Derrick Rose or Chris Paul? Who do you take?

[CP1708]

Dirk, you pissin on a forest fire bro. 

Even Kiddin bailed on this thread. 

 

[staysogreezy]

rose is not better than paul end of discussion

 

[staysogreezy]

rose is not better than paul end of discussion

 

[jmause3]

its time to lock this up

 

[jmause3]

its time to lock this up

 

[everysingletime]

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Uh, no. He is not better than Paul now, healthy or otherwise. And no one can prove he is better at ANYTHING, unless you're using bogus arbitrary analysis or pointing to wins, although wins are a function of a TEAM. And don't tell me he is a better "driver"or finisher either, CP is hitting 72% of his shots at the rim, Rose 61%.



You're part of the underwhelming minority that believes this. 

Amare shoots over 50 percent from three.  Does that mean he's a better 3 pt shooter than Chris Paul? 

 

[everysingletime]

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Uh, no. He is not better than Paul now, healthy or otherwise. And no one can prove he is better at ANYTHING, unless you're using bogus arbitrary analysis or pointing to wins, although wins are a function of a TEAM. And don't tell me he is a better "driver"or finisher either, CP is hitting 72% of his shots at the rim, Rose 61%.



You're part of the underwhelming minority that believes this. 

Amare shoots over 50 percent from three.  Does that mean he's a better 3 pt shooter than Chris Paul? 

 

[bittersweet]

Other than "defense"

... how is Paul better than Rose right now?

I don't see it ... D. Will we can argue.

 

[bittersweet]

Other than "defense"

... how is Paul better than Rose right now?

I don't see it ... D. Will we can argue.

 

[tennhouse2]

Chris Paul is by far the better player, I never even knew there were people outside of Chicago fans that thought diffrent

 

[tennhouse2]

Chris Paul is by far the better player, I never even knew there were people outside of Chicago fans that thought diffrent

 

[kiddin like jason]

I feel like some of you guys are trying to bait me into jumping into this conversation.

 

[kiddin like jason]

I feel like some of you guys are trying to bait me into jumping into this conversation.

 

[bhzmafia14]

Mike Conley anybody?

 

[bhzmafia14]

Mike Conley anybody?

 

[abovelegit1]

Originally Posted by amel223

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Uh, no. He is not better than Paul now, healthy or otherwise. And no one can prove he is better at ANYTHING, unless you're using bogus arbitrary analysis or pointing to wins, although wins are a function of a TEAM. And don't tell me he is a better "driver"or finisher either, CP is hitting 72% of his shots at the rim, Rose 61%.

You're part of the underwhelming minority that believes this. 

Amare shoots over 50 percent from three.  Does that mean he's a better 3 pt shooter than Chris Paul? 

Great comparison there, champ.

The sample size between Paul and Rose's "at the rim attempts" is indeed distinct, but that doesn't change the fact that Paul is quite adept at driving and finishing at the rim, despite claims that he somehow is so injured that he can't even get there. Not to mention that of those attempts, Chris Paul is only assisted on 10%, while Rose is assisted on 28%.

But I'm done arguing with Rose-fanboys. It's honestly like arguing with a brick wall. Again, and again, no one can say exactly how Rose is better than Paul, aside from using arbitrary means, or pointing towards wins, as if wins aren't a function of a team. Once again we are talking about right now, and right now Paul is the clear cut better player.

You can point out all the BS that supposedly makes you right, i.e Rose is better because he helps his team win, or that he does what is necessary, or that he leads his team. What does he do better? Doesn't play defense better. Doesn't play offense better. THEREFORE, IS NOT BETTER. And EVERY metric supports that he isn't.

Let me take the arbitrary approach of Rose fans for a second. If Paul was on the Boston Celtics, he would lead the league in assists. He would be having one of the greatest PG seasons ever, because all those bad shots that he passes up in order to hit open teammates would suddenly become assists, due to better teammates. The assist to turnover rate would be absurd, and the floor would open up so that he could score more as well, while maintaining the ridiculous percentages. They would be a 65+ win juggernaut, and he would be an MVP candidate. All the while MAINTAINING his SAME level of play he is now.



