Stephen Curry or Chris Paul?
by Precise Films Productions on Jul 21, 2010 11:24 PM PDT
Email
PrintIf the Warriors had the chance to land Chris Paul by trading Stephen Curry, would you be okay with it? This is if CP3 actually wanted to play in Golden State.
It's just a hypothetical question. I'm asking because I want to know how much Warriors fans value Stephen Curry's potential compared to a proven all-star in Chris Paul. Also, if the Warriors were to offer Stephen Curry to the Hornets in real life, I think New Orleans would greatly consider the offer.
It's like when Anthony Randolph got traded in a package for David Lee, some Warriors fans liked Randolph's potential more than they liked Lee's proven production.
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
155 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Marco Belinelli hands down.
Seriously though I think almost everyone would chose Chris Paul over Stephen Curry. I mean the analogy with Randolph and Lee is okay, but Chris Paul is an absolute super-star and I think the best point guard in the league right now.
As for the Hornets trading Paul for Curry, I doubt it. They have Collison who was a pretty good point last year while CP3 was out.
Warriors.
wow... I really hope people didn't read the question carefully or were joking or something because after I voted Steph and CP were even...
Both of these are young players, but only one has finished second in MVP voting… There are only two explainations that I can think of. 1.) Homerism is a much more serious problem then I thought. Or 2.) People are worried that CP3 is injury proned or forget how good his is because he was injured.
Looking into this a bit more, career per 36 numbers,
Paul 18.6 pts / .353 3pt% / 5.6 fta / .848 ft% / 4.5 trb / 9.6 ast / 2.5 tov / 2.3 stl / .570 ts%
Curry 17.4 pts / .437 3pt% / 2.5 fta / .885 ft% / 4.4 trb / 5.9 ast / 3.0 tov / 1.9 stl / .568 ts%
Curry is clearly a better shooter than Paul, but so far at least, Paul has made up for it in being able to get to the line, and isn’t too shabby converting Fts. Curry is already near Nash’s insane shooting ability though, not hard to see Curry matching Nash in this category.
Curry is close in scoring production, rebounding, and steals to Cp3. However, for Curry to make the jump to an elite Point Guard, he is going to have to take care of the ball better and improve ast:tov. I believe Curry has even mentioned it in interviews this offseason that he wants to work on making better decisions with the ball. I don’t know if Curry can hit Paul’s insane 4:1 ratio, but something along Nash’s and DWill’s 3:1 ast:tov would be nice. :D
Not sure how to rate defense, since I have seen much less of Paul than I have Curry. All I can say is that right now Curry’s defense rates somewhere along “average,” in that he is capable, but I wouldn’t consider it a strength. Both have shown so far they are apt at getting steals.
I still think CP3 is still clearly the best guard in the league at running the point. Even at his ceiling, I just don’t see Curry putting up the assist numbers that Paul can. However, I do think Curry can absolutely be a bigger scoring threat than Paul.
I really love both players, and they are different types of players. CP3, to me, is a more “pure” point guard than Curry, but then if Curry can become a “Nash-like” point guard than that aint to shabby either. :D
I guess I’d have to chance my stance slightly. If I was building a team from scratch, I would take Paul over Curry. However, if I were the Warriors FO and was offered to trade Curry + change for Paul, I don’t think I would do it.
;-P
by Badly Browned on Jul 22, 2010 2:08 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Curry's assists will most likely go up next season
especially with David Lee to run pick and roll’s with (and a healthy team). It’ll make Curry’s job much easier.
I think Isiah Thomas led the NBA in turnovers his rookie year. Some players tend to do bad at passing at first, and then get better their second year once they know their limitations and what they’re capable of.
by Precise Films Productions on Jul 22, 2010 2:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Also, if Curry played in NO w/ their BS scores he’d have had twice as many assists last season.
Only McCoven not to get one of his comments rec'd in the Post Game Thread after that Epic win over the Dodgers.
by cybermaldonado on Jul 22, 2010 7:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Paul is a Superstar
Curry is not. Its not always about the stats. Paul led the Hornets to #2 seed not that long ago and pretty much turned David West into an all star that year. He is much better at defense than Curry. Also, his assist to turnover ratio is pretty incredible. He really has not had much, if any, help in New Orleans. If im starting a franchise, Paul is among the top 5 players I’d choose.
by tom88gsw on Jul 22, 2010 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
And if you look at CP3's last healthy season (08-09)
his stats are just insane. He was the true MVP that season.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions
If im starting a franchise, Paul is among the top 5 players I’d choose.
Yes, that was what I was trying to say.
However, if I already had Curry I do not think I would want to trade him + whatever to match the salaries for CP3 right now unless some kind of extension or whatever was part of the deal.
;-P
by Badly Browned on Jul 22, 2010 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, sure.
There’s always a certain amount of reasonable inertia with the players you have. Sometimes it reaches absurd levels (fans clammoring for Tolliver to be resigned, for example).
I hope we get to watch Curry mature into a superstar on the Warriors. That’d be awesome. On the other hand, having CP3 in a Warriors jersey would be pretty awesome, too.
(As I said in the fanshot, I would love to see a trade build around Monta for CP3. I doubt they’re dumb enough to go for it, but … a CP3-Curry backcourt would have some defensive issues at the two – which we have anyway with Monta – but would be a blast to watch, and so good offensively that it might not matter; after all, both of this year’s NBA finalists only had one halfway decent backcourt defender most of the time).
Kobe is capable of being a great defender.
He has the skills and the ability.
