I think both these guys are good points...a few observations from stuff I read above... this is coming from a Heat fan.... don't like the Jazz or the Hornets... To say that Paul is reaching Magic level is ridiculous. You guys must be too young to remember "Showtime". If you bring in the stats, I have to agree with those Jazzercisers and say Stockton is #1. Just the lead he has in steals and assists ( playing with stiffs like Ostertag, Blue Edwards, Jeff Malone, etc....hahaha) is sick. He had 1 guy all those years there and he was dirty ass hell, but I liked him. Why? because if the Heat had Stockton instead of Sherman Douglas and Steve Smith I would have loved him. Second- I like Williams if I was a GM too. I was so happy when Miami passed on Boozer (well, other than getting the 3 kings). He is one of those guys that you see sitting on the bench in a nice suit too many times a year. Paul to me seems like one of those guys.... fragile. Even though DWill looks always nicked up too, at least he gets out on the court. I don't know about the percentages of games missed and all that, but it seems that way. If Paul's health stays on this track, he might tagged with that ageless phrase, "He's great, when he plays". Boozer has that tag. Paul isn't there yet, but 2 more injury riddled seasons will put him there. Hopefully he can stay out on the court. I want the South Beach Kingdom to take down everyone at full strength....
« My Kingdom for a Four?
The Arguments for Deron Williams
Utah Jazz fans, and really just D-Willers in general, have recently decided to bring back the old debate about who is the best point guard in the NBA. Most of the arguments are the same, but with Paul’s recent injury a few of them seem stronger. Let’s look at the more common reasons why they think Deron Williams is better than Chris Paul.
The argument of health- This is quite popular nowadays, but it’s really not based on anything more than a fluke injury. As for that fluke injury potentially lingering, nobody cares about your pretend medical opinion. The fact is, this argument wouldn’t exist if not for a wayward pass by David West. Through both players’ first four season in the league, Deron had missed 18 games, and Paul 28. That comes out to 10 games over the course of four seasons, or 2.5 per year. Since they were drafted, Paul has played 12,881 minutes, while Williams has logged 13,623. That 5% difference hardly make a concrete case that one gets hurt more than the other, or is “injury prone”.
The argument of loyalty- This one has been popping up a bit, and for good reason. Paul wanted out of New Orleans and supposedly sent Beebop and Rocksteady behind the scenes to make it happen. Or something like that. Anyway, there is a case to be made that right now that D-Will is a more valuable asset, or more desirable, or whatever, because of his supposed loyalty. That’s fine and acceptable. The problem is that this argument has nothing to do with playing basketball, and everything to do with off the court issues. It has no business being used in a debate about who is the best point guard on the court.
The head to head argument- ThisÂ has been around a while, and still isn’t fooling anyone except the D-Willers. Essentially they like to just throw 24/25ths of all games entirely out the window, and instead focus on the remaining 1/25th. Sure, those games prove that Deron Williams’ team has thus far kicked Chris Paul’s team all over the court, and that Deron has so far outplayed Paul when they have been matched up, but that’s all that it means. Take the Nadal-Federer rivalry in tennis for instance. Nadal tends to beat Federer when they play heads up, but Federer is still considered the all time best, while Nadal isn’t even within shouting distance of the conversation. You might say that Nadal is better than Federer heads up, but to argue that he’s a better player overall would be foolish.
The argument for defense- Although it’s hard to evaluate defense using statistical measures, Paul and Deron are both undeniably good defenders. Paul has been voted onto the All-Defensive first team and second team, while Deron hasn’t been mentioned. So as of now there hasn’t been any good argument that he’s better defensively than Paul. Have one? Leave a link.
The argument for Chris Paul being better is fairly simple, so there’s no need to waste time detailing it. Look at any statistical measure (PER, adjusted +/-, efficiency ratings, APER, win score, clutch stats, whatever) and it’s clear who fares better. There are no advanced statistical measures of overall performance that favor Deron.
Van, I hereby declare that Deron Williams' stats are inflated. How can you possibly counter my baseless assertion? Joe, I think you have to speak to these guys using their lingo. You are too distracted by things that actually happen. Those things are SOOOO in the past. Like totally in my backward light-cone. And stuff. Get with the times. We are dealing with an alternate reality here, it's all quantumy and jazzy, and we need to learn their rules. In their world you just declare. I did it at lunch. I said I want a burger sans ketchup . . . voila . . . no ketchup, and they didn't charge me extra. By the number 6 combo with no ketchup and a coke principle, Deron's stats are inflated. I ate the burger, so it's locked in. Now if you cover the quesadillas at Taco Bell, we can make sure Derrick Rose missed 20 games last year. Break!