By utilizing a bunch of arbitrary analysis, you may be able to intuit that Paul is the inferior player. The tough thing about being an empiricist is that if you're wrong, you can be proven so. The nice thing about being an intuitionist (i.e Rose fan-boys) is that nobody can prove anything.

/thread

 

[abovelegit1]

Originally Posted by amel223

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Uh, no. He is not better than Paul now, healthy or otherwise. And no one can prove he is better at ANYTHING, unless you're using bogus arbitrary analysis or pointing to wins, although wins are a function of a TEAM. And don't tell me he is a better "driver"or finisher either, CP is hitting 72% of his shots at the rim, Rose 61%.

You're part of the underwhelming minority that believes this. 

Amare shoots over 50 percent from three.  Does that mean he's a better 3 pt shooter than Chris Paul? 

Great comparison there, champ.

The sample size between Paul and Rose's "at the rim attempts" is indeed distinct, but that doesn't change the fact that Paul is quite adept at driving and finishing at the rim, despite claims that he somehow is so injured that he can't even get there. Not to mention that of those attempts, Chris Paul is only assisted on 10%, while Rose is assisted on 28%.

But I'm done arguing with Rose-fanboys. It's honestly like arguing with a brick wall. Again, and again, no one can say exactly how Rose is better than Paul, aside from using arbitrary means, or pointing towards wins, as if wins aren't a function of a team. Once again we are talking about right now, and right now Paul is the clear cut better player.

You can point out all the BS that supposedly makes you right, i.e Rose is better because he helps his team win, or that he does what is necessary, or that he leads his team. What does he do better? Doesn't play defense better. Doesn't play offense better. THEREFORE, IS NOT BETTER. And EVERY metric supports that he isn't.

Let me take the arbitrary approach of Rose fans for a second. If Paul was on the Boston Celtics, he would lead the league in assists. He would be having one of the greatest PG seasons ever, because all those bad shots that he passes up in order to hit open teammates would suddenly become assists, due to better teammates. The assist to turnover rate would be absurd, and the floor would open up so that he could score more as well, while maintaining the ridiculous percentages. They would be a 65+ win juggernaut, and he would be an MVP candidate. All the while MAINTAINING his SAME level of play he is now.



By utilizing a bunch of arbitrary analysis, you may be able to intuit that Paul is the inferior player. The tough thing about being an empiricist is that if you're wrong, you can be proven so. The nice thing about being an intuitionist (i.e Rose fan-boys) is that nobody can prove anything.

/thread

 

[thesimplestlife]

I still don't see why people think Paul is better offensively than Rose. I mean can someone clarify this to me. Like Amel said, that whole 61% to 72% is nothing really to look too deeply into. I could of sworn that people knew that the top 3 drivers in the league were Lebron, Wade, and Rose (special mention to Westbrook), in what ever order you want to put them. It's almost a fact to say Rose is a better driver than Paul.

Rose also has a nice little floater that he can virtually get over anybody. I believe (could be wrong though) Rose is the only player in the league averaging 24 pts with at least 8 assists.

With the defense....
Paul gets more steals
Rose gets more Blocks+ Rebounds (if you consider rebounds a defensive thing)

  If you want to say Paul plays better defense, fine. But don't make it seem like he plays WAY better defense. It's close.

I agree that Paul would have an amazing year if he were on the Celtics. But that's why I never said Rondo was the best PG in the league. He's great, but with so many stars playing with him, it's easy to look good. Chris Paul is better than Rondo,but not better than Rose. Rondo also has a game that depends on his teammates to be making shots in order for him to look better.(With KG, Pierce, Allen, and even Big Baby, it's not hard to find somebody that can score).

I just think Rose would fit more teams better. Maybe Paul would do better on a team like Boston than Rose, but can you say the same for NJ, Phoenix, Sacramento, and etc. The teams that are really struggling who could use a massive scorer + distributor.