But he doesn’t really try that much. He often plays rather lazy defense, hanging back and playing “free safety” to jump in someone else’s passing lane, or gambling for steals.
The net result is that he puts up nice numbers, but doesn’t really challenge the player he’s guarding that much.
There are exceptions, particurly when his ego gets involved, but let’s be honest: the reason they wanted Artest rather than Ariza was so that they’d have a true stopper to put on opposing 2s and 3s.
Curry will be the better player.
I think Curry will be just as good. Different obviously, but just as good. Both have separate elements to their game that make them unique, but I honestly think that Stephen is on CP3’s level. Curry will be one of the deadliest shooters in the league for a long time, who passes the ball with incredible finesse and beauty. He runs a team in the half court or on the break with mastery and his creativity around the rim equal to all, is second to none. The fact that Curry fell to us at 7 and the personal fact that I enjoy watching him play more than Paul, I’d go with Curry. Plus Steph has never had a major injury before. Chris Paul has.
More so, Curry has more versatility as a player being a big point guard. He has the outside game to play off the ball and be effective as a shooting guard. He can even be better than Chris Paul when it is all said and done. He can take over the game and beat you in more ways.
Passing: Paul
Rebounding: Paul
Defense: Paul
Scoring: Paul
Steals: Paul
A/TO Ratio: Paul
Curry is the better 3 point shooter, but that’s about it.
Ugh
This is Curry’s second season this upcoming year. If anything, compare both player’s rookie seasons. Even then, the argument would be flawed given the fact that Curry had horrible perimeter shooters to pass to, along with D-leaguers who had very little notion of the crucial concept of offensive positioning. There are way too many elements to argue in terms of A/TO ratio. Also, Paul was literally given the reigns at point guard coming into the league, while Curry had player’s like CJ and Monta to take his minutes once he began to make rookie mistakes. Let’s take a look at their rookie stats.
Curry
mpg. 36.2 fg 0.462 3pt 0.437 ft 0.885 off 0.6 def 3.9 tot 4.5 apg 5.9 spg 1.9 bpg 0.2 to 3.0 PF 3.2 PPG 17.5
Paul
mpg. 36.0 fg 0.430 3pt 0.282 ft 0.847 off 0.8 def 4.3 tot 5.1 apg 7.8 spg 2.2 bpg 0.1 to 2.35 PF 2.79 PPG 16.1
Like I said, they are very comparable players who each have their own unique strengths, correct? Keep in mind, that Curry was running with lesser players throughout the duration of the season. So let’s agree to disagree as far as their passing is concerned. A large portion of that discrepancy can be assigned to teammates missing opportunities and making wrong decisions, well, quite frankly, because they sucked.
Curry is absolutely a better scorer than Paul. Paul get’s to the rim more, but Curry is a far better shooter from not only, 3 point range as you said, but from mid-range as well. He has the craftiness and ball handling to get to the line whenever he pleases, and does not miss nearly as many free throws as Paul. They are just so different as players, it’s hard to line them up after their rookie seasons and say who is better. Chris is better now, but they may not be so in 4 years. Curry is our guy, and I don’t really see your point in trading our guy for another guy who plays the same position when they are comparable players to begin with.
There's no handycap in basketball.
You don’t get any more wins by saying “Curry is only in his 2nd year”. And assuming Curry will turn into a top-5 player in the league is risky.
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Jul 22, 2010 7:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Why compare their rookie season? We’re living in the present. If we could compare rookie seasons, then Tyreke will be better than LeBron. Do you know how good Chris Paul actually is? He’s a top 3 player in the NBA when he’s healthy without a doubt. Chris Paul is good at basically everything. He’s an above average rebounder, scorer, playmaker, everything. Curry is good no doubt, but it’s highly unlikely he’ll be better than Paul.
Curry is absolutely a better scorer than Paul
Healthy CP3 > Curry any day, even when it comes to scoring.
Look, I’m not trying to say Curry is a bad player, because he’s not. What I am saying is that CP3 is superior in almost every category and he’d help us win more games. That’s that.
You say a healthy CP3
yet you want to say we’re living in the present…. If so right now.. I’d take Curry
Lights please!!
CP3 is healthy right now
so I don’t know what you’re thinking of.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions
He is coming off
an injury from last year, a knee injury…. Not the best injury for a basketball player to have. I won’t be surprised if CP3 gets hurt again next season. Therefore… Curry all the way.
Lights please!!
He was injured last season
and now he’s healthy. The surgery he had is not one that takes a long time to come back from. It wasn’t microfracture surgery. He did play for much of the last half of the season.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions
He did play for much of the last half of the season.
Yeah all 7 games. During which he managed to make about 5 FT total. That says a lot about how well he was driving to the hoop.
Only McCoven not to get one of his comments rec'd in the Post Game Thread after that Epic win over the Dodgers.
by cybermaldonado on Jul 22, 2010 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions
I was combining his early season ankle sprain
with his mid season meniscus tear in my head. Disregard that.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 7:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Doesn't matter..
Once you injury your knees in basketball… Your career takes a major turn. You probably wouldn’t know that because I assume you are one of those people who love talking about sports but never plays them. Your like the Jim Rome of posting
Lights please!!
I play basketball every day, bro
no need to make that assumption.
Also- why would playing basketball make you an expert on injuries, especially relatively uncommon ones (compared to ankle/finger sprains)? That doesn’t make any sense. That’s actually really stupid.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Haha....
I am sure you play everyday. No need for the bro comment either. It does not make you look tough… Simply insecure. Are you comparing a sprained finger to a knee injury where surgery was needed? Because if you are, that is actually stupid
Lights please!!