Williams is on the court, Paul is, most likely, injured. I think, (avg) Paul has missed 20 games/ season. Maybe more
The problem with stats is that the Jazz are by far a better team than the Hornets. If Deron didn't have as good of supporting players then he would have higher stats.
If you're going to argue statistics, you should probably Provide them: CP3 Career Stats: Games Played: 343, Minutes: 37.3, FG%: .473, 3PT% .353, FT% .848, OFF Rebs: 0.8, DEF Rebs: 3.9, TOT Rebs: 4.7, STL: 2.38, BLK: .09, Turnovers: 2.57, Fouls: 2.57, Assists: 10.0, Points: 19.3 DWill Career Stats: Games Played: 386, Minutes: 35.3, FG%: .467, 3PT%: .361, FT% .799, OFF Rebs: 0.5, DEF Rebs: 2.6, TOT Rebs: 3.1, STL: 1.03, BLK: .23, Turnovers: 2.98, Fouls: 2.67, Assists: 9.0, Points: 16.7 Now, if you're going to say that Paul is the better player because his statistics are better than Deron's, you have to consider their rolls on their teams and their supporting casts. The fact is that DWill has consistently been surrounded by better teams. His roll with the Jazz has essentially been as the facilitator and 2nd or 3rd scoring option. Although he has the talent to be the first scoring option, Utah's system is not designed to have a shoot-first PG. Chris Paul, however, is the first option on New Orleans' offense and his numbers reflect as much. The best argument to make in this case, is to look at the shooting percentages. They give better insight into a player's abilities in regards to fundamentals and overall talent. In this case, they are nearly identical with the exception of Paul having a significant advantage on free throw percentage, which doesn't really give any indication of how good he is during regular game play. As far as defense goes, Chris Paul has only made the All-Defense team because he led the league in steals. One of the only two measurable defensive statistics, the other being blocks. Both of which have been said to give no true indication of a player's true defensive abilities. Having high numbers in the steals category only means that CP3 is good at taking risks. If you're going to say that Chris Paul is the better defender, you have to look at the average performance of each players' opponents. It's 2am where I am, so I'm not about to research and see if anyone actually has these numbers right now. It is, however, a widely known fact that CP3 consistently allows bigger guards to have huge games when he is defending them, whereas Deron Williams has always been able to curb the performance of most any guard in the league, with the exception of very small, very fast guards like Aaron Brooks. So, to me, it looks like a toss up. Really, no matter who you would choose to be your point guard, I would choose the other man and be completely happy with him. It's pointless to argue this point when both players still have 10+ years to play out their careers. Anything can happen, and only time will tell who the better guard will be.
Yeah that who critical thinking thing....the bane of all hyperbole and headline grabbing pundits. Still if anyone likes D-Will better then of course they can. Someone with the ability to run a Multi-million dollar franchise thought that Billups was better than at least2 of these three "D-Will, Nash, CP-3" again cant say who that GM would have voted for if he had free reign. Not that this has any bearing to the argument but if you like D-Will best you will likely be very happy in most 10 man NBA fantasy leauges where he appears to be hitting the second round with regularity. (Paul is going top 3 picks over all fairly consistently) but fantasy player focus on stats so what do they know.
Van- "they cannot deny that if 60 percent of General Managers" Actually I easily refuted this misinterpretation of the vote in my first post in this thread. We can only assert that 43% of all the General managers prefer D-Will to Paul. The actual number may be higher but it can only be proven that 13 out of 30 actually prefer D-Will. Given that some may prefer Nash to D-Dwill, they may also prefer Paul which leads us to the conclusion that it is possible that more GM's actually prefer Paul to D-Will. Venn Diagrams for the Win!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venn_diagram Again for what its worth.
I think D-will is good. However , No one who has any significant knowledge of the NBA would call him "one of the best ever" at this point. He might continue to develop but clearly his performance is not in the pantheon of all time greats. CP is in that pantheon. Paul's injuries has clearly reduced his stock in the minds of many. Still to assert that D-Will is a better point guard from this point and forward you have to assume that he will continue to improve AND/OR CP will have significant injury issues or has had significant decline. D-Will is good but his stats dont compare, and as far as intangibles go pick your poison; rings, all-star games, significance to the team. Arguably D-Will wasnt even the best player on his own team last year. Still to be even handed D-Will did win the Taco Bell Skills Challenge in 2007? So there you have it! (Cept Brandon Jennings beat him last year so he's clearly the best.)
