OMG, the Nets stink

[BballTim]

The biggest problem with that team is D-Will.  He's gone from one of the top 5 players in the NBA to not really interested in playing basketball anymore.  He is just not dedicated anymore.

so he's gone all Mark Blount on them?

But worse, because Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league.

  That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury.

Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11.

  He was close to those stats, but he wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury. I don't think a ton of people put him on the same level as Rose during his mvp season either.

Williams was definitely ranked by many sources on the same tier as Paul even before his knee injury.  He came out of college a better long range shooter than Paul and took his team over .500 while Paul's was under .500.

  Williams got drafted onto a better team than Paul's. It's not that he made more of a difference. It's also not like he was an MVP candidate when Paul was.

I'm not saying he made more of difference, just relaying one of the arguments for why people ranked them the way they did.  Although, being drafted to a worse team definitely improves your chances of winning MVP.  And it's not even like MVP is a measurement of who's the best player, that's been proven multiple times.

The basic idea is that people didn't know who was going to turn out the better player so they just called them 1A and 1B until they proved differently.  The fact that Deron was much bigger, a better shooter, and on a winning team instead of a losing team was enough to keep him at least on the same level in people's minds.  In 06-07 the year before Paul was an MVP contender, Williams received 15 all-NBA points to Paul's 3.  It's understandable they rose to the top tier together as Kidd/Billups/Nash were getting older and Arenas stopped scoring 30ppg.

  He might have been seen as on the level of CP3 in 06-07 but that's not the same as being 1A-1B for best point guard in the league, Steve Nash would have been widely seen as the best in the league. He wasn't really seen as on Paul's level in the year or two after that when CP was an mvp candidate. He wasn't really seen as the best pg in the league when Rose was the MVP either. The only time he's been widely seen as the best pg in the game was when CP3 was out with a knee injury.

He wasn't seen as on the same level, or even equal, he was seen as better than CP3 according to the votes in 06-07.

Once again, the argument wasn't if Williams was better than Paul before the injury, thank you but you're not the only one that can see hindsight.

  No, it wasn't. The argument was whether Williams was seen as the best pg in the league. Being seen as the same or better than CP is meaningless when there's a pg (Nash) that's clearly better than either of them.

[crimson_stallion]

It will be interesting if it turns out that playing next to Rondo has been masking the extent of KG and PP's decline due to age.

I've been saying this for a couple of years now...

Pierce, Ray and KG all had their shooting numbers at or near career bests up until they really hit their walls about a season or two ago.  Despite already being on the decline, they were shooting as efficiently as ever. 

They improvement coindicided with two things:
- Their increaced age (and physical decline that comes
with it)
- The emergence of Rondo as a top calibre PG

I'm pretty sure it was a result of point #2.

Look at KG's scoring numbers in the playoffs last season, and his scoring numbers in Brooklyn now.  I think he is hurting most as a result of losing Rondo because majority of his points lately have come off assists.

[mgent]

The biggest problem with that team is D-Will.  He's gone from one of the top 5 players in the NBA to not really interested in playing basketball anymore.  He is just not dedicated anymore.

so he's gone all Mark Blount on them?

But worse, because Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league.

  That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury.

Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11.

  He was close to those stats, but he wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury. I don't think a ton of people put him on the same level as Rose during his mvp season either.

Williams was definitely ranked by many sources on the same tier as Paul even before his knee injury.  He came out of college a better long range shooter than Paul and took his team over .500 while Paul's was under .500.

  Williams got drafted onto a better team than Paul's. It's not that he made more of a difference. It's also not like he was an MVP candidate when Paul was.

I'm not saying he made more of difference, just relaying one of the arguments for why people ranked them the way they did.  Although, being drafted to a worse team definitely improves your chances of winning MVP.  And it's not even like MVP is a measurement of who's the best player, that's been proven multiple times.

The basic idea is that people didn't know who was going to turn out the better player so they just called them 1A and 1B until they proved differently.  The fact that Deron was much bigger, a better shooter, and on a winning team instead of a losing team was enough to keep him at least on the same level in people's minds.  In 06-07 the year before Paul was an MVP contender, Williams received 15 all-NBA points to Paul's 3.  It's understandable they rose to the top tier together as Kidd/Billups/Nash were getting older and Arenas stopped scoring 30ppg.

