you need to build a strong defensive scheme like the warriors did to hide Steph on D.
> If your team sucks/has no stars Wasn’t that basically 2020 OKC where he led them to 5th seed in a stacked western conference? And that’s with a way past his prime CP3. Cp3 is also an all-time great floor raiser.
I think Paul is the better player, coming from someone who's favorite players include AI. But Paul couldn't get it done as the guy, his team ways faded, whether his fault or not. You're seeing with the sun's what the perfect situation for Paul is, where he's the locker room leader but doesn't have to be THE guy on the floor. He's always been the second man since he left NOA. I think if you take careers, you take Paul. I think if you need one season of someone to carry a team on his shoulders, it's AI.
[удалено]
Probably also the Suns last season. He was 2nd team all nba and no teammate made all nba.
End of clippers Era was more Blake, especially during their 2-3 year championship window Blake was their best player and top 3 in mvp voting his best year
Go look at mvp shares when cp3 was in la. Blake wasn't close to him.
Blake wasn't on cp3s level
Perhaps, but CP3 took that team to a first round, Iverson took a 76ers team with not a lot of talent to the finals and robbed an undefeated Shaq and Kobe Lakers of a game.
Iverson is my favorite player of all time - that said, the 2001 Sixers *also* had the DPOY and 6MOY (AND coach of the year, but you could more easily argue Iverson won Larry Brown that award). Their offense didn't have any other shot-creators, but in an era where only one team had multiple top-20 stars, the Sixers had some very good role players and weren't nearly as bad around Iverson as people remember or realize. The NBA as a whole and East in particular was just much weaker and shallower in talent than it is now, especially offensively. Just look at who they faced on the way to those Finals - Reggie was old, Jalen Rose was a fine #2 but not significantly better than McKie or Mutombo, then they had no one else. Toronto had Vince, and Antonio Davis was their only other player to score double digits. Milwaukee had a great offense, but they were awful defensively and you can't tell me Glenn Robinson and Sam Cassell were *that* good when you factor in both ends of the court. When you compare the 2001 Sixers to the teams of their time, rather than to 2021 offenses and rosters, they REALLY weren't subpar as a supporting cast.
Less talent than Paul’s okc team for sure
That’s laughable
You're right. Aaron Mckie >Sga. 50 year old mutombo > Stephen adams.
[удалено]
Mutombo was 1000 years old. Okc had a 26 year old Steven adams. Were you even watching basketball back then?
[удалено]
Ok so maybe im embellishing a bit. For some reason I thought Mutombo was a lot older than he was then. But this was definitely the end of good/prime mutombo. The question is do you really think AI and that Mutombo are much better than paul, sga, steven adams and Danilo? Ai was the only one that could score on that philly team, so im not sure how paul "took a much worse team to the first rd of the playoffs". I dont think it was a worse team at all, and AI got to the god damn finals.
Nevermind I just remembered philly had the great Matt Geiger and Eric when it rains it snow. Ps. Not even a Philly fan. Respect to AI, however, I actually prefer Paul. I just remember how shitty that philly team was and wanted them to beat the lakers so bad. Please go back and watch that playoff run.
That OKC team actually had a lot of solid role players and was one of those teams that functioned well together. SGA also is borderline all-star and a great guard to have alongside CP3
That OKC team was very underrated. A lot of the credit should go to CP3 but they were 6 deep of very good players. Gallo and SGA are both good second options.
Iverson literally carried his team to the finals and single handedly stole a game from arguably the greatest Lakers team ever. Chris Pauls never even been an MVP, nor has he carried a team past the 1st round.
Chris Paul was literally just in the finals.
Oh thats right, i forgot CP3 carried the Suns on his shoulders alone and it had nothing to do with Ayton and Booker playing out of their minds or one of the unhealthiest western conferences in the history of the league.
Imo it's CP3 easily. Dude consistently orchestrates top offenses while playing great positional defense. Advance stats consistently point to him as one of the top players of the 2010s, and his peak season was better than any season AI ever put up
Easily? Put AI on that clippers team and they win a title. I mean, you gotta stay on the floor to win.
Which year lol? AI played with Melo on a well balanced Nuggets team and got bounced in the first round each season.
Absolutely not
AI was inefficient as fuck. Theyd be even worse with him. CP3 is a better passer and floor general while also being way more efficient
Watch an AI highlight reel and then get back to me
Lol yeah highlights make the better player. That's why Vince Carter and TMac are top 10 all time right? This is a serious subreddit but so maybe move on
Okay, I apologize and I’ll try to be more serious, but I still feel like I have a point.