I just call people bro
I started saying it ironically and then it seeped into my vocabulary. I realize it sounds stupid.
Are you comparing a sprained finger to a knee injury where surgery was needed?
Actually, the opposite. What I am saying is that the injuries that the average casual basketball player would know about aren’t meniscus tears, but things like sprained ankles.
My point is that playing basketball has nothing to do with knowledge of knee injuries. In fact, the more serious NBA fan would probably know more about those than someone who just plays a lot of basketball.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
8ToTHErim,
You are not providing intelligent content and you are not being civil. Ideally, you should strive to do both. If you don’t, don’t expect to remain welcome here.
by jae on Jul 22, 2010 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Once you injury your knees in basketball… Your career takes a major turn.
Not really true.
Paul had a meniscus tear, which, as far as knee injuries go, is about as mild as it can get. The meniscus doesn’t have a structural job, rather it provides cushioning between the bones in the knee.
So you might reasonably expect someone with a damaged meniscus to have longevity injuries, there’s absolutely no reason to think of it as being as hard to come back from as an ACL or MCL tear. They are VERY different injuries.
Contrary to what you wrote, all knee injuries are not created equal.
by Ronaldinho on Jul 23, 2010 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
You probably wouldn’t know that because I assume you are one of those people who love talking about sports but never plays them
You suck.
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 23, 2010 8:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Why compare their rookie seasons
Because if you can even begin to compare the players in the first place, in all fairness, the only thing left for comparison is their rookie seasons. It’s a little unfair to compare a veteran to a rookie. Since it wasn’t my idea to start a post about such a lopsided comparison, I feel the only way to moderate this in any way, shape or form, is to compare the minimal information given to us. Does that make sense to you?
Again, I know how good Paul is, and I am not saying that Curry is better than Paul. I am saying that I, as in me, believe that Curry will be a comparable player and I even go as far as to say that he has a chance at being better. I believe he will be the ultimate team player who absolutely gets the most from his teammates, similar to Nash or Paul.
In saying this, when a player is comparable, as most people believe Kobe and LeBron to be for example, you could argue one is better than the other. In this sense, I believe that fans will have similar conversations about Paul and Curry some day. In other words, I believe Curry will rise to the same plateau as Paul. The conversation then shifts to vanilla and chocolate ice cream. The transition from college to the NBA, and the amount of improvement Curry showed in one season alone, I can confidently say that this is a conversation that will continue within completely different terms in the near future. Am I getting through?
Incidentally, anyone who thinks Kobe is better than Lebron is an idiot.
It’s not even a subject about which reasonable people can disagree.
I wouldn't say they are infact an idiot in general
but when it comes to evaluating basketball, yes, yes, yes.
And i believe tons of people have to pretend Kobe is the best or even in top 2 conversation to keep credibility with Kobe’s extremely (all of the sudden) large and obnoxious fan base. Jerry West and Barkley know Lebron’s better, but they have to keep it quiet, only to bring it up when directly asked, then to say ,“Oh but Kobe’s right behind him!” just so they aren’t called out by ESPN’s Mark Jackson or something.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 23, 2010 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Well Tyreke Absolutely No Potential
Curry=Major Potential
Randolph= As High As Potential Can Get
by harrisontran on Jul 23, 2010 8:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Well Tyreke Absolutely No Potential
He’s young, fast and strong. Of course he has potential
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 23, 2010 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions
HMMM!!!
First Stephen Is Still Learning
Passing Potential: Curry
Rebounding: Same (Using Burned Brown Stats) Thanks
Defense: This Goes To Paul
Scoring Potential: Curry He’s Only One Point Behind
Steals: Paul
A/TO: Again Stephens Learning
Gosh Give Him A Chance Eh
Thanks To Burned Brown
by harrisontran on Jul 23, 2010 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions
Badly Browned Whoops
Sorry Badly Browned LOL
Sorry Again
Thanks
by harrisontran on Jul 23, 2010 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions
One Thing
Lets Clear That Marco Sucks Badly
by harrisontran on Jul 23, 2010 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions
at being average?
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 23, 2010 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions
Anyone even consider that Paul’s contract ends in two years? I don’t want to trade Curry for a 2 year CP3 rental.
WOW!
Surprising how many people actually picked Curry.
May I remind you, we’re talking about 22 yr. old with (?)star potential vs. a 25 yr. old MVP candidate.
Curry is already a star
He finished at the top of his class. He is proven, never mind his potential.
I would not consider him a star already personally
But even if you gave him that…
22 year old star vs. 25 year old MVP candidate…
by freerandolph on Jul 22, 2010 7:18 AM PDT up reply actions
Passing goes to Curry because, well, did you watch a single game last season?
Rebounding goes to Paul but is not essential for a PG
Defense is a toss-up because Paul is a better on-ball defender but Curry comes up with more steals
Scoring goes to Curry because he will develop into a player that will make sure that the ball gets in the basket, if it is him doing it or a teammate.
Overall, I would stick with Curry because hes the man right now and I think he can play better with Monta than Paul could. I’m not trying to take anything away from Paul because he is a phenomenal player but, Curry is good, very good.
"Don't mess with Moses!" -BFitz
Passing goes to Curry because, well, did you watch a single game last season?
Except Paul has almost a career 4:1 ast:tov and Curry managed a 2:1 ast:tov.
