Chris Paul/Isiah Thomas

Anybody notice how similar these two play alike? Paul is an exact replica of Thomas.

I was looking at some stats and noticed how freakishly similar there rookie numbers are.

Isiah Thomas:

PPG- 17.0
APG- 7.8
SPG- 2.08
FG%- .424
3P%- .288

Team turnaround in wins: 18.

Chris Paul:

PPG- 16.1
APG- 7.8
SPG- 2.24
FG%- .430
3P%- .282

Team turnaround in wins: 20.

How amazing is that? Do you see Chris Paul eventually becoming the better of the two?

 

I do see the similarities in their games, I don't really see CP3 passing up Zeke though.

 

^ Yeah Paul's good but he won't be as good as Zeke. Zeke won 2 titles in a very tough era. I don't see Paul winning one. Plus Zeke was one of the toughest guards in history. Real scrappy.

 

<div class="quote_poster">NBA MAN Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">^ Yeah Paul's good but he won't be as good as Zeke. Zeke won 2 titles in a very tough era. I don't see Paul winning one.Plus Zeke was one of the toughest guards in history. Real scrappy.</div>

In his whole career? Dont count him out like that, he could be the start of something huge for the Hornets.

Damn those stats are close. Paul may be better than Isiah Thomas in the future though. Like I said, he could be the start of something huge.

 

Personally Chris Paul scares me, and I actually do believe that there's a possibility that he can be better than Zeke....although that's a difficult task.

 

It's tough to gage just how good Chris Paul can be. He had a spectacular rookie season, but you never know what course his career can take five to six years from now. He can have a major injury like Penny and Hill did that changes his career. I personally think he has the tools to be the best point guard of our generation. However, only time will tell.

 

Paul's rookie stats are actually much more impressive to me than Isiah's.

Thomas averaged an unbelievable 4.2 turnovers per game his rookie year, compared to only 2.6 for Paul. He was a much less efficient scorer as well (48.7 TS% compared to 54.6 TS%). And all of Isiah's numbers are inflated because of the difference in pace between their respective teams.

Thomas had a 14.5 PER (per possession stat rating), and totalled only 8 win shares (by b-r.com's measurements) on the season. Paul had a 22.1 PER with 30 win shares on the season.

 

<div class="quote_poster">BALLAHOLLIC Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">How amazing is that? Do you see Chris Paul eventually becoming the better of the two?</div>Nope, and that's the problem when you compare stats and assume that players are similar or of equal caliber.

Statistically and realistically, Paul's more like Jason Kidd with his ability to rebound.

But realistically compared to Isiah? No, Isiah is more like Chauncey Billups on Steroids.

 

<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post"> And all of Isiah's numbers are inflated because of the difference in pace between their respective teams.</div>

wouldnt that make his turnover rate much more inderstandable?

 

<div class="quote_poster">TheFreshPrince Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">wouldnt that make his turnover rate much more inderstandable?</div>

If you mean his turnovers/min, sure. Slightly better. But still pretty bad.

According to basketball-reference.com, the Pistons in 81-82 (Isiah's rookie season) had a 104.3 pace factor (possessions per 48 minutes). The Hornets last year played at only a 89.0 pace, by comparison. So, in the same number of minutes, we can infer that Isiah had about 17% more possessions to collect his "stats". If you want a fair comparison just looking at the stats, compare their numbers per 40 minutes, and then also reduce Isiah's numbers by 17% across the board.

This is what the comparison looks like now:

<div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><font size=""2""><font color=""Navy"">G MPG FGFGA 3P3PA FTFTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PFPTS</font><br/>Chris Paul7836.05.8 13.50.7 2.5 5.6 6.6 0.9 4.8 5.7 8.7 2.5 0.1 2.6 3.1 17.9<br/>Isiah Thomas7233.86.4 15.00.2 0.8 4.2 6.0 0.8 2.1 2.9 7.9 2.1 0.2 4.2 3.5 17.2</font></div>

It's fairly evident here that Paul's numbers are actually much better. That's reflected in the vast difference in PER that I mentioned (22.1 to 14.5)

 

^^ one thing to note though, Isaiah having to play at a higher pace would require more energy to make more possesions per minute. It is possible if Isaiah were to play in a slower pace that he would have less turnovers, and be able to expend more energy on each possesion. (very theoretical) lol

An exageration would be comparing the tempo of the Suns to the Houston Rockets.