  He might have been seen as on the level of CP3 in 06-07 but that's not the same as being 1A-1B for best point guard in the league, Steve Nash would have been widely seen as the best in the league. He wasn't really seen as on Paul's level in the year or two after that when CP was an mvp candidate. He wasn't really seen as the best pg in the league when Rose was the MVP either. The only time he's been widely seen as the best pg in the game was when CP3 was out with a knee injury.

He wasn't seen as on the same level, or even equal, he was seen as better than CP3 according to the votes in 06-07.

Once again, the argument wasn't if Williams was better than Paul before the injury, thank you but you're not the only one that can see hindsight.

  No, it wasn't. The argument was whether Williams was seen as the best pg in the league. Being seen as the same or better than CP is meaningless when there's a pg (Nash) that's clearly better than either of them.

Hmmm, I didn't know that Nash was CLEARLY better when both of them scored more than Nash, were both within .5 assists of Nash, and Williams shot better from the field.  Oh yeah, and then there were these little things called defense and rebounding, both of which Nash was at the bottom of the league in.

Absolutely nobody has argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, I outlined the argument in my response, but you deleted that and made up your own.

Your exact argument that I was replying to was "[Williams] wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury."  That's the only thing I was disputing, I don't really care about the exact numerical order of completely different players you can't exactly compare.  People don't wait until the end of the season to rank players, and the term 1A/1B was certainly thrown around before Paul proved himself beyond reasonable doubt.  There's no line in the sand or single game where the "best PG" torch is transitioned from one player to another.  Sometimes it's a drawn-on debate, and I'm not sure why you're saying this debate never happened.

[BballTim]

The biggest problem with that team is D-Will.  He's gone from one of the top 5 players in the NBA to not really interested in playing basketball anymore.  He is just not dedicated anymore.

so he's gone all Mark Blount on them?

But worse, because Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league.

  That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury.

Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11.

  He was close to those stats, but he wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury. I don't think a ton of people put him on the same level as Rose during his mvp season either.

Williams was definitely ranked by many sources on the same tier as Paul even before his knee injury.  He came out of college a better long range shooter than Paul and took his team over .500 while Paul's was under .500.

  Williams got drafted onto a better team than Paul's. It's not that he made more of a difference. It's also not like he was an MVP candidate when Paul was.

I'm not saying he made more of difference, just relaying one of the arguments for why people ranked them the way they did.  Although, being drafted to a worse team definitely improves your chances of winning MVP.  And it's not even like MVP is a measurement of who's the best player, that's been proven multiple times.

The basic idea is that people didn't know who was going to turn out the better player so they just called them 1A and 1B until they proved differently.  The fact that Deron was much bigger, a better shooter, and on a winning team instead of a losing team was enough to keep him at least on the same level in people's minds.  In 06-07 the year before Paul was an MVP contender, Williams received 15 all-NBA points to Paul's 3.  It's understandable they rose to the top tier together as Kidd/Billups/Nash were getting older and Arenas stopped scoring 30ppg.

  He might have been seen as on the level of CP3 in 06-07 but that's not the same as being 1A-1B for best point guard in the league, Steve Nash would have been widely seen as the best in the league. He wasn't really seen as on Paul's level in the year or two after that when CP was an mvp candidate. He wasn't really seen as the best pg in the league when Rose was the MVP either. The only time he's been widely seen as the best pg in the game was when CP3 was out with a knee injury.

He wasn't seen as on the same level, or even equal, he was seen as better than CP3 according to the votes in 06-07.

Once again, the argument wasn't if Williams was better than Paul before the injury, thank you but you're not the only one that can see hindsight.

  No, it wasn't. The argument was whether Williams was seen as the best pg in the league. Being seen as the same or better than CP is meaningless when there's a pg (Nash) that's clearly better than either of them.

Hmmm, I didn't know the Nash was CLEARLY better when both of them scored more than Nash, were both within .5 assists of Nash, and Williams shot better from the field.  Oh yeah, and then there were these little things called defense and rebounding, both of which Nash was at the bottom of the league in.

Absolutely nobody has argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, I outlined the argument in my response, but you deleted that and made up your own.