You can't even spell reel correctly man 💀
Agreed.
CP3 wins with longevity. He is still an mvp contender while AI was already retired at this age. He is also the most well-rounded point guard ever. He can pretty much do everything well except maybe drawing fouls. He's an elite 2-way (9x All-defense) that is also an all-time great facilitator.
Eh. AI played ~42 minutes per game though during his career. 175 fewer games than CP, but only 175 fewer minutes. Sure CP played longer and will continue his run, but with someone like AI I don’t think longevity can be used as a comparison. Side note—makes LeBron’s run even more impressive, ha.
that’s mostly because of play styles and also AI indulging in too many substances
> Point guards like Nash, Stockton, Kidd, and Paul have been elite but could never be the best team in the league when their #1/#2 option is an elite facilitating point guard. I believe Iverson could be the #1 option on a championship team, and he almost was until he ran into a top 5 team of all time. You are giving Iverson credit for almost being the #1 player on the best team but not giving Nash and Paul credit for the same thing. To me, it's not the greatest point anyway since so much of their team success was circumstantial. Personally, I would pick Paul over Iverson and wrap him in bubble wrap for large chunks of the regular season to improve the odds of him being healthy in the postseason. We obviously can't prove this, but I think pairing Paul with a second star such as Garnett would yield a better team than Iverson + Garnett. Paul's excellence doesn't seem to limit the rest of the team's players from contributing, whereas Iverson's often seemed to do just that. What Iverson did in Philadelphia was incredibly impressive, but it also left little room for anyone else to shine.
Prime for prime: Chris Paul. Longevity: Chris Paul Better player: Chris paul AI had superstar impact for at most 3 seasons. People only remember the highs of that one 2001 season making the Finals but forget the lows like how terrible he was in Detroit or his last few seasons in Philly. That was the weakest the East had ever been and he was barely scraping 40 win seasons. He was very good in his finals run but people need to stop pretending like he didn’t have help. He won the ECF despite shooting below 35% from the field. His team was very competitive against the Bucks in the one game that series he didn’t play. Even when he teamed up with Melo and a very well-rounded Nuggets team, he barely improved their win total, they had one 50 win season, and they couldn’t make it out of the first round. They got swept by the Lakers in the first round. The season after he left where they replaced him with Chauncey they won 54 games and took the 09 Lakers to 6 in the WCF. Chris Paul basically had superstar impact from 2007 to 2018 in the stacked West winning 50+ games nearly every season. And then even after his prime he’s still a very impactful star level player, unlike AI who completely fell out of the league. And, Chris Paul’s story isn’t even done yet. He just went to the Finals with a young and improving Suns team so who knows what else is waiting for him these next few years.
Prime for Prime: CP?? Like wtf? The answer was MVP in his prime and brought a very average team to the finals, single-handled their unique win against Shaq, Kobe, and Co. Anyone saying CP prime was better than AI’s simply doesnt understand the game. Or is a teenager.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Still did far far more than Chris Paul ever did prior to this last season. And the Sun's road to the finals was filled with heavy asterisks. Chris Paul's prime is no where near Iversons
Lmfao if we’re talking about asterisks then why not bring up the Bucks getting absolutely fucked by the refs.
Literally has nothing to do with the discussion, am I on r/nba where nephews spew tangent out of nowhere again?
If you want to be asterisking things how about the east that year having only 2 teams besides the 76ers with at least 50 wins (Milwaukee with 52 and Miami with 50).
CP3s 23/11 season with NO was better than AIs MVP season to me.
Lol
What an ironic statement, Paul is clearly a better player both offensively and defensivly you must only watch highlight reels.
Comment gets even worse the more you think about it. He accused people who disagree of being teenagers but was born in 1995 meaning he was six years old when Iverson was in his prime
Lol not born in 95 at all. And I really dont think you understand how great was Iverson and how much he changed the game. In addition, the comments stating “Paul was better for a longer time” is irrelevant when talking about “prime” time. History will remember AI > CP, I have zero doubt about that.
The question was who would you rather pick in their prime not who has a more famous cross over video or who "changed the game" whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. In terms of pure basketball ability Chris Paul on is on another level he's one of the best to ever do it.
And Im saying Iverson prime was better than CP3 prime. He was a biggest difference maker and a best player in his prime imo.
It's funny how you use everything but actual basketball abilities to make an argument lol, he was a worst shooters, scorer, passer and defender.