D will is hands down better. though pauls stats may be better.... it is because he is on a team that depends souly on him. like iverson with the 76rs. pauls fans say we cant argue head to head cuz williams has a better team around him. and this is true.... williams has better players around him...and HE STILL PUTS UP NEAR CLOSE NUMBERS to paul. if williams were a hornet... his stats would be far better than pauls. the fact that he is on a better team AND IS STILL ABLE TO PUT UP THOSE KIND OF NUMBERS is incredible. u put paul on a team with the talent like utah and his numbers are no where close to derons.
When you take that tone and call people names like son, you may lose the grace people will give you when you base your ire, not argument, on typing a 2 instead of a 1 in 15.9, or mess up the subtraction. Just a tip, me to you. Enjoy.
Also health is a huge issue with Paul if you want to look at the reality of the stats over the course of his career, fluke injury or not he was still injured, he has still missed consistent time over the course of five years Deron Williams Games played over a 5 year period: 382 total number of games over 5 years 410 so 382/410 is 0.932 (rounded up) or 93.2 percent of games over the course of his 5 seasons he has played in missing only a 6.8 percent average per year Chris Paul's games played in a course of 5 yeas: 345 so 345/410 is 0.841 or 84.1 percent of games played over a course of 5 seasons meaning Paul has missed on average 25.9 percent of his games on average over the course of 5 years Thats nearly 4 times the amount of missed games as Deron Williams far from an invalid argument, get your facts straight son.
DWill has generally had worse interior defense than Paul and subsequently cannot gamble like Paul does so he does not rack up the steals. That's the only reason why Paul has defensive team votes. Otherwise D-will is better at guarding physical players, Paul can stay with fast ones. The debate is close. The head to head argument is important but I'll grant that it's only 1/25th of the games. Your problem is your faith in stats. The Hornet's playbook is such that it inflates the stats of their PG. Darren Collison too. Both great point guards (CP3 and Darren) but NO plays start with the ball in the hands of the PG and end with the PG taking the shot or making the pass for the shot. Utah's playbook has plays where Deron is 3-4 passes away from the shot and sometimes the SG takes up the ball and Deron never touches it all play. Also, Deron is not asked to rebound on offense, he is the first man back on defense. In addition, Deron plays the perimeter on D and waits for the team to secure the board and then grabs the ball. So I'm sick of CP3 lovers throwing stats in Deron's face. You can say that Deron has more wins because he's on a better team, but if you say that then you also are obligated to say that Deron has to do less because he's on a better team. So, in the end, I still say Deron is a better player because, when he does less on a better team (versus more on a worse team) his team wins more in both the regular season and the playoffs.
Statistically there is little support for Deron being a better point guard other than the fact his is 3 inches taller and 30 pounds heavier. Paul is the better shooter and gets more steals but the defense is definitively in Williams favor for a couple of reasons. First in an NBA where size is always an asset Paul has shown that he gets dominated by larger, stronger guards ala Williams and Billups. The second factor that is in Williams favor is his versatility, with his size and he slide to the 2 spot and also guard elite 2s like Bryant and Roy which he has done quite often in the past. While Hornets fans would simply like to just dismiss the argument based on Paul's "Fluke" season, they cannot deny that if 60 percent of General Managers and more and more Hall of Fame players declare it, there is some substance to saying Williams has surpassed Paul. You could also make a sound argument based on the fact that the Jazz run an offensive system in the Flex that tightly restricts the output of the back court in favor of strong output from the front court. The Hornets system has always relied far more heavily on output from Paul but also given him much more free reign. If Im picking a guard based on pretty stats, I pick Paul, if Im picking a guard that has recently been more reliable, more versatile defender and a longer history of success I pick Williams.
It really is pretty simple. I have not yet heard a single person say D-Will could be the greatest of all time behind Magic. CP3 gets mentioned in the best PG ever discussion every year. Get over it. The Jazz lost out but not by much. Hell, if D-Will stays with them and CP3 leaves us, then I'd say you made the right choice. But CP3 will always be a 1-of-a-kind talent while D-Will will just be another superstar and that's that.