If someone compares Rafer Alston to Steve Nash and points out that the Suns possesions per 48 minutes is higher than the Rockets possesions per 48 minutes, one also should note that Nash has to be able to play at such a pace which requires more energy.

I'm sure a player like Shaq, Yao, Tim Duncan, etc. would find it more difficult to play on the Suns if they didn't change the tempo when he was on the court.

I'm guessing Chris Paul would do fine or flourish in a higher paced environment. His stamina didn't seem to be a problem. But maybe Isaiah's game would have been a little more efficient in a slower paced environment?

 

<div class="quote_poster">Best Kept Secret Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">It's tough to gage just how good Chris Paul can be. He had a spectacular rookie season, but you never know what course his career can take five to six years from now. He can have a major injury like Penny and Hill did that changes his career. I personally think he has the tools to be the best point guard of our generation. However, only time will tell.</div>
I hope he wont. Theres not a lot of Chris Pauls in this world right now you know.

 

<div class="quote_poster">SkiptoMyLue11 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">
I'm guessing Chris Paul would do fine or flourish in a higher paced environment. His stamina didn't seem to be a problem. But maybe Isaiah's game would have been a little more efficient in a slower paced environment?</div>

Maybe, but I doubt it.



You can see, season by season, how his pace-adjusted turnovers/min varied as the pace of his team's changed. If what you say is true, we would expect his turnovers to have decreased as the pace decreased (even more so since, generally, as a player gets older they take better control of the ball). That wasn't the case with him.

 

<div class="quote_poster">hustler Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I hope he wont. Theres not a lot of Chris Pauls in this world right now you know.</div>Yup, he's gonna be a pretty special player.

 

<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Maybe, but I doubt it.



You can see, season by season, how his pace-adjusted turnovers/min varied as the pace of his team's changed. If what you say is true, we would expect his turnovers to have decreased as the pace decreased (even more so since, generally, as a player gets older they take better control of the ball). That wasn't the case with him.</div>
In your graph, which line represents turnovers, from what I understand there is pace and pace/40 minutes.

but good analysis and I'll take your point that his TOs did not decrease substantially as pace changed. It seems though that his pace/40 minutes never dropped 99, while Chris Paul's pace was at 89 wasn't it?

 

<div class="quote_poster">SkiptoMyLue11 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">In your graph, which line represents turnovers, from what I understand there is pace and pace/40 minutes.

but good analysis and I'll take your point that his TOs did not decrease substantially as pace changed. It seems though that his pace/40 minutes never dropped 99, while Chris Paul's pace was at 89 wasn't it?</div>

The green line is pace-adjusted turnovers/40 minutes (which is essentially proportional to the number of turnovers he committed per possession). Pace refers to possessions/48 minutes for the Pistons in the given season. You can see that while the pace of the team decreased, there wasn't really a corresponding decrease in turnovers/possession for him.

Perhaps a better way of judging if he was less turnover-prone as the team's pace reduced is by looking at turnover-ratio instead of turnovers committed per possession. Turnover-ratio is another Hollinger stat which gives an idea of how turnover prone a player is relative to his activity on the offensive end (defined here):

 

i cant say that hes gonna be better than isiah, but thats only because i havent seen isiah play at all. obviously he was a great player, but i cant compare the two. i can say however that i think paul will have an very good career with at least one championship, but not with NO/OK the way theyre looking. and yes, the numbers are very similar.

 

<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">The green line is pace-adjusted turnovers/40 minutes (which is essentially proportional to the number of turnovers he committed per possession). Pace refers to possessions/48 minutes for the Pistons in the given season. You can see that while the pace of the team decreased, there wasn't really a corresponding decrease in turnovers/possession for him.

Perhaps a better way of judging if he was less turnover-prone as the team's pace reduced is by looking at turnover-ratio instead of turnovers committed per possession. Turnover-ratio is another Hollinger stat which gives an idea of how turnover prone a player is relative to his activity on the offensive end (defined here):</div>

Now I understand both graphs, the turnover-ratio and turnover/40 min both seemed very similar. Yea it doesn't seem that Isaiah's turnovers/40 min changed as the pace changed. Thanks for explaining it.

lol, my theory has been blow out of the water. Excellent work Durvasa, it does seem that Chris Paul's rookie season was better.

 

CP3 has a chance to surprise IT11 but I don't think he will. IT11's game is more fun to watch because of the intensity he brings into the game that CP3 thus far lack.