PDA

View Full Version : Is Steve Nash a "Winner"?



NYtilIdie
05-31-2010, 01:07 AM
Think about it. This guy has been on some of the best teams, the Mavs squad with their "Big 3" they had a prime Finley and Nowitzki with Antawn Jamison as a 6th man and of course the Suns "7 seconds or Less" team.

He has 2 MVP's, one of the greatest passers to ever pick up a ball and possibly a top 10 PG, BUT he has never gotten past the WCF.

They said on TNT that he is one of the few players to ever win an MVP, but never make it to the Finals.

He said earlier that rings don't measure a players success, but people like to measure a players legacy based on if they ever won a ring, but to never make it to the Big Stage has to be a crucial blow to his legacy.

So is Steve Nash a "winner"?

RadiantShot
05-31-2010, 01:09 AM
Depends. In my eyes, he's a winner. Put him on the Lakers right now, and he's automatically wearing a ring. I still think his supporting cast hasn't fulfilled his needs yet, and that's the reason he hasn't gotten that trophy.

DengelBerry
05-31-2010, 01:10 AM
By far yes, he was amazing through out his career, and will be scary again next year.

JermanJaysFan
05-31-2010, 01:18 AM
It depends on your definition. Some (in my mind, erroneously) tie a player's value heavily to his number of rings. If that's your bag, then no, he isn't a winner. But if you count a winner as someone who is willing to do everything he can to put his team ahead on the scoreboard by the end of the game, sacrificing himself and never quitting as a winner? Then **** yeah Steve Nash is a winner.

Duncan = Donkey
05-31-2010, 01:21 AM
Of course he is a winner. Dumb thread in my honest opinion.

Duncan = Donkey
05-31-2010, 01:23 AM
I know some people will bring up rings and garbage like that.

if so, i put this to you.

DJ Mbenga has a ring and Steve Nash doesnt. Does that make Mbenga more of a winner than Steve Nash. Just ridiclious.

XerxestheGreat
05-31-2010, 01:24 AM
i would have him on my cities team any day!! even at this age...

NYtilIdie
05-31-2010, 01:29 AM
It depends on your definition. Some (in my mind, erroneously) tie a player's value heavily to his number of rings. If that's your bag, then no, he isn't a winner. But if you count a winner as someone who is willing to do everything he can to put his team ahead on the scoreboard by the end of the game, sacrificing himself and never quitting as a winner? Then **** yeah Steve Nash is a winner.

Thats why I made this thread. When he came out and said Rings don't measure success people made a huge deal about it and bashed him, by saying he wasn't a winner due to having 0 rings. Laker fans love to bring up the rings arguement when it comes to Kobe or Lebron. But to never make it to the Finals has to question his ablility to win.

Say Lebron or Dwight never win a ring would that still make them winners? They've both made it to the Finals a place Nash has never been (at least yet)Or do we set higher standards for them then we do Nash?

Raph12
05-31-2010, 01:30 AM
Short answer... No.

iggypop123
05-31-2010, 01:30 AM
hey nash. if you cant beat them, join them

SeoulBeatz
05-31-2010, 01:36 AM
obviously he is a winner.

its just a shame he had to run into this stacked Lakers team.

He does everything right. he knows how to play d, its just his lateral quickness wont allow him to play good defense anymore.

to say otherwise is just hating. the guy is a class act/warrior all the way around

valade16
05-31-2010, 01:39 AM
Did you watch Steve Nash play that final game? He made like the last 4 shots IN A ROW for the Suns. He absolutely did everything he possibly could've to win that game.

Absolutely a winner...

ink
05-31-2010, 01:49 AM
it depends on your definition. Some (in my mind, erroneously) tie a player's value heavily to his number of rings. If that's your bag, then no, he isn't a winner. But if you count a winner as someone who is willing to do everything he can to put his team ahead on the scoreboard by the end of the game, sacrificing himself and never quitting as a winner? Then **** yeah steve nash is a winner.

+1

thephoenixson28
05-31-2010, 01:53 AM
Heck yeah. Nash is a winner. Its just unfortunate that he kept running into, a spurs dynasty.