@QueenBee: I have long accepted the fact that you can't argue with Jazz/Deron fans regarding CP3.. :)
@imblo- So you're saying that its chris paul's fault for not blocking the corner threes that the spurs made a few years ago? and thats why deron is a better defender today? . . . I see . . . @Jordan- Did you notice how the year that cp3 gets hurt, the hornets team stats dropped of significantly on both ends of the court?? I wonder why that might be. . . @Queenbee- Great point! Deron and cp3 did play on the same team, with the same talent and chris paul dominated and outplayed that "other point guard on team usa" on the world level! Pretty sure mario chalmers should be in this discussion as well (since stats are overrated). . . Oh wait. Am I a year too early??
Your point about using non-basketball arguments to make Deron sound like a better basketball player than CP3 is very similar to a point I try to make when people (including NBA GMs) say that Durant (who I like) is better than Lebron (who is a douche).
Joe, kudos for jumping right in it with this post. I am still working my way back into blog-shape since the offseason, so I'll admit, I got winded trying to read all these comments. I really admire your capacity to actually argue with people who think Deron Williams is better than Chris Paul. Charles Barkley said it best, when he opined that Williams had overtaken the "best point guard in the League" label from CP3, and when asked why responded: "because he's bigger." Yes, D-Will had just last year become the best PG because he was bigger. Think about it. That's all the logic anyone has offered here.
You know who I think is better? Deron. The stats are in favor of Chris, but why do I pick Deron? Because I watch him play, and I watch Chris play. Yes, stats are great, but watching a game, looking at a players impact on his teammates, on the opponents, and shoot, on the refs and opposing coaches too, matters just as much, if not more, than what any advanced stat says. How do you think Red Auerbach was able to draft and build teams so well without all the stats we have today? Oh yeah, because he actually watched the players play, a lot. So yes, I think Deron Williams is better than Chris Paul. But you know what? Chris Paul is a damn good player too. Both of these guys kick ass and I can't imagine any team not wanting either one of them. As it stands, neither one of these guys has helped a team win a championship, and anyways, getting all huffy because someone says Paul is better, or someone says Deron is better, is pretty silly.
simple answer to this... switch players to the other team... jazz likely have deep playoff runs past few years with cp3 and hornets are looking at the lottery every year. yes the style of play fit better where the players are at but that can be switched to match their abilities
Since their rookie years, Deron has progressed more than CP3, so much so to the point that even after CP3s stellar rookie year I believe Deron is slightly better now. Can't argue that CP3 is an extremely efficient player - high assist/TO, steal/TO ratios and a pretty good shot as well. However, Deron runs the Jazz offense efficiently as well. Deron calls plays for the Jazz on a lot of their sets, something the legendary Stockton didn't do. However, I think Deron is a better shooter particularly from deep. CP3 is quick, but Deron is no slouch - numerous clips on you tube showing him getting by his defender should attest to that. Deron is a bigger point guard, and I think that helps out defensively and favours his durability. Yes, I have seen the reports which testify to CP3s surprising strength but his smaller stature means he will get caught out more on the defensive end. CP3 is a an OK defender; while he racks up the steals, his height and wingspan (or lack there of) often means he has trouble closing out perimeter shooters - something the Spurs took advantage of a few years ago in their playoff series.
"You might say that Nadal is better than Federer heads up, but to argue that heâ€™s a better player overall would be foolish." It is? Federer has had the better (longer) career, but Nadal's been dominant for a while now.
do you also consider Jordan as the GREATEST player of all time even though the NUMBERS don't prove he is. He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts - for support rather than for illumination. ~Andrew Lang
Ok so while i'm not sure who i think the better point guard is, if i was drafting right now to build a team for the future, id take Deron Williams no questions asked. The reason? for all the stats that say chris paul is better, none of them apply when he isnt on the court. Chris Paul misses more games due to injury than D-will...the margin there is not small either, Dwill has played in roughly 11% more games over his career than Paul has...
My actual point is these become invalid inflated stats not because he is improving his teammates but because they cannot pull there own weight. There also is no proof that teamless Williams couldnt do the same either way I am just pointing out that stats cant judge two different players saying someone or something is better than something else is always subjective per example you can look at 2 computers much less subjective much more widely agreed upon stats one may have faster processor, more memory, larger hardrive, and still someone can argue the other is better because some specific function may run faster or other reasons. Also Intangibles are such because they are unmeasurable the fact his team wins shows he is a winner an intangible. MY POINT IS STATS ARE INVALID TO COMPARE 2 DIFFERENT THINGS OPERATING UNDER DIFFERENT SITUATIONS THE ONLY WAY IT BECOMES VALID IS TO TEST THEM IN A CONTROL ENVIRONMENT SAME PLAYERS SYSTEMS AND ONLY THEN IF WE HAVE TRULY VALID STATS TO MEASURE BY AND WE STILL DONT
42, You really aren't as funny as you think you are. I'm not saying you are boring. But your humor definitely isn't translating well here. I'm basically reading gibberish.