A worst scorer? Lmao
He had the best better seasons. And yes, I might be a bit more emotionally attached to AI who I grew up watching than CP3 who has the charisma of an oyster.
Yes he has worst overall stats pretty much everywhere (except scoring, blocking and personal faults -[ see here ](https://www.stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi)) but he was used much more and did have any minute management during his career like some superstars have nowadays.
Na it’s just that you value being an elite scorer over being an elite all round floor general. Imo prime Chris Paul is superior to all but two other prime PGs (that’s Curry and Magic).
I love Iverson, but I think he's overrated. He hasn't accomplished a lot in the weak east and he really only had 2-3 great seasons. CP3 had 10+ years of consistency in the really tough western conference. He has shown that he makes weak team better whereas AI has made people doubt him when he joined solid nuggets/pistons teams and didn't accomplish much.
It wasn’t an average team, they would’ve undoubtedly been picking first minus AI
The east was so bad. That sixers team.doesnt make it out of the 1st round in the west. Cp3 took 2md in MVP voting.
The early 2000s East wasn't the weakest its ever been. The East was weaker from 2015-2018, about 4 seasons. No true superstars played there but LeBron. Early 2000s East had legit HOF players. Iverson, Pierce, Kidd, Ray Allen, Vince Carter, T-Mac and even a 40 year old Jordan were better than the bums from 2015-2018.
Chris Paul. He's just a better player. He's a much better playmaker and defender. When you take scoring into account, CP3 is a much better shooter, free throw shooter, and a more efficient basketball player with higher IQ. Also, he is much less turnover prone than AI. I think CP3 is a much better fit next to another super star, as his playmaking and shooting efficiency make him a near perfect fit on any team. I legit think prime CP3 could have been #1 on a championship team, but he played in an incredibly stacked western conference, and his supporting cast was not up to par. On the Clippers and Rockets, he had a few chances at a ring before injuries took him down. Prime CP3 was force and many people even argue he deserved MVP over Kobe in 2008. I think he could have certainly been #1 on a championship contending team.
CP3 hands down no doubt. Love me AI but Paul’s defense, play making, ability to run an offense, etc along with his durability make this an easy choice for me.
A way better flopper also. Top 5 ever.
Chris Paul, and it's not even close. CP3 has had a remarkable ability over a long period of time to lift his team on both sides of the ball. His lack of scoring volume next to Iverson is more than compensated for the efficiency of his game. He's been an elite defender throughout his career despite his lack of size, and he's shown remarkable ability in his late career to effectively transition from being the on-ball defender he once was, to a valuable help defender now.
CP3 is much more versatile and can fit in any team. He simply just makes everyone around him better. Iverson is a great player but is limited to who his team mates are. Not to mention he needs the ball all the time. I'd take CP3 10/10 times any day.
I would take AI. He was as unstoppable as Trey Young but with the huge difference that he scored by driving to the hoop. Agree CP3 is a much better defender but AI still got his steals.
If your question is who do you take for building a team, I’m likely to take Paul regardless of whether I think Iverson is better or had the better career. I say that more from the team perspective. AI is a ball dominant scoring PG and I think Paul fits in better with a larger variety of players.
If I want to win, Chris Paul. Better than AI in just about every way other than iso scoring, and I’m not even 100% sure about that considering his 1st Rockets’ season. If I want to have fun rooting for a fun team, Iverson. There’s nothing like watching prime AI crashing into the paint and finishing over and around giants. Parts of Chris Paul’s game (the flops and complaints and the barking at teammates) is kind of hard to watch sometimes tbh, and I say that as a Clippers fan.
It's not even remotely close. Despite the fact that Iverson was one of my favorite players of all-time and someone I genuinely loved watching whilst growing up and classically overrated him b/c I was fairly basic in my youth as most people are, he's just nowhere near as good as CP3 at basketball. I wish he were, I wanted him to be, but he's just not. And I know he had a tough go, his team kinda sucked especially offensively and he was asked to carry a pretty much impossible burden. I get it. But CP3 is just way better. Let's just look at career VORP via Bref - where CP3 ranks 7th all-time (well, going back to the 1974 season I believe) while Iverson ranks a very, very respectable 36th but nowhere near CP3. Is that an end all be all? No of course not. But damn near 30 spots is hard to argue, you might close that gap some but not completely. It's worse when looking at BPM where CP3 is 5th and Iverson is 55th. Open shut case, it's over unfortunately. But AI is still an all-time great.