97NYer
05-31-2010, 01:53 AM
An NBA player who isn't a winner to me is someone who is more concerned with money and glory than winning. You can't say either of the two apply to Nash.

Teeboy1487
05-31-2010, 01:55 AM
He is one of the best PGs to ever play the game but he is not a winner. This does not make me respect him any less though. He tries his hardest to win a ring. Like some one said, put him on the lakers and he is easily winning rings. I will compare him with Derek Fisher to prove my point. Derek Fisher is a winner but he is not half the point guard Nash is or ever was. Nash is one of the best point guards ever but he is not a winner. Nash is great but he has to win rings to be even greater. I hope later in his career, he wins a ring. I just can't see a guy like Nash falling off that much. He has such a great skill set. JMO.

More-Than-Most
05-31-2010, 01:58 AM
Please don't go with the supporting cast bs... Him having all this talent argument is flawed because he makes the talent around him great. Look at what happened to everyone that left the suns... Besides Johnson what has become of the rest??? You put anyone around Steve Nash and he will make them an all star... He has just been unfortunate to run into a team like the spurs and lakers throughout his career. The guy plays through everything and takes a beating unlike any other player in the league and gets right back up and defies all odds. Nash could have become a free agent and gone to a lakers team or a cavs team and probably won a championship but he stuck it out and tried to do it the old fashion way and actually earn one. Today to many people take the easy way out and just go out and sign with the best team in the league to get their championship. Nash plays with everything he has... He continually gets knocked down but keeps getting back up... He gives 1000 percent every single time and holds nothing back on the court... He does everything in his power both Physically and Mentally to try and win and regardless of the out come that alone makes him a winner.

Rox07
05-31-2010, 02:05 AM
winning an nba championship doesn't necessarily make you a "winner", the passion of wanting to win day in and day out truly defines a winner. Regardless of rings.

So to answer your question, yes steve nash is a "winner".

Bigbadmoffo
05-31-2010, 02:15 AM
Please don't go with the supporting cast bs... Him having all this talent argument is flawed because he makes the talent around him great. Look at what happened to everyone that left the suns... Besides Johnson what has become of the rest??? You put anyone around Steve Nash and he will make them an all star... He has just been unfortunate to run into a team like the spurs and lakers throughout his career. The guy plays through everything and takes a beating unlike any other player in the league and gets right back up and defies all odds. Nash could have become a free agent and gone to a lakers team or a cavs team and probably won a championship but he stuck it out and tried to do it the old fashion way and actually earn one. Today to many people take the easy way out and just go out and sign with the best team in the league to get their championship. Nash plays with everything he has... He continually gets knocked down but keeps getting back up... He gives 1000 percent every single time and holds nothing back on the court... He does everything in his power both Physically and Mentally to try and win and regardless of the out come that alone makes him a winner.

Well said.

jackdawson
05-31-2010, 02:15 AM
Yes. He is. Now if you think winning a ring is the only scale to measure a winner than this thread is dumb. Everyone knows he hasn't won a ring. Overall, he has been the point guard of the decade. A two time mvp winner is by no questions a winner imo.

kblo247
05-31-2010, 02:18 AM
He is not a winner in the he played a key role on a championship team sense. Like was said above about Fisher and Nash, Fish is not better than Nash but he has done what it takes and what is needed of him when around the talent to win a ring.

Nash to me is a winner because he plays his heart out, works hard, and tries to win. I have nothing but respect for a man who plays hurt and even shed tears about losing out on a chance to win.

However, I think the thing that hurts him and his legacy the most when people look back at him is those MVP awards and him not making the NBA Finals. He would get much more credit and respect after he is retired had he made a finals trip as I think people could easily find it in their heart to say look he met the Lakers and Spurs in those years much like they said about Malone, Stockton, Reggie, Charles, and Ewing in the 90s running into MJ/Scottie and the Dream.

Sadds The Gr8
05-31-2010, 02:19 AM
Of course. It's stupid and unfair to say he's a loser because he has no rings. In my eyes you don't have to win 10 rings to be a winner. Championships come with good teams, not good individuals, and people don't realize that players are lucky to be on championship teams. Nash always gives it his all, makes teammates better, is a great leader, and is one of the tougher players to play in the NBA. He also is one of the best PG's to ever play in the NBA and is among the all-time leaders in assists, and has 2 MVPs; and he also has a great rep around the league. Those things make him a winner IMO.