Your exact argument that I was replying to was "[Williams] wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury."  That's the only thing I was disputing, I don't really care about the exact numerical order of completely different players you can't exactly compare.  People don't wait until the end of the season to rank players, and the term 1A/1B was certainly thrown around before Paul proved himself beyond reasonable doubt.  There's no line in the sand or single game where the "best PG" torch is transitioned from one player to another.  Sometimes it's a drawn-on debate, and I'm not sure why you're saying this debate never happened.

  The entire discussion's quoted in your post. Someone said "Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league". I answered "That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury" and someone said "Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11". So you're saying absolutely nobody argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, but clearly multiple people were saying that. Oh, and if you're so up on how Deron and CP were rated with respect to each other in their first couple of years, you should have at least some idea that Nash, who finished 1st and 2nd in MVP voting in those years, was CLEARLY better than either of them at the time.

[mgent]

The biggest problem with that team is D-Will.  He's gone from one of the top 5 players in the NBA to not really interested in playing basketball anymore.  He is just not dedicated anymore.

so he's gone all Mark Blount on them?

But worse, because Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league.

  That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury.

Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11.

  He was close to those stats, but he wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury. I don't think a ton of people put him on the same level as Rose during his mvp season either.

Williams was definitely ranked by many sources on the same tier as Paul even before his knee injury.  He came out of college a better long range shooter than Paul and took his team over .500 while Paul's was under .500.

  Williams got drafted onto a better team than Paul's. It's not that he made more of a difference. It's also not like he was an MVP candidate when Paul was.

I'm not saying he made more of difference, just relaying one of the arguments for why people ranked them the way they did.  Although, being drafted to a worse team definitely improves your chances of winning MVP.  And it's not even like MVP is a measurement of who's the best player, that's been proven multiple times.

The basic idea is that people didn't know who was going to turn out the better player so they just called them 1A and 1B until they proved differently.  The fact that Deron was much bigger, a better shooter, and on a winning team instead of a losing team was enough to keep him at least on the same level in people's minds.  In 06-07 the year before Paul was an MVP contender, Williams received 15 all-NBA points to Paul's 3.  It's understandable they rose to the top tier together as Kidd/Billups/Nash were getting older and Arenas stopped scoring 30ppg.

  He might have been seen as on the level of CP3 in 06-07 but that's not the same as being 1A-1B for best point guard in the league, Steve Nash would have been widely seen as the best in the league. He wasn't really seen as on Paul's level in the year or two after that when CP was an mvp candidate. He wasn't really seen as the best pg in the league when Rose was the MVP either. The only time he's been widely seen as the best pg in the game was when CP3 was out with a knee injury.

He wasn't seen as on the same level, or even equal, he was seen as better than CP3 according to the votes in 06-07.

Once again, the argument wasn't if Williams was better than Paul before the injury, thank you but you're not the only one that can see hindsight.

  No, it wasn't. The argument was whether Williams was seen as the best pg in the league. Being seen as the same or better than CP is meaningless when there's a pg (Nash) that's clearly better than either of them.

Hmmm, I didn't know the Nash was CLEARLY better when both of them scored more than Nash, were both within .5 assists of Nash, and Williams shot better from the field.  Oh yeah, and then there were these little things called defense and rebounding, both of which Nash was at the bottom of the league in.

Absolutely nobody has argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, I outlined the argument in my response, but you deleted that and made up your own.

Your exact argument that I was replying to was "[Williams] wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury."  That's the only thing I was disputing, I don't really care about the exact numerical order of completely different players you can't exactly compare.  People don't wait until the end of the season to rank players, and the term 1A/1B was certainly thrown around before Paul proved himself beyond reasonable doubt.  There's no line in the sand or single game where the "best PG" torch is transitioned from one player to another.  Sometimes it's a drawn-on debate, and I'm not sure why you're saying this debate never happened.

  The entire discussion's quoted in your post. Someone said "Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league". I answered "That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury" and someone said "Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11". So you're saying absolutely nobody argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, but clearly multiple people were saying that. Oh, and if you're so up on how Deron and CP were rated with respect to each other in their first couple of years, you should have at least some idea that Nash, who finished 1st and 2nd in MVP voting in those years, was CLEARLY better than either of them at the time.