Sure is a good thing that your opinion about how many games Paul has missed means absolutely nothing. Read the damn article and you can see the real ones. Five percent.
It would actually follow that he would have worse stats with less talent around him. Less assists, more turnovers, lower efficiency. Sure he might wind up with more points per game, and maybe even more rebounds per game, but the scoring almost certainly would be at a less efficient rate. By advanced stats I really, really, really don't mean stuff like points per game (since that doesn't even account for playing time).
I honestly don't have to provide the stats, and those that you provided aren't the same in which I am referring to. If you want to see them, go here- http://www.hoopdata.com/advancedstats.aspx Chris Paul wins in every single one except offensive rebounding rate. Not total rebounding rate, just offensive. Last year Paul even had more win shares, despite playing so many less games.
The system was not Paul first. Gettung may steals means he's good at succeeding when taking risks. Same for high shootng percentage, assists, etc. Shooting etc. are all necessary risks.
Good things those fantasy leagues have so much bearing on the reality of how our teams perform in the regular season and into the playoffs. Maybe General Managers will take a note from your book and evaluate potential trades and free agent pick ups on their fantasy value? If this is where critical thinking has brought us then I fear for many. Perhaps all of Paul's fantasy skills can propel the Hornets to failing to make the playoffs again this year, we can only hope...Perhaps you will take solace in making the fantasy playoffs with Paul?
I didn't realize that I would have to explain the difference between advanced stats and simple things like assists per game to people. Instead of looking at assists, look at assist/TO rate, for example. One player dominates the other. DOMINATES!!!! (I can use caps, too) You might think that because their per game assist numbers are close, that their passing skills are equally close, but that's just not the case. One guy turns it over 33% more often. That's a huge difference that you just don't seem to acknowledge exists. As for your teammate argument- with better teammates (who would presumably convert a higher percentage of open shots into points), Paul would likely have even an even higher ast/TO rate, whereas if Deron had worse teammates, his would be even lower. Long story short- you fail.
If my grandmother had balls, she'd be my grandfather." -- Yiddish Saying (in English) dwill - Try using facts. Try typing numbers themselves instead of just using the word "numbers." Only then will your arguments in prove. I BEElieve in you, c'mon.
Ire for people who seem inclined to place such high value on statistics then omit the 5th year injury of Paul's career as a fluke? sure Ire for someone that doesn't know how to round up? For instance 0.9317 rounded up to 0.932? Ding, Ding, Ding guess elementary math isn't for everyone
no one making that argument probably because most people in here dont think magic is the best point guard...jazz fans would say its stockton and the stats would back that up. point being PG is a sensative subject in utah cause we had the best true point to ever play the game. so yeah its premature to compare either CP3 or D-Will to hall of famers. maybe try it when either of them are within shouting distance of 15806 (assists) and 3265 (steals)
I would argue its a bit premature to even mention Paul's name in the same sentence of the elite pg the game has had to offer. As of right now he has to progress quite a bit to be mentioned in the same breath as players like Magic Johnson and John Stockton. Perhaps 5 or 6 years down the road if he maintains his pace but with injury questions now lingering that could be in question.
Yeah I know nikkoewan. I just thought I'd take a peek in here today and it's unbelieveable this thread is approaching 80 comments. LOL. I only scrolled down to read the comments from the ones that are familiar to hornets247. They can talk until they're old Jazz uniform blue in the face. Won't change my mind.
So thus you are saying that there is no real way to say who is the best point guard in the league. It is all matter of opinion and we should all just agree that they are both excellent PG's and there if you have one of the two you would not trade either for any other PG in the WORLD!!! ---I'm looking at you Rubio, and your floppy hair and not so floppy socks. You are not El Pistola! Just stop it with the hair and the behind the back passes. No you can't go inside to supper until you hit 100 FT in a row. Now go out and learn to shoot, if your going to keep that haircut!
Zang, you seem like good people, but I'm not trying to be funny, but you are exactly right in that I was spouting gibberish. It's basically the same gibberish I've had to read in a number of comments on all sides of the argument of this post. Since arguing well hasn't seemed to faze some, I've decided to embrace the movement and try to do a `When in Rome' thing to better understand what's going and to see if others see things the way I do, and I promise you, I promise you I will. So far, you seem to like the gibberish arguments as little a I do. Kudos. I like you.