;-P
by Badly Browned on Jul 22, 2010 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions
consider
the other 4 teammates. Consider their rookie seasons exclusively. Once you begin to argue fairly by comparing their respected rookie seasons instead of Paul’s career averages, you then can further investigate into the realms of team basketball and winning percentages. There are 4 other guys on the court who largely dictate the cause of an assist or turnover, discrediting or crediting the agent of whence it came.
Perhaps
But Curry still did have lots of bad “WTF” passes last season. He did have plenty of the good “WTF” passes though.
;-P
by Badly Browned on Jul 22, 2010 1:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Clearly.
However, I don’t recall a rookie from Chris Paul to Jordan who didn’t have their share of “WTF” moments, either.
Then when Curry gets up to 4:1 ast:tov
Come back to me
;-P
by Badly Browned on Jul 22, 2010 1:06 AM PDT up reply actions
Will do.
Also, I’m not sure what it would say about our new franchise, if the owners were approving deals that would send “our guys” out of town right after they experience success for other sexy offerings. I’m not sure if that looks very reputable in a player’s league. Just saying…
I'm confused by you lolboots
Whats not reputable about trading a player for a better player? Just because a guy is on our team its not reputable to trade him for another player?
Sure Curry has potential. I just think Paul is about as good as a PG can be. At his best Curry will be Steve Nash. Would you rather have Nash or Paul in their prime more? The answer to that question is more a matter of style than one being better than the other. It just seems to me that Paul is an already proven elite point guard and Curry has the potential to be an elite point guard at some point, but its not guaranteed.
by freerandolph on Jul 22, 2010 7:22 AM PDT up reply actions
Lol @ this thread. ^
Curry is a better passer than Paul?
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Jul 22, 2010 7:23 AM PDT up reply actions
consider the other 4 teammates. Consider their rookie seasons exclusively.
Paul was much better as a rookie, and his team improved from abysmal the year before he arrived to respectable with him. It’s not really particularly close. The “other teammates” effect on a player’s numbers is far less significant than most seem to think. There seems to be this notion that if other players were better, then it would be vastly easier to watch an assist total spike while turnovers dropped while there were tons of easy shots to watch efficiency improve. Doesn’t actually seem to be the case when looking at real players though. But looking at the “4 other players”, as a rookie Paul was playing alongside David West, a reasonably good (albeit vastly overrated) player and a bunch of scrubs who had managed to win only 18 games that year.
Interesting.
I understand what you’re saying jae, but at the same time I’ve thought about this. Paul is a player who looks to get to the rim. Many of his assists are dealt within 8 feet of the basket. His game abides by tactics dictated through his unparalleled athleticism. A common trend in his game that has gained him notoriety for being a dynamic player, is his ability to turn the corner and get all the way to the rim almost at will.
Excluding open jump shots, dunks and point blank goals are commonly the highest percentage shots in basketball. Having a skill set and a mentality to get to the rim many times during the game, along with having a particular big man with soft hands and scoring ability around the rim along with a jump shot, it’s safe to say one can assume that this 6’9 player is more likely to serve both himself and his teammates as beneficiaries of a certain design.
This is much different than getting to the rim and passing to Turiaf (who is a horrible finisher) and Corey Maggette, who is 6’6 and was matched up every night against guys 4-6 inches and 50 lbs. larger than him.
I have a hard time buying the fact that there is virtually no difference in the outcome. Perhaps I am misreading or misunderstanding the information you’re giving me.
Consider their rookie seasons exclusively.
It doesn’t make sense to “compare their rookie seasons exclusively” because Paul has improved an unusual amount since then, whereas Curry MAY improve substantially, but may not.
But, since you want to do that, let’s do it. Rookie v. Rookie:
Paul Curry
TS% .546 .568
A/36 5.9 7.8
Reb/36 4.5 5.1
TO/36 2.3 3.1
STl/36 2.4 1.9
PF/36 2.8 3.2
In other words: except for shooting efficiency (which is important, absolutely) Paul was better in EVERY. OTHER. CATEGORY.
And you might notice something else: look at what’s happened to Paul’s efficiency. He had a year when he had Andris-Biedrins like efficiency. FOR A POINT GUARD. In other words, that area improved, with him, far beyond what any reasonable person would ever have thought could happen.
Curry could improve his efficiency a lot – and I suspect it’ll go up at least some – and not come close to to that.
Curry is a really good player who may become a great player. I’m excited that he’s on our team. But saying he’s better than Paul is up there with Monta saying he’s better than Lebron. He’s just not.
You're right.
But my conclusion was right. Paul is better in every one except for shooting efficiency.
Sorry for the error.
Aren't you
Mr. all about efficiency??? I am surprised you would say CP3, if 75% of your posts include efficiency statistics.
Lights please!!
Strawman
Scoring efficiency isn’t the only thing that matters, but it’s important. It’s a piece of the puzzle and no one represents it any other way.
Chris Paul was still pretty efficient for his position. Nowadays, he’s a very efficient scorer.
Also- efficiency doesn’t exclusively refer to scoring. It can also be used for turnovers. Curry was turnover prone last season, whereas Chris Paul was good at taking care of the ball and finding his teammates. He also was better at pretty much everything else.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions
No, I evaluate a lot of numbers.
And I also use my eyes and evaluate what I see.
TS% tell a lot of the story with a lot of players. But it doesn’t tell the whole story. The difference in their TS% amounts to a little under one made shot every three games.
By contrast, in those three games, Paul was producing:
1.8 more rebounds
2.4 fewer TOs.
1.5 more steals.
If you think about what those things mean, it’s abundantly clear that you the TO difference alone is worth more than Curry’s one extra bucket. Then you’ve also got to throw in the:
5.7 more assists and
1.2 fewer Fouls
that Paul was producing every three games.