THE MTL
05-31-2010, 02:25 AM
Winning a ring has seriously become OVERRATED! I know its important and it should be VERY IMPORTANT! But when ppl begin to question the abilities/greatness/legacy over a ring (something you wear on ur finger) there is a problem.

You do not need a ring to be successful and you do not need a ring to have a legacy.

You have bums like: DJ Mbenja, Adam Morrison, Darko Millic, Malik Rose, Brian Scalabrine with championship rings.

More-Than-Most
05-31-2010, 02:27 AM
Personally I still think he has a 2 year window left to win a championship... The bench will only get better and maybe a piece here and a piece there will put them over the top. Also if they lose Amare that wouldn't be the worse thing in the world... Personally I think he is a bit overrated and is also a product of Steve Nash... Is Amare great... yes... but his numbers will easily decline when he leaves Nash... His lack of rebounding and horrid defense make him a liability to a team trying to win a championship. The off season mvoes the suns make will have a huge impact and I believe they can make it back at a run to the finals.

Sadds The Gr8
05-31-2010, 02:33 AM
Personally I still think he has a 2 year window left to win a championship... The bench will only get better and maybe a piece here and a piece there will put them over the top. Also if they lose Amare that wouldn't be the worse thing in the world... Personally I think he is a bit overrated and is also a product of Steve Nash... Is Amare great... yes... but his numbers will easily decline when he leaves Nash... His lack of rebounding and horrid defense make him a liability to a team trying to win a championship. The off season mvoes the suns make will have a huge impact and I believe they can make it back at a run to the finals.

I agree with your stance on Amare, but I think if he leaves and the Suns don't find at least a borderline Allstar PF, or a young stud PF to replace Amare, then I think Nash's opportunity to win a ring is done in PHX. Unless he takes a bench/role player role on a championship team when he's like 39+...and that's if he still even plans on playing that long.

AI4MVP
05-31-2010, 02:35 AM
Nash is a winnner in every sense of the word. No, he hasnt won any championships. But hes tough, plays with passion, heart, determinition, leadership, and amazing offensive skills to go with that

More-Than-Most
05-31-2010, 02:49 AM
I agree with your stance on Amare, but I think if he leaves and the Suns don't find at least a borderline Allstar PF, or a young stud PF to replace Amare, then I think Nash's opportunity to win a ring is done in PHX. Unless he takes a bench/role player role on a championship team when he's like 39+...and that's if he still even plans on playing that long.

I agree with that... I wouldn't say they need a borderline all star but something close to that yes... I believe Nash can bring out the best in just about anybody... They need to look for someone athletic and strong... Any ideas??? Lets say they lose Amare... Who would you personally bring in to fill that role??? I wouldn't worry to much about a getting someone that can score as I would someone that can rebound and play defense.

Fireworld
05-31-2010, 02:57 AM
yes

More-Than-Most
05-31-2010, 02:58 AM
yes

:clap: Simple and easy... Love this post lol.

OA SLAY
05-31-2010, 03:01 AM
Of course he is a winner. Dumb thread in my honest opinion.

this

abe_froman
05-31-2010, 03:02 AM
well he's won alot of games,so...

Sadds The Gr8
05-31-2010, 03:11 AM
I agree with that... I wouldn't say they need a borderline all star but something close to that yes... I believe Nash can bring out the best in just about anybody... They need to look for someone athletic and strong... Any ideas??? Lets say they lose Amare... Who would you personally bring in to fill that role??? I wouldn't worry to much about a getting someone that can score as I would someone that can rebound and play defense.

hmm...maybe someone like an Al Jefferson, David West...both of those guys have been on the trading block. maybe Anthony Randolph would be able to flourish with Nash as well. Those are the ones at the top of my head.