When did I say Nash wasn't better back then?  I said Nash wasn't clearly better in 2007ish when Paul and Williams were passing him to become two best PGs in the league (how could he be?).  That's the part you deleted and ignored.  Again, there's no exact point in time when the best player changes.  And again, people don't wait until the end of the season to neatly rank players.  Players are even ranked in the summer based on how people "think" they're going to play.  I know you feel like a genius because you have hindsight and knows what's going to happen, but you're just arguing with yourself because nobody is disputing the results.

Explain to me how 1A/1B could possibly equal "Williams was the best PG in the league" like you're suggesting.  It means he was in the discussion for best PG in the league.  And he was.  No matter how badly you want explain to us who won that battle, it doesn't change what peoples' opinions were back then.

D.O.S. never claimed Williams was the best PG in the league, and in fact he gave a conclusion that confirms his thoughts a page or two ago.  I think you might have lost sight of the 1A/1B argument, and I didn't jump in until you started a second argument when you claimed Williams was never on the same level as Paul before the injury.

[Q_FBE]

It will be interesting if it turns out that playing next to Rondo has been masking the extent of KG and PP's decline due to age.

An interesting corallary is that with KG and PP no longer has Doc Rivers but a ROOKIE HEAD COACH who just retired from the NBA. Realistically - They are going through a "learning process". What they may find is that none of them can play the game anymore and keep up with the good teams and have trouble with the mediocre teams. Perception and Reality are two different things around here.

[BballTim]

The biggest problem with that team is D-Will.  He's gone from one of the top 5 players in the NBA to not really interested in playing basketball anymore.  He is just not dedicated anymore.

so he's gone all Mark Blount on them?

But worse, because Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league.

  That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury.

Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11.

  He was close to those stats, but he wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury. I don't think a ton of people put him on the same level as Rose during his mvp season either.

Williams was definitely ranked by many sources on the same tier as Paul even before his knee injury.  He came out of college a better long range shooter than Paul and took his team over .500 while Paul's was under .500.

  Williams got drafted onto a better team than Paul's. It's not that he made more of a difference. It's also not like he was an MVP candidate when Paul was.

I'm not saying he made more of difference, just relaying one of the arguments for why people ranked them the way they did.  Although, being drafted to a worse team definitely improves your chances of winning MVP.  And it's not even like MVP is a measurement of who's the best player, that's been proven multiple times.

The basic idea is that people didn't know who was going to turn out the better player so they just called them 1A and 1B until they proved differently.  The fact that Deron was much bigger, a better shooter, and on a winning team instead of a losing team was enough to keep him at least on the same level in people's minds.  In 06-07 the year before Paul was an MVP contender, Williams received 15 all-NBA points to Paul's 3.  It's understandable they rose to the top tier together as Kidd/Billups/Nash were getting older and Arenas stopped scoring 30ppg.

  He might have been seen as on the level of CP3 in 06-07 but that's not the same as being 1A-1B for best point guard in the league, Steve Nash would have been widely seen as the best in the league. He wasn't really seen as on Paul's level in the year or two after that when CP was an mvp candidate. He wasn't really seen as the best pg in the league when Rose was the MVP either. The only time he's been widely seen as the best pg in the game was when CP3 was out with a knee injury.

He wasn't seen as on the same level, or even equal, he was seen as better than CP3 according to the votes in 06-07.

Once again, the argument wasn't if Williams was better than Paul before the injury, thank you but you're not the only one that can see hindsight.

  No, it wasn't. The argument was whether Williams was seen as the best pg in the league. Being seen as the same or better than CP is meaningless when there's a pg (Nash) that's clearly better than either of them.

Hmmm, I didn't know the Nash was CLEARLY better when both of them scored more than Nash, were both within .5 assists of Nash, and Williams shot better from the field.  Oh yeah, and then there were these little things called defense and rebounding, both of which Nash was at the bottom of the league in.

Absolutely nobody has argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, I outlined the argument in my response, but you deleted that and made up your own.

Your exact argument that I was replying to was "[Williams] wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury."  That's the only thing I was disputing, I don't really care about the exact numerical order of completely different players you can't exactly compare.  People don't wait until the end of the season to rank players, and the term 1A/1B was certainly thrown around before Paul proved himself beyond reasonable doubt.  There's no line in the sand or single game where the "best PG" torch is transitioned from one player to another.  Sometimes it's a drawn-on debate, and I'm not sure why you're saying this debate never happened.