Again, not particularly close.
Just leave.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Far beyond what any reasonable person would ever thought could happen.
I don’t know, I suspect most people who know the game expect changes the following year after a rookie season, albeit the changes prove to be critical or marginal.
You could compare Curry’s rookie season….to his rookie season! How much did Curry improve over the second half compared to the first? Why did he not hit the rookie wall? Why was he playing better with each game towards the end of the season even after playing so many minutes? It’s tough to predict improvement or lack there of. Again, nobody is saying Curry is better than Paul. There is proof against this. What I actually am saying if you read it properly, is that Curry can become a better player than Paul, and I’m hopefully believing that he will.
Also
I was never on a mission to “prove Curry is better than Paul”. I’m not a fool. However, I was on a mission to state that given my opinion, judging from Curry’s early career, both players are “comparable”. Since all we have to compare are their stats from their rookies seasons, after taking a look at them, they are not far off. Paul was clearly the better distributor, but IMO that had more to do with him having a healthy front line to finish around the rim with more efficiency. Since we can agree that shots closer to the basket are higher percentage shots, and that front court players play closer to the basket, it is safe to say that Curry missed out on some assists, dishing to players like Maggette instead of West. Again, this was a point brought up not to prove that Curry is a “better” passer, but rather a “comparable” one.
Also
it’s not fair to compare their rookie seasons because Paul only played 2 years of college compared to Curry’s 3, so Curry is older and farther along in his development than Paul was.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Hmm
that’s a fair point but I still feel like it’s nit picking. Couldn’t you then argue that Curry played in a lesser conference, so Paul was actually the one who had the better experience? Have you studied their minutes played each year? Too many factors to make that argument besides the one year Curry had on him.
YOu could argue that, but there's no evidence to support that idea as a general principle.
… so it comes dangerously close to just making up excuses for the player you like better.
the problem I have
is that it’s also not totally fair to compare CP3’s sophomore season to Steph’s rookie season.
Man, I hope we can get something really special out of Steph next year. I really can’t wait.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 23, 2010 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Chris Paul's rookie
numbers were still incredible.
16.1 ppg 7.8 apg 5.1 rpg 2.2 spg 2.3 to
Curry had 5.9 apg to 3.1 to. Curry is a very good passer but Chris Paul is among the best (Kidd has to be there still). I know we all love Curry, but, im my mind, this is not even debatable. Paul is an MVP caliber player.
ignore the first half
of the season, he was making dumb mistakes… and im not talking about just stats, watch him play
"Don't mess with Moses!" -BFitz
23 > 24 - basic math
His A:TO ratio never got all that good
I don’t even think it was above 2 for the second half. Just eyeballing his splits, it was only above 2 for the last 8 games of the season.
and im not talking about just stats, watch him play
Have you ever watched CP3 play? It’s pretty obvious that he’s one of the very best passers in the league and that Curry has a way to get there. I think Curry will be a very good passer in the future. He’s just not there yet.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Aug 1, 2010 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Passing goes to Curry because, well, did you watch a single game last season?
This sentence is both poorly written and poorly reasoned. The awkward construction, shifting from statement to a question does not produce a logical conclusion. Yes, I watched many games last year and Paul is the better passer. He has been the more effective passer, gathering significantly more assists while turning the ball over less often throughout his career.
Rebounding goes to Paul but is not essential for a PG
A rebound that a guard gets is just as valuable as a rebound that a big man gets. End result is the same. Your team has the ball.
Defense is a toss-up because Paul is a better on-ball defender but Curry comes up with more steals
Curry does not come up with more steals either per minute or per game. This isn’t one of those debatable things either. It’s just a matter of being able to count. Really, if you can’t be bothered to look up who actually gets more steals, why should anyone think anything else you write is even slightly reliable or reasonable?
Totally agree with you (as I hope most people do on this debate)
Although a little harsh Jae… lol. Must sting a lil for lilbots
by freerandolph on Jul 22, 2010 7:26 AM PDT up reply actions
must sting a lil for "lilbots"
Except I didn’t write what jae was responding to. Apparently for some, it’s unfortunate I have no problems with sentence structuring. Perhaps it would be helpful to slowly gather your thoughts, and then commence with a careful reread of the posts that are clearly provided to you.
Ok, let’s make sure a couple of things are nice and sparkly clear. I never said Curry is a better player than Paul. I said that I believe Curry will grow into a better player than Paul, simply because he is a better offensive player and similarly talented with the ball in his hands. Although you may disagree with this, nobody can actually prove me “wrong”. We do not own a crystal ball, and we can not talk to God.
Since it is absolutely impossible to predict what Curry will do this upcoming season or the next, it is only fair to compare both player’s rookie seasons. This is sound logic. Just because Paul has improved since then and Curry MAAAAAAY improve, doesn’t add strength to the notion that Curry is more or less likely to improve. That doesn’t make sense.
What’s not reputable about trading a player? There is a certain amount of trust and respect that is being lost in this league with each passing year. We all watched Kobe whine and threaten his way until LA met his demands and West brought in Gasol. We all watched Lebron repeatedly kick a team from a lousy city with no appeal like the Cavaliers, in the groin until they cried uncle. We watched Jason Richardson traded away for basically nothing, when he was the heart and soul of the franchise.