Nirvanaskurdt
05-31-2010, 03:59 AM
Hes a winner in my book.. just like Reggie Miller :clap:

DerekRE_3
05-31-2010, 04:20 AM
Absolutely.

illegallover
05-31-2010, 04:32 AM
nash can buy your mama's house with the change in his underwear

sp1derm00
05-31-2010, 04:53 AM
Nash is a winner. His only rival in "toughness" right now in the league is Kobe. He is clutch, able to carry on the load as a distributor or a scorer. He hits big shots, he makes bigger plays.

I don't know how anyone can argue that the man isn't a winner. His days on the Mavs does nothing but prove that he's a team player. His numbers were down across the board on the Mavs, even though he has shown that he could have put up much better numbers. He toned it down on the Mavs because thats what that system and team of players required him to do.

soonabooma
05-31-2010, 04:54 AM
Nash is every bit as much of a winner as guys like Malone, Stockton, and Chucky Barkley. Rings are great, but they can't make or break an athletes legacy. Just ask guys like Dan Marino, Barry Sanders, and Ken Griffey Jr. Some guys just aren't meant to win the big one. Nash is in that category, but it doesn't change how great he was and still is. He's a Hall of Famer, no question.

gcoll
05-31-2010, 05:25 AM
The rings argument is ridiculously flawed.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
05-31-2010, 05:47 AM
Depends. In my eyes, he's a winner. Put him on the Lakers right now, and he's automatically wearing a ring. I still think his supporting cast hasn't fulfilled his needs yet, and that's the reason he hasn't gotten that trophy.

you can put chris duhon to the lakers and we still would win!

put do answer the question, he is a winner

PrettyBoyJ
05-31-2010, 05:57 AM
Thats why I made this thread. When he came out and said Rings don't measure success people made a huge deal about it and bashed him, by saying he wasn't a winner due to having 0 rings. Laker fans love to bring up the rings argument when it comes to Kobe or Lebron. But to never make it to the Finals has to question his ability to win.

Say Lebron or Dwight never win a ring would that still make them winners? They've both made it to the Finals a place Nash has never been (at least yet)Or do we set higher standards for them then we do Nash?

Nash is a winner.. even tho he hasnt gone to the finals that doesn't make him a loser he's gone far in his career and has a lot of individual awards that show for it.. He def is a winner.. but winning a ring is the highest accomplishment a player can obtain playing basketball as a team.. And that's what separates good players from great players.. even tho a lot of great player didn't win a ring (Karl Malone, Elgin Baylor) it will always remain a shadow in there careers, they will always be known for not be able to take there team to the top, and will always be questioned how great where they.. even tho ppl have diff opinions on this topic, the way I see it great players are always remembered, Champions are never forgotten.. Jus like so many ppl tlk about LeBron not winning and comparing him to kobe, if he never wins one he'll always be remembered for being a great player and filling the stat sheet.. But never will be part the company of great players who won championships... So if Steve Nash doesn't win a ring or make it to the finals as long as he satisfied with his accomplishments he still a winner.. jus not that kind of winner ppl like to refer too

Mrphilly
05-31-2010, 06:08 AM
Nash isn't a winner, but because he seems like a nice guys everbody wants to call him a winner. All the great players that ended their career without a ring atleast made it to the finals. Steve Nash hasn't even made it to the finals.

Not many people would call Dirk, Lebron, or Iverson winners, and they all played for a chance to win a ring. What makes Nash any different?

Don't give me the he ran up againts the Lakers and Spurs argument, because if you are a winner, you win against good teams.

Don't give me the if he played for the Lakers argument he would have a ring. If Ewing played for the Bulls he would have a ring. That's so weak.

If you call Nash a winner, what do you call players that actually win????

championships
05-31-2010, 06:41 AM
I know some people will bring up rings and garbage like that.

if so, i put this to you.

DJ Mbenga has a ring and Steve Nash doesnt. Does that make Mbenga more of a winner than Steve Nash. Just ridiclious.

You got that from TNT. Come up with your own.. Totally different. There a ton of bench players with rings, but when you are a star and a main focus on the team, you better produce some rings or at the least some finals appearences

PrettyBoyJ
05-31-2010, 06:56 AM
Nash isn't a winner, but because he seems like a nice guys everbody wants to call him a winner. All the great players that ended their career without a ring atleast made it to the finals. Steve Nash hasn't even made it to the finals.