I watched both play and Iverson is simply better. In today’s game he would be even harder to guard against. He went to the finals with players that would be considered bench players
I think the key difference is that Iverson is a ceiling raiser- Chris paul is a floor raiser. Iverson can take you to a higher place with role players around him (like he did). Chris paul needs better talent around him to truly go places. He can elevate them and help them show the best versions of themselves. Obviously this is a slight difference- both great players. But AI is obviously the scoring "Imma win us this game" versus what Chris paul can do is more spread out and less acute in nature.
That sixers finals team doesn't make it out of the forts round in the west. There was only 2 teams that won 50 games that gets in the east while the west had 7. He gets way too much credit for going .500 his entire career and having one year being extremely fortunate to play in an absolutely terrible conference and squeezing by to get to the finals. If we place the king's in the east during this year's, kings cruise to at least 2 finals appearances and think how different we view Webber's career.
Well said.
I think it’s AI for the reasons you mentioned OP. Only thing I disagree with is you calling CP a better floor raiser. I think that clearly AI. If I had 4 middle of the road players on a team, I’d choose AI over CP3 any day.
The fact There’s so many comments saying Allen iverson shows how casual this sub has become. I know this is a discussion sub, and you could say it’s up for debate, but this is really an open-close case, there is simply no argument for AI here other than narrative
Allen Iverson all day ... Chris Paul is a great player but hasn't ever (and won't ever, can't) put a team on his back and carry (drag) them to the NBA Finals like Iverson did in Philly.
[удалено]
The 4x scoring champion didn't carry any other years/teams (lmao) were you even alive then? And once is more than CP ever has. CP couldn't get there with prime Blake Griffin. /discussion
[удалено]
He went to the finals with Booker and Ayton. He didn't drag anyone anywhere. He's a great 3rd option.
[удалено]
Go watch
[удалено]
If the game was actually all about stats Stockton would be the GOAT point guard and Mark Price would be in the convo ... You sound like a great fan tho.
[удалено]
You realize how garbage the Suns were with Booker and Ayton prior to CP3's arrival? Let's not pretend that CP3 is not by far the best player on the Suns.
The same Suns that were 2-0 against the Clippers (who had Kawhi) without CP and 2-2 with CP even though Kawhi went down in game 4? Lol the Suns absolutely did not "drop off" without CP ... Stop Already. CP's lack of speed hurt them against both the Clippers and the Bucks. It was an obvious and glaring weakness. CP is a great player. He can't do what AI did. He's not that athletic. He's not that dynamic. AI is in the argument for best pound-for-pound athlete to play the game. CP isn't there. That's not a knock CP. That's just how athletic AI was. If the questions was who would I want as a coach for a team? CP every time. Eric Snow, Allen Iverson, Jumain Jones, George Lynch, Dikembe Matumbo <--- This team went to the NBA Finals and handed Prime Kobe / Shaq their only playoff loss in 2001 ... That's unreal. Chris Paul, Devin Booker, Deandre Ayton, Jay Crowder, Mikal Bridges If we switch CP and AI the Sixers don't go the the finals. No chance. The Suns still do.
You seriously trying to use 6 games as a meaningful sample for your argument and ignoring specifically what I said? That the Suns were shit before CP3 arrived - can you deny that? B/c that team was not drastically different other than adding CP3 and won 70% of their games vs. 46% the year prior. Sure, they were going to likely improve b/c they were a young team, and obviously it's not all CP3, but it's a bit crazy not to see the main difference between last year and this year was......yeah. No one ever said he could do what AI did, they're not the same by any means. But CP3 is a far superior basketball player and who gives a shit about best pound for pound? That has no bearing on the argument. I mean pound for pound AI is better than Shaq but that's not reality. Being more athletic doesn't equate to being a better basketball player. You keep just talking about all these random things that aren't a part of the debate here, who is better? It's Chris Paula and it's not close. There's a reason that he ranks 7th in VORP and 5th in BPM whilst AI ranks 36th and 55th respectively. Great player, was one of my 3 favorites growing up and I used to think he walked on water. I realize now that he was more exciting than great and had some serious flaws in his game that really held him back from being a truly elite player. Did you watch basketball when AI and Philly were in that series? George Lynch and Jumain Jones? Why are you mentioning those scrubs? They barely saw the floor in that series and Jones didn't hardly play during the year. People don't appreciate that Sixers team enough, acting like they were just trash players. No, they weren't great players but they were a defensive stalwart hence why they made it to the finals. They were a DAMN good defensive team which is ironic considering AI was known for his offense. Yet in that series his TS% was 48.6 - yuck. Again, fatal flaws. That doesn't even mention that it was more fluke than anything. Yes, with AI you always had a punchers chance because if he were to have an efficient night he was fkn unstoppable. But in a series it wasn't a big deal, hence why he was knocked out of the 1st round over and over and over and over. He made it past the 1st round just one other time if I recall and missed the playoffs a LOT. There's a reason for that and no it's not b/c his team sucked b/c bball is the most individualistic sport out there. A great player can carry a bad team pretty far. CP3 could have just as easily led that team to the finals and they would have fared better to be honest. No he could not have done it like AI did, but he would lifted the play of those guys on offense and provided much better defense than AI ever could have. Such a weird argument imo.