  The entire discussion's quoted in your post. Someone said "Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league". I answered "That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury" and someone said "Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11". So you're saying absolutely nobody argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, but clearly multiple people were saying that. Oh, and if you're so up on how Deron and CP were rated with respect to each other in their first couple of years, you should have at least some idea that Nash, who finished 1st and 2nd in MVP voting in those years, was CLEARLY better than either of them at the time.

When did I say Nash wasn't better back then?

  I said Nash was better back then. You were disagreeing with me, or at least appearing to.

Explain to me how 1A/1B could possibly equal "Williams was the best PG in the league" like you're suggesting.  It means he was in the discussion for best PG in the league.  And he was.  No matter how badly you want explain to us who won that battle, it doesn't change what peoples' opinions were back then.

  I'm not sure you're familiar with what 1A/1B means if you don't understand how "Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league" could possibly equal him being the best pg in the league.

D.O.S. never claimed Williams was the best PG in the league, and in fact he gave a conclusion that confirms his thoughts a page or two ago.  I think you might have lost sight of the 1A/1B argument, and I didn't jump in until you started a second argument when you claimed Williams was never on the same level as Paul before the injury.

  If he thinks Willaims was never the best pg in the league then he's disagreeing with his earlier 1A/1B claim. And I didn't say that Williams was never on the same level as Paul before the injury. If I said Rondo was better than Nash before Rajon had his knee injury that doesn't mean that Rondo was better than Nash from his very first rookie game until his knee injury. As far as I can tell you're arguing with me over statements that I never made and claiming that others didn't say what they were apparently claiming.

[D.o.s.]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

[Snakehead]

As great as Nash was on offense, never bought into him as MVP quite.  I thought LeBron should have definitely won when he won his 2nd MVP.

[mgent]

The biggest problem with that team is D-Will.  He's gone from one of the top 5 players in the NBA to not really interested in playing basketball anymore.  He is just not dedicated anymore.

so he's gone all Mark Blount on them?

But worse, because Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league.

  That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury.

Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11.

  He was close to those stats, but he wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury. I don't think a ton of people put him on the same level as Rose during his mvp season either.

Williams was definitely ranked by many sources on the same tier as Paul even before his knee injury.  He came out of college a better long range shooter than Paul and took his team over .500 while Paul's was under .500.

  Williams got drafted onto a better team than Paul's. It's not that he made more of a difference. It's also not like he was an MVP candidate when Paul was.

I'm not saying he made more of difference, just relaying one of the arguments for why people ranked them the way they did.  Although, being drafted to a worse team definitely improves your chances of winning MVP.  And it's not even like MVP is a measurement of who's the best player, that's been proven multiple times.

The basic idea is that people didn't know who was going to turn out the better player so they just called them 1A and 1B until they proved differently.  The fact that Deron was much bigger, a better shooter, and on a winning team instead of a losing team was enough to keep him at least on the same level in people's minds.  In 06-07 the year before Paul was an MVP contender, Williams received 15 all-NBA points to Paul's 3.  It's understandable they rose to the top tier together as Kidd/Billups/Nash were getting older and Arenas stopped scoring 30ppg.

  He might have been seen as on the level of CP3 in 06-07 but that's not the same as being 1A-1B for best point guard in the league, Steve Nash would have been widely seen as the best in the league. He wasn't really seen as on Paul's level in the year or two after that when CP was an mvp candidate. He wasn't really seen as the best pg in the league when Rose was the MVP either. The only time he's been widely seen as the best pg in the game was when CP3 was out with a knee injury.

He wasn't seen as on the same level, or even equal, he was seen as better than CP3 according to the votes in 06-07.

Once again, the argument wasn't if Williams was better than Paul before the injury, thank you but you're not the only one that can see hindsight.

  No, it wasn't. The argument was whether Williams was seen as the best pg in the league. Being seen as the same or better than CP is meaningless when there's a pg (Nash) that's clearly better than either of them.

Hmmm, I didn't know the Nash was CLEARLY better when both of them scored more than Nash, were both within .5 assists of Nash, and Williams shot better from the field.  Oh yeah, and then there were these little things called defense and rebounding, both of which Nash was at the bottom of the league in.