Not many people would call Dirk, Lebron, or Iverson winners, and they all played for a chance to win a ring. What makes Nash any different?

Don't give me the he ran up againts the Lakers and Spurs argument, because if you are a winner, you win against good teams.

Don't give me the if he played for the Lakers argument he would have a ring. If Ewing played for the Bulls he would have a ring. That's so weak.

If you call Nash a winner, what do you call players that actually win????

You actually gotta point.. nobody wud call AI a winner and he actually played in the finals

Duncan = Donkey
05-31-2010, 07:37 AM
You got that from TNT. Come up with your own.. Totally different. There a ton of bench players with rings, but when you are a star and a main focus on the team, you better produce some rings or at the least some finals appearences

WTF?? got what from TNT??:confused:

Duncan = Donkey
05-31-2010, 07:39 AM
Nash isn't a winner, but because he seems like a nice guys everbody wants to call him a winner. All the great players that ended their career without a ring atleast made it to the finals. Steve Nash hasn't even made it to the finals.

Not many people would call Dirk, Lebron, or Iverson winners, and they all played for a chance to win a ring. What makes Nash any different?

Don't give me the he ran up againts the Lakers and Spurs argument, because if you are a winner, you win against good teams.

Don't give me the if he played for the Lakers argument he would have a ring. If Ewing played for the Bulls he would have a ring. That's so weak.

If you call Nash a winner, what do you call players that actually win????

once again, because DJ Mbenga has "Won", he therefore is a winner and Nash is a loser. its just ridiclious and doesnt make any sense.

BaustinSali08
05-31-2010, 07:57 AM
It's hard for me to say he isn't mainly because the Refs had some part in not allowing the Suns to go to the finals when they played San Antonio. That being said, anyone who puts up the numbers like Steve Nash does is a winner in my eyes.

gcoll
05-31-2010, 08:03 AM
If you call Nash a winner, what do you call players that actually win?
Your logic is flawed because you are comparing a team accomplishment (a championship) to individual merit.

It's the same flaw everyone who ever makes the "Rings!!!" argument makes. Individual players do not win rings. Teams do.

So what you would call those players that "actually win" would be great players who were on championship teams. Steve Nash is a great player that has never been on a championship team.

It's not that hard to figure out if you can think. But a lot of people buy into the bull **** that ESPN sells on a daily basis. But they are in the business of hyping individual athletes, and they aren't so concerned with sports.

evadatam5150
05-31-2010, 10:31 AM
Think about it. This guy has been on some of the best teams, the Mavs squad with their "Big 3" they had a prime Finley and Nowitzki with Antawn Jamison as a 6th man and of course the Suns "7 seconds or Less" team.

He has 2 MVP's, one of the greatest passers to ever pick up a ball and possibly a top 10 PG, BUT he has never gotten past the WCF.

They said on TNT that he is one of the few players to ever win an MVP, but never make it to the Finals.

He said earlier that rings don't measure a players success, but people like to measure a players legacy based on if they ever won a ring, but to never make it to the Big Stage has to be a crucial blow to his legacy.

So is Steve Nash a "winner"?

I guess it boils down to how you define the word winner.. If you define it as someone who's really good, give it his all, makes others around play better, then sure you could consider him a winner in that aspect of things.. Is he one of the best to pick up a basketball, I doubt it.. Was he really worthy of 2 MVP's, don't think so, (just my opinion mind you but I think those MVP awards were a way for the league and voters to keep Kobe from getting them).. Fantastic basketball player no doubt, HOF, no doubt, winner..?? I'm not so sure.. I guess you have to look at the Stockton's and Malone's of this world and see how you measure them since they were on great teams, they were great players, and yet they never won the important one.. How do you view them..??

evadatam5150
05-31-2010, 10:41 AM
I know some people will bring up rings and garbage like that.

if so, i put this to you.

DJ Mbenga has a ring and Steve Nash doesnt. Does that make Mbenga more of a winner than Steve Nash. Just ridiclious.