By who's definition then are we assuming what a fluke injury is since you seem as equally eager to pronounce yours as a fact as well. I remind you that Paul injured his knee during the course of a game against Golden State, not rearranging his furniture, so why is it a fluke? If you want to make an objective argument for both parties involved then perhaps more people will listen, but when you exclude relevant data because, then you look more like a blogger just slanting his article to prove his own points, biased in a word. Which is fine since your writing for a Hornets blog, just don't label it arguments for Deron Williams then not represent the arguments fully are accurately. Maybe there is some merit to the fact that Williams is now favored by General Managers around the league and why more and more NBA players and annalist are taking Williams side as well?
Calling something a fact does not make it so. This is just another of the many things that you D-Willers do to try and convince yourselves. "Fact is there really is no such thing a â€œflukeâ€ injury, some players get hurt others donâ€™t, its all part of the game, its really quite simple." If someone has television fall on their leg while moving it, that's a fluke injury. So your "fact" isn't really a fact.
except the fact that you excluded Paul's last year based on a "fluke" injury your argument might have held some water. If your going to place your foundation of the article on objectivity of stats then you ought to provide them for one, and then not exclude those stats that shoot holes in your argument. If you were going to exclude Paul's injury why not extend Williams the same favor by excluding the ankle injury he received by Derek Rose standing underneath him while he took a jump shot? This would have greatly reduced his number of missed games since the 3 prior years he had played 80, 80 and 82 games. Fact is there really is no such thing a "fluke" injury, some players get hurt others don't, its all part of the game, its really quite simple.
Joe, don't you understand: In their world, the world of these asserters, the `appearance-of-goodness' of a team is a conserved quantity. Since the team is good, it takes away some appearance-of-goodness from Deron. Since the Hornets are worse, the contrary is true for Paul. Of course, the negative argument of how much worse we were without Paul does nothing to show how great Paul is . . . far too subtle a take. It involves subtraction . . . and we know how that goes . . . For them, teams can't change. Players don't grow. It's black and white. It's simple. It's all some people can handle. No teams ever split series. Nothing is gray. Nothing is fun. I'm a Deron fan. I'm a Chris fan. That's how I know the truth on this matter based on what we know now. What we know tomorrow could change all this.
its possible is a key phrase in there but also you should take note of your usage of the word assume, which well isn't really building your argument on a solid foundation because its based on 2 assumptions which you really have no idea what the real truth is. So out of the 28 general managers 50% voted for Williams, that is a statistical fact and while Dell may prefer Paul, you have no verification that he voted for Williams as he could have selected either Billups or Nash. Also you ignore the opinion of the very man you selected Williams over Paul in the draft, or Kevin O'Connor which for arguments sake, we know he likes Williams over Paul he drafted him, but he could have also selected Paul under the rules of the vote. Not to mention you have NO idea which General Managers didn't vote in this section, so both the Utah and New Orleans GMs could have forgone this section meaning the vote is completely accurate or O'Connor could have selected Paul and Dell Nash which would have meant an even greater disparity in Williams favor. But save it be the old adage when you assume you make an ass out of you and me so lets just stick with what we know. Williams 50% Paul 35.7%
Yeah, he's just writing below. I don't blame him. Once bitten, twice shy. "Step to the stage . . . too late, I blew it up" -- Kid, to Play, House Party
I want to write a post all about this. Since you owned him, I've been constantly checking back to see if he would respond.
The real humor is I'm wrapping up a Ph.D. in math. I was a string theorist before Katrina and now I'm a statistician. I've made more math-o's than most (my word for a math typo), but I try not to base conclusions on them, even less, personal attacks. That's why it's always good to maintain some humor with or engender some sense of grace in your sparring partners. That's why I was cracking up. You just can't buy this kind of entertainment. The guy wrote more down below, but this little bit of noise . . . silenced. This bit I'm writing could make him say something, but we all know who took that round.
I guess elementary math isn't for everyone! That must have been a lesson Van learned long ago, and never forgot, unlike subtraction...
You have no idea how funny what you just said really is. Also . . . You said Paul playing in 84.1 percent of games means he missed 25.9 percent, not 15.9 percent. Ding, Dong, Dung.
Did you notice how no Jazz guys got upset when I said I was a better point guard than Mr. Williams? I noticed. They didn't get upset because the claim is stupid. Saying Chris Paul is better, however, seems to really hit close to home. Really close. I think the reaction speaks volumes.