Maybe none of this means anything to you, but I’m a bit more old school. I think when you draft a guy and he turns out to be a good player and wants to lead your team, you should stick with your guns and build a foundation that people can identify such a player with. It’s why I love Paul Pierce so much and respect Boston for not trading him away. I like the idea of investing in your investments and giving them a chance to bare fruition, instead of just always looking for the next best thing. Kind of like a girl dumping Lacob when he was a peanut pusher for a baseball club. Then he goes off and beomes a billionaire. Whoops…
I think it says something for your legacy as a franchise if you can successfully build a team through the draft and faithfully stick with your guys. I think people respect what the Thunder are doing a lot more than what the Heat are doing in South Beach. I know I do, but I can’t speak on anybody else.
I have a hard time investing in the belief that in the case of a point guard, the 4 other teammates on the floor have little effect on his assist numbers. I don’t believe it vastly effects it, but I do believe there are some marginal and even considerable differences.
Tony Parker is a living example of this. Without Tim Duncan, I doubt Tony has the reputation of being an elite distributor. Again if this is the case, for similar reasons, why would Curry be excited about running the pick and roll with David Lee, rather than Anthony Tolliver? Show me something to back up your stance on this argument, evidence if you will. Again, I do not know if this is true or false. It’s simply my opinion. I am free to changing my opinion if some one actually has a vested interest in showing me examples that would allow me to reasonably sway elsewhere.
Chris Paul is the best at what he does, hands down. The major injury he suffered will hurt him in the latter end of his career I think, since he relies a lot on athleticism to do what he does. Physically, Curry as of now is healthier, younger, and has more size. Still, it is not possible to say who will have had the better career 15 years from now. I believe Curry is going to be a top 5 player in this league. I believe he has the talent and the confidence to do this. Sure, it’s a risk making such a grand statement, but it’s my belief. Save a loaded gun, and in about 10 years, if I’m wrong, you can put a hole in me.
Incidentally...
…obviously “elite” isn’t a specific measurement, but Tony Parker’s reputation as an “elite” distributor doesn’t seem entirely credible to me. The best assist season he’s ever had was 08-09, in which he almost racked up as many as Chris Paul did his rookie season. For the career, 6.2 APG per 36. That doesn’t seem like elite production to me, at least not so much so as to claim Tim Duncan is somehow inflating his numbers.
lol
Wow. Can’t trust most of your opinions on here
by GoldenSt8OfMind on Jul 22, 2010 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Don’t trust anyone’s opinion unless they are a host on ESPN radio. You’ll fit in much better with most crowds that way. Good luck.
Only McCoven not to get one of his comments rec'd in the Post Game Thread after that Epic win over the Dodgers.
by cybermaldonado on Jul 22, 2010 7:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Passing goes to Curry because, well, did you watch a single game last season?
Have you ever watched Chris Paul play?
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I really like Chris Paul.
I also really like stephen curry a lot and he is younger and had a very good rookie season, it would be tough to see him in any other jersey and idc if we get paul. This wont happen tho.
this fanpost is based on a failed premise
NO is not trading CP3 for a point guard when they have Collison ready to take over that position. The most logical trade, the one that returns the most value to NO and satisfies CP3’s desire to win now, is CP3 for Andrew Bynum.
CP3, too much Money!
For the Warriors to acquire CP3, we would have to move many of our talents and risk ourselves with the cap… I love CP3 but im very happy with Stephen Curry’s play… plus we will never know Steph could become better than him.
by Mzed on Jul 22, 2010 6:30 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
At this stage why would you even try and compare them, we know that Curry’s resume is much to short. Why compare Carrie Underwood to Patsy Cline; Usher to Micheal Jackson,? Let their careers play out a little longer then you can make fair comparisons.
It’s time to start comparing Paul to some all timers.
Paul vs, Tiny Archibald-Tiny
Paul vs. Ike Thomas-Thomas
Paul vs. W. Frazier- Frazier.
These comparisons are unfair to Paul because these players had careers long enough to include mutilple championships,
Let Curry’s and Paul’s careers play out a little longer.
This is a no brainer
Paul is a HoF point guard right now. He is the best point guard in the game. He is better on BOTH ENDS than Curry.
It blows my mind how many people voted for Curry and even tried to justify why.
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
Paul is...
…really good, but let’s not lose our minds. He’s hardly a Hall of Famer if his career ended today. There’s both a quality and quantity standard people generally have to meet for Hall of Fame induction into most sports. Paul has had two real good years, two years I’d consider HOF worthy over a long haul, and a third year that looked much the same until he got injured.
Paul has had two real good years, two years I’d consider HOF worthy over a long haul, and a third year that looked much the same until he got injured.
Paul has had 3 really, really good years where he was the best PG in the game, another year where he was damn close and was the best rookie in the game —significantly better than either Curry or Tyreke, and a year where he was every bit as good as he’d been in his 3 really, really good years diminished only because he was healthy. I am not a fan of “per game” comparisons in general, but what Paul did as a rookie, averaging 16ppg, 5 rpg and 7.8 assists has only been done 45 times in NBA history by 15 other players. His rookie year was HOF worthy, and it was his least effective year so far. Half of those guys are hall of famers, with a couple that are probably going to be enshrined at some point.
Paul if you have half a brain.
Paul might be the second-best player in the NBA right now, when healthy.
It’s not even close.
There are two reasons to prefer Curry.
One, he’s younger. Neither player is old, but obviously, all else being equal, you always want a younger player.
Two, no injury history. The knee injury Paul suffered this year may hurt his longevity.
And obviously you don’t trade Curry for Paul unless you have some certainty about Paul sticking around past the end of his contract – Curry is too much to give up for one or two years of Paul, even though Paul is better.