Absolutely nobody has argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, I outlined the argument in my response, but you deleted that and made up your own.

Your exact argument that I was replying to was "[Williams] wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury."  That's the only thing I was disputing, I don't really care about the exact numerical order of completely different players you can't exactly compare.  People don't wait until the end of the season to rank players, and the term 1A/1B was certainly thrown around before Paul proved himself beyond reasonable doubt.  There's no line in the sand or single game where the "best PG" torch is transitioned from one player to another.  Sometimes it's a drawn-on debate, and I'm not sure why you're saying this debate never happened.

  The entire discussion's quoted in your post. Someone said "Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league". I answered "That was pretty much when Paul was out with a knee injury" and someone said "Earlier and later than that, actually. He was right around 20/10 from '07-'11". So you're saying absolutely nobody argued that Williams was the best PG in the league, but clearly multiple people were saying that. Oh, and if you're so up on how Deron and CP were rated with respect to each other in their first couple of years, you should have at least some idea that Nash, who finished 1st and 2nd in MVP voting in those years, was CLEARLY better than either of them at the time.

When did I say Nash wasn't better back then?

  I said Nash was better back then. You were disagreeing with me, or at least appearing to.

Explain to me how 1A/1B could possibly equal "Williams was the best PG in the league" like you're suggesting.  It means he was in the discussion for best PG in the league.  And he was.  No matter how badly you want explain to us who won that battle, it doesn't change what peoples' opinions were back then.

  I'm not sure you're familiar with what 1A/1B means if you don't understand how "Williams was, at one point, either 1A or 1B for point guards in the league" could possibly equal him being the best pg in the league.

D.O.S. never claimed Williams was the best PG in the league, and in fact he gave a conclusion that confirms his thoughts a page or two ago.  I think you might have lost sight of the 1A/1B argument, and I didn't jump in until you started a second argument when you claimed Williams was never on the same level as Paul before the injury.

  If he thinks Willaims was never the best pg in the league then he's disagreeing with his earlier 1A/1B claim. And I didn't say that Williams was never on the same level as Paul before the injury. If I said Rondo was better than Nash before Rajon had his knee injury that doesn't mean that Rondo was better than Nash from his very first rookie game until his knee injury. As far as I can tell you're arguing with me over statements that I never made and claiming that others didn't say what they were apparently claiming.

I'm the one unfamiliar with what 1A/1B means?  1A/1B means neither is better than the other.  How can anybody be saying Deron is the best PG in the league if they're admitting he's not better than CP3.

Even if what your personal definition of the term is different, I think you could have plainly inferred that D.o.s. wasn't saying Deron Williams was the best PG in the league.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And for the record, I was disagreeing about Nash being CLEARLY better around 07, not before that.  No one ever talked about before 07, you brought that out of nowhere.  But please continue to nitpick little things and avoid the overall subject.

[fairweatherfan]

Would you guys mind cutting out some of the prior replies?  This conversation, while super-productive and not at all silly and pedantic, is basically clogging up the entire page and making it hard to pick out the interesting stuff.

[Snakehead]

Would you guys mind cutting out some of the prior replies?  This conversation, while super-productive and not at all silly and pedantic, is basically clogging up the entire page and making it hard to pick out the interesting stuff.

This post is 1c or 1d in the thread.

[D.o.s.]

Would you guys mind cutting out some of the prior replies?  This conversation, while super-productive and not at all silly and pedantic, is basically clogging up the entire page and making it hard to pick out the interesting stuff.

This post is 1c or 1d in the thread.

But only when Jordan Crawford isn't playing at a CBMVP level.

[mgent]

Would you guys mind cutting out some of the prior replies?  This conversation, while super-productive and not at all silly and pedantic, is basically clogging up the entire page and making it hard to pick out the interesting stuff.

There seems to be disagreement about what's physically written in that print, despite confirmations, so I left it.

[Fafnir]

Would you guys mind cutting out some of the prior replies?  This conversation, while super-productive and not at all silly and pedantic, is basically clogging up the entire page and making it hard to pick out the interesting stuff.

I think a quote box containing 16+ other quote boxes is the worst thing that happens in Celticsblog.