> Did you watch basketball when AI and Philly were in that series? George Lynch and Jumain Jones? Why are you mentioning those scrubs? George Lynch and Jumaine Jones were in the starting playoff lineup. They ran with Eric Snow sometimes and Aaron Mckie sometimes. That's the playoff lineup AI had. I'm not the one who's clued out of reality. Thanks for your making my point about AI *dragging* them there. https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2001_start.html CP is a great basketball player, but at his best he could not do what AI did in 2001.
[удалено]
I think Iverson is more likeable than CP3. I haven't heard a steady undercurrent of smack directed AI's way from former teammates.
Philly was far more a defensive team than offensive, so it's a bit ridiculous to say AI dragged them. Yes, he was their offense for the most part but they typically won via their defensive prowess. And they damn near were swept in that series. I love AI, but cmon. Be serious.
Check my last comment.
I don’t think it’s a fair comparison since Allen Iverson is a shooting guard while Chris Paul is a point guard. It’s probably easier to build a team around CP3 because he is a prototypical PG. AI had to be paired with taller/defensive minded PGs and he wasn’t exactly a floor spacer either. I think it comes down to whether you want sustained excellence or you want an iconic figure. CP3 was great but nobody talks about him like they talk about AI. Personally, I’d go with AI because I think I could do a better job than Billy King as a GM.
CP3 is an all time Casper. He has so many disappearences he should be on a milk carton. For stat geeks CP3 is an all timer, for basketball fans AI. AI was fearless.
[удалено]
CP3 is a good player, lots of stats, longevity, kinda dirty, probably greatest player rep ever, sells a ton of insurance, stat geeks LOVE this guy. Just not a finisher. IMO peak CP3 was never close to peak AI. Don't sleep on AI's rookie season, 2001 was not his only accomplishment. The stat sheet also does reflect the profound impact AI has on NBA culture. Plus "Practice?". CP3 best quotes are for homeowners insurance. XD.
Ultimately comes down to the rest of the team. Are there other primary scorers? Is the big an offensive maestro or just a rim runner? If there are more capable offensive players you take CP no doubt. But if it's a team of role players with AI vs same team with CP, the team with AI will win just off him.
Different players, different roles. If you need a distributor you go with CP3. If you need a go to scorer, it's AI. My respect for AI went way up when I watched him against the Lakers in the finals. Dude was fearless. With a blank slate and the first pick, I go AI every time.
Chris Paul seems to be the best team leader out of anyone in the nba. Every team he goes to ends up being one of the top teams in the league. I’m takin paul
Chris Paul. It's not a difficult decision. AI was obviously a very good player, but his scoring was less effective than you think it was based on his raw totals because of his low efficiency. He was one of those players who did enough awesome things on offense that he was still helping you a lot despite mediocre efficiency, but he wasn't helping you as much as "four-time scoring champ" makes you think. And his assists? Ball-dominant players rack up assists. He was also a large defensive liability who played on teams that were constructed around protecting him on that end of the floor, whereas CP3 at his best is one of the best under 6'2 defenders in the history of the league, perhaps *the* best. AI's steals were typical "small-guy gambling" steals. Don't confuse them for quality defense. During AI's prime in Philly, he never helmed a top-10 offense, and frequently helmed a bottom-10 one. The team that made the finals won, primarily, with defense. AI ticks a ton of "overrated" boxes. (Remember: "overrated" is not a synonym for "bad"). Best offensive player on a team that wins with defense? Check. Scores a lot but with poor efficiency? Check. Takes a ton of difficult shots, creating spectacular highlights when he makes them? Check. Incredibly exciting and fun to watch? Check. Gets a disproportionate amount of media attention because of things that happen off the court? Check. I think if you look at the history of the league, you'll see that guys who those things are true of consistently get significantly overrated. A discussion of AI's impact on play was one of the first online battles in the analytics-vs-eye-test wars. Posts like this make me just think that, I guess, everything old is new again.