But as far as on the court, right now and for the next several years – look:
The absolute, pie-in-the-sky, best-case scenario for Curry is that he becomes a player as good as Paul already is.
Curry could have an incredibly career and not be as good as Paul. I mean, lots of people are talking about Curry eventually being as good as Nash as an optimistic best-case scenario, which is awesome, but … Nash isn’t as good as Paul.
I have 1/3 of a brain and drink lots of kool-aid
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
Ode to Tim Kawakami
by Doctor Kajita on Jul 22, 2010 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I think...
…they’re strengths are different enough that Curry’s maximum yield probably doesn’t resemble Paul’s, at least not in a way that makes the comparison clean and tidy right now. I mean, I could see Curry upping his shooting volume, efficient as he is, and maxing out as a 24-26 point per game guy at the PG slot, which isn’t something I’d expect from Paul.
You’re also right about Nash not being as good as Paul. Although I am worried about Paul’s leg injury…
Why Paul is better than Nash.
Paul is light-years better defensively in that hard-to-measure, staying-in-front-of-his-man way.
His career assists numbers are better despite just coming into his prime.
His career rebound numbers are better.
His career turnover numbers are better.
His career steal numbers are better.
He scores more.
The only thing Nash has on him is shooting efficiency, but both players are very efficient, and I suspect when all is said and done the difference will be very small. Note that Paul his .599 his last healthy season – not as good as Nash but certainly elite.
Nash is a better outside shooter
and doesn’t rely as much on athleticism, which has enabled him to have excellent longevity. I’m not sure CP3 will be as effective once his physical abilities start to decline, which will happen in 2-3 years, if not sooner. We’ll see.
There's no reason to expect Paul to start to decline in 2-3 years unless the injury is worse than expected.
Nash has been fantastic when it comes to longevity, and that has to be factored in, although of course we won’t know just how good Paul’s longevity will be until his career is over.
the decline I was referring to
is simply his physical/athletic abilities generally peak at or before age 28 for men. Obviously there is some variation, but assuming CP3 is already conditioning to his maximum potential, I think it’s reasonable to assume between the ages of 27-28 he will be past his peak athletic condition.
he has great athleticism, but his game isn’t purely predicated on it. He’ll probably be a very good player till his 30s.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions
WOW I cannot believe the poll
If your telling me CP3 was healthy and wanted to play for the Warriors meaning he would sign some kind of extension, I would of course take CP3 over Curry. Curry is going to be a really good player but at this point CP3 is the better player. We can only hope for Curry to be that good.
by GoldenSt8OfMind on Jul 22, 2010 8:50 AM PDT reply actions
Curry
The fact that CP3 is demanding a trade is a total turn off. Enough of those players. Curry’s potential is way sexier than Randolph’s potential. Curry actually played significant minutes at the hardest position in the NBA. I believe Curry will be in the same discussion as CP3, Steve Nash, Deron Williams (who I think is better than CP3), Rajon Rondo, and Tony Parker at the end of the day.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
Ode to Tim Kawakami
If the Warriors had the chance to land Chris Paul by trading Stephen Curry, would you be okay with it?
Depends on who we had to give up along with Binky? There’s no way they let us have CP one to one. I doubt it would be worth the price unless they took something like Binky , Vlad, Gadz, WTF, and CiaoLin?
Lights please, lights please, turn off the lights.
by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 22, 2010 10:27 AM PDT reply actions
plus curry has a higher IQ
What do you base this off of? Pauls basketball IQ is tremendous. A 4.28:1 assist to turnover ratio shows that to be true. Curry’s was 1.9:1 . Later in the year when Curry was doing better (post all star) it rose to 2.08:1.
I like Curry a lot and he has the potential to be a very special player, but CP3 is among the top 5 players in the NBA. Curry has a lot to work on defensively before he would ever be thought of so highly.
I could care less about a subjective view of higher IQ
Chris Paul simply is more effective. Might be a jerk and I can understand if you just don’t like him but I think it’s pretty clear he is the more effective player. That isn’t a knock on Curry either.
Because talent? You want to add a guy like boozer because hes talented? I’m sorry i just don’t see that as a valid reason. -- fffindeed
by wallywagon11 on Jul 22, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Paul had less
turnovers, more assists, and it is VERY debatable on who had better weapons around him. We had a higher offensive rating (points per 100 posessions)
Curry.
I don’t wanna have to trade for an all star like Miami did. I want to have someone be the face of our franchise for his whole career, like Tim Duncan was for the spurs. Plus, Chris Paul has proven to be kinda injury prone.
Marco Belinelli
He Is A Joke Guys Come On!
Those Who Would Want Marco Belinelli Instead Of Curry That Have A Console With Nba 2009 or newer go trade him right no thats right you wouldnt. No One Would Trade Marco For Stephen Its Just A Bad Deal For The Dubs. Who Picked Marco Youre All Crazy. Just Kidding But Are You Serious Marco Instead of Curry NEVER!!!!!!!
Reply button?
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 5:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Im taking Curry in a heart beat
CP is really undersized to me. Curry is younger, bigger, and a wayyy better shooter.
And also way less athletic, with low defensive potential
and less good of a passer.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions
And CP3 is wayyy better at scoring overall, passing, rebounding, defense, and could possibly be the 3rd greatest point guard of all time.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I like how all the Kobe homers on this blog ( well only a select few)
who use terrible grammar and take personal shots at others unsurprisingly keep saying Deron Williams and Curry > CP3.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 6:17 PM PDT reply actions
DO THEY WATCH BASKETBALL?!!