This isn't a popularity contest.. Is Nash the better talent..?? Absolutely.. But the question is, is Nash a winner..?? And when you state the question like that concerning Mbenga and Nash in reference to the actual thread question then literally you have to answer your question YES.. Mbenga has a ring which makes him a winner, not a better ball player but a winner.. It's not ridiculous, it is what it is.. Again it goes back to what each and every one considers the definition of winner to be.. Apparently you don't equate Winning (as in the goal of each and every team & player in the NBA) while defining the word winner..

Personally I think your question is a bit more asinine than the original question because you know the answer but are just too blind or too much of a Nash fan to admit it..

JasonJohnHorn
05-31-2010, 10:43 AM
Stockton. Malone. Barkley. Reggie Miller. These guys are all winners. As is Nash. Every team Nash has been on, he has made better. Granted the names I mentioned have all been to the finals, but there are many others who havent who are just as great. Bob Lanier. George Gervin. And had Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce not been brought together, it is likely each of them would still have yet to be to the finals.

"Winning" is as much about chance and situation, being a "winner" is about talent, team play, drive and work ethic. It is about competing at the very highest level and about knowing you gave all you had and are the best player you can be. Nash is a great example of that. His game is not perfect, but he goes out there and gives 100% ever night, plays hurt and works to make his teammates better.

This isn't even a question in my mind.

J-Relo
05-31-2010, 10:59 AM
shouldn't be a question

KnicksorBust
05-31-2010, 11:10 AM
DJ Mbenga has a ring and Steve Nash doesnt. Does that make Mbenga more of a winner than Steve Nash. Just ridiclious.

Pathetic post. You should be embarassed.

KnicksorBust
05-31-2010, 11:14 AM
Your logic is flawed because you are comparing a team accomplishment (a championship) to individual merit.

It's the same flaw everyone who ever makes the "Rings!!!" argument makes. Individual players do not win rings. Teams do.

So what you would call those players that "actually win" would be great players who were on championship teams. Steve Nash is a great player that has never been on a championship team.

It's not that hard to figure out if you can think. But a lot of people buy into the bull **** that ESPN sells on a daily basis. But they are in the business of hyping individual athletes, and they aren't so concerned with sports.

So it's a coincidence that the best players of all-time all have rings? I understand your point but there's a reason why the teams of the best individual players do better. Duncan in 99 and Wade in 06 are two damn good examples of individual players carrying their teams to rings. I actually think Nash is a "winner" but he couldn't have done what either one of those guys did.

C_Mund
05-31-2010, 11:38 AM
The way the NBA is structured offers a couple great players chances to win a 'chip every generation.
There has only been ONE team that didn't have an all-time great in the last 15 years that's taken home the trophy, and many more players that could have won if they were placed in the right situation.
Unfortunately, it looks like there's going to be another decade of dynasties coming up with all of the free agents conspiring to play together from now on; many players who play with loyalty and don't chase rings might never get one.
...so yes, he's a winner. So was Charles Barkley. So was John Stockton (Malone is on this list too...but I hate him). They might not have won a ring but had they been drafted to a different team then maybe the history of the game shakes out different.

magichatnumber9
05-31-2010, 11:48 AM
My only problem with Nash is this, If your gonna go on t.v and predict a win you better back that **** up.

More-Than-Most
05-31-2010, 11:53 AM
My only problem with Nash is this, If your gonna go on t.v and predict a win you better back that **** up.

He had no choice... It was a heartbreaking loss the game before... He had to stand up and man up for his team and walk with confidence... It just didn't happen. What was he suppose to do????

C_Mund
05-31-2010, 12:11 PM
People have to stop making excuses about the Suns never being able to get to the Finals cus of the Spurs & Lakers. Nash played these teams for 7 years straight. It's not like he had a crappy supporting cast around him like LeBron has had in Cleveland for years. In Dallas, he had Nowitzki, Finley in his prime, & a solid 6th man in Jamison. A few years back, he had Diaw, Bell, & Marion with Amare. They had more than good enough teams to compete. He's a tough as nails player, and does everything to help his team win, but this Suns team this year was good enough to beat the Lakers. So there's no EXCUSE. That Game 5 loss was a stinger. At the end of the day, Nash is a Top 10 PG, but HE CAN'T WIN THE BIG GAME. At