 

[thesimplestlife]

I still don't see why people think Paul is better offensively than Rose. I mean can someone clarify this to me. Like Amel said, that whole 61% to 72% is nothing really to look too deeply into. I could of sworn that people knew that the top 3 drivers in the league were Lebron, Wade, and Rose (special mention to Westbrook), in what ever order you want to put them. It's almost a fact to say Rose is a better driver than Paul.

Rose also has a nice little floater that he can virtually get over anybody. I believe (could be wrong though) Rose is the only player in the league averaging 24 pts with at least 8 assists.

With the defense....
Paul gets more steals
Rose gets more Blocks+ Rebounds (if you consider rebounds a defensive thing)

  If you want to say Paul plays better defense, fine. But don't make it seem like he plays WAY better defense. It's close.

I agree that Paul would have an amazing year if he were on the Celtics. But that's why I never said Rondo was the best PG in the league. He's great, but with so many stars playing with him, it's easy to look good. Chris Paul is better than Rondo,but not better than Rose. Rondo also has a game that depends on his teammates to be making shots in order for him to look better.(With KG, Pierce, Allen, and even Big Baby, it's not hard to find somebody that can score).

I just think Rose would fit more teams better. Maybe Paul would do better on a team like Boston than Rose, but can you say the same for NJ, Phoenix, Sacramento, and etc. The teams that are really struggling who could use a massive scorer + distributor.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by amel223

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Uh, no. He is not better than Paul now, healthy or otherwise. And no one can prove he is better at ANYTHING, unless you're using bogus arbitrary analysis or pointing to wins, although wins are a function of a TEAM. And don't tell me he is a better "driver"or finisher either, CP is hitting 72% of his shots at the rim, Rose 61%.

You're part of the underwhelming minority that believes this. 

Amare shoots over 50 percent from three.  Does that mean he's a better 3 pt shooter than Chris Paul? 

By utilizing a bunch of arbitrary analysis, you may be able to intuit that Paul is the inferior player. The tough thing about being an empiricist is that if you're wrong, you can be proven so. The nice thing about being an intuitionist (i.e Rose fan-boys) is that nobody can prove anything.

/thread


quoted for truthfulness.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Originally Posted by amel223

Originally Posted by abovelegit1

Uh, no. He is not better than Paul now, healthy or otherwise. And no one can prove he is better at ANYTHING, unless you're using bogus arbitrary analysis or pointing to wins, although wins are a function of a TEAM. And don't tell me he is a better "driver"or finisher either, CP is hitting 72% of his shots at the rim, Rose 61%.

You're part of the underwhelming minority that believes this. 

Amare shoots over 50 percent from three.  Does that mean he's a better 3 pt shooter than Chris Paul? 

By utilizing a bunch of arbitrary analysis, you may be able to intuit that Paul is the inferior player. The tough thing about being an empiricist is that if you're wrong, you can be proven so. The nice thing about being an intuitionist (i.e Rose fan-boys) is that nobody can prove anything.

/thread


quoted for truthfulness.

 

[everysingletime]

Originally Posted by thesimplestlife

 I could of sworn that people knew that the top 3 drivers in the league were Lebron, Wade, and Rose (special mention to Westbrook), in what ever order you want to put them. 

Yea, I thought so too.  I guess I was wrong.

 

[everysingletime]

Originally Posted by thesimplestlife

 I could of sworn that people knew that the top 3 drivers in the league were Lebron, Wade, and Rose (special mention to Westbrook), in what ever order you want to put them. 

Yea, I thought so too.  I guess I was wrong.

 

[JD617]

I still don't see why people think Paul is better offensively than Rose.
I always thought shooting and passing were pretty major aspects of offense, but what do I know.

 

[JD617]

I still don't see why people think Paul is better offensively than Rose.
I always thought shooting and passing were pretty major aspects of offense, but what do I know.