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions
INJURY DUH WTF
Steph Curry yo. he hasnt been injured as much and is younger. but cp3 is cp3 so…and lets never forget about belinelli hes a baller with POB up in toronto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2I89FzHNJA
by warriorboi4lyfe on Jul 22, 2010 6:26 PM PDT reply actions
Hello!!!!!!!!
Cp3 a.k.a Blown knee! Curry a.k.a baby face assassin ! Sum of so Called Fan are just Dumb!
And some so called fans (you)
are just stupid homers. CP3 is the 2nd best player in the league. Curry is, at best, top 50.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I like CP3
he is a great PG but i’m going with Curry. Steph is with Warriors right now and I love the guy so i’m sticking my our guy. I also like that Steph is 6’3 and is potentially still growing while Paul is maybe 6’0
Golden State Warriors Fan 4 Life!!!
Owner: Joe Lacob, Peter Guber
GM: Kevin Prichard
Coach: Brian Shaw
Over 1,000 wins online with GSW in 2K10
..............SC30..............
Who are you responding to?
Use the reply button, it makes it easier.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Hmmm.
Maybe I am responding to the post that says Cp3 is the 2nd best player in the league…. Does that sound familiar..?
Lights please!!
Okay
but how was I implying that he’s better than LeBron?
I definitely think he’s better than Kobe and Wade, but not LeBron. Curious- who do you think is the best player in the league? You’ve pretty much just eliminated the top 4 players in the NBA already.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 8:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I think he’s made it clear that Kobe >>>> Lebron, so i’m guessing Kobe?
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions
NO DUDE
HE SAYS KOBE IS BETTER THAN HIM.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Why do you think
cp3 is the 2nd best player in the league…. Didn’t you say that if people act “stupid” then they are stupid. Are you proving your point with that comment..?
Lights please!!
I don't think there is a defined 2nd best player in the league.
All i know is, if you put Wade, Howard, or Paul, you aren’t wrong.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 8:25 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think it's terribly outrageous
to put guys like Wade or Dwight ahead of him, but I think CP3 is the second best player. He’s the best PG, great defensive player, very effective passer, takes care of the ball well, scores super efficiently. He’s basically really good at everything. He could have been the MVP in 09 and it wouldn’t have been that outrageous.
Pro-Skub for life
by Reverend_Randy on Jul 22, 2010 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions
i think he deserved it in 08, and 09 was Lebron's year IMO.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Hmmm.
Maybe I am responding to the post that says Cp3 is the 2nd best player in the league…. Does that sound familiar..?
Lights please!!
Well stop acting like you did respond to his post.
You didn’t and you just put it here on the bottom, and to be quite honest, with your post quality, i would have assumed you were just talking to yourself.
"We didn't win our independence from the British to watch Aaron Rowand hit this bad,"-KNBR caller.
by GovernorStephCurry on Jul 22, 2010 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Curry's smarter
When you watch Curry play you notice that he has a huge menu of options that he’s got in his head in any variation and he quickly can compute which is the one to goto, almost like an endless reservoir – you can see his brain working in other words, I just notice more passion on Paul’s end and I’d rather have a brain. Speaking of Paul and brains…what team does he think he can play for right now that would be any better than the Hornets? Think about how much the other team would have to give to N.O. to get Paul – after that Paul is playing with a gutted roster – probably worse than what he’s playing with right now. All the best teams are set at point except the Lakers and they’d have to give away their entire roster besides Kobe to get Paul (the Heat are just flat out set). He must’ve gotten sick of jambalaya or something. Real sick.
CP3 is the best PG around, no question
and I would still keep Curry on this team at this point in time. Last week, it might have been different, but the current drama smells uncomfortably like Jackson, and another attitude like that is the last thing this team needs.
by sellWarriorsNowplzthx on Jul 23, 2010 3:10 PM PDT reply actions
not Curry vs Paul but Ellis for Paul
Curry, like his Dad, is a very good and will be a great 3 point shooter. He is much better able to spot up than Ellis who likes to drive and finish or stop and jump shoot more. So Curry is more able to exist with Paul than Ellis IMO. The real trade is Ellis for Paul. That would be the second coming of Baron Davis and this infusion would get the Warriors to the playoffs and maybe deep if everyone stays healthy. Perhaps Ellis and the new injured rookie for Paul or whatever the numbers need to be. GS has plenty of options with all the trade exceptions and high priced bench players.
Curry and Paul backcourt
Not new, but just saw this piece on Curry @ http://www.csnbayarea.com/07/29/10/Steinmetz-Coach-K-High-on-Warriors-Curry/landing_steinmetz_v3.html?blockID=279658&feedID=2799
“You knew he was going to be a player,” said Dell Curry, now a broadcaster with the Bobcats. “But I don’t think anybody could have imagined, himself even, a year that he had.”
Chris Paul begged to differ. The New Orleans Hornets point guard, who has worked out with Curry in the past, participated in the golf tournament to benefit a community center Curry volunteered at when he was in college.
“Stephen was unbelievable,” Paul said. “He didn’t surprise me by anything he did. I’m fortunate enough to get the opportunity to be around him and see his work ethic and things like that.”
I didn’t know Paul and Curry had history. I’m even more interested in a Curry Paul backcourt. And it looks like Paul might like it as well.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"UNSTOPPABLE BABY!"
Golden State Warriors rookie Marc Jackson to the Mavericks' bench, after hitting a lay-up during a 29-point loss (2000)
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Most Commented
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
- David West hilariously denies each and every one of his young fans a high-five (VIDEO)
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat are moving on to the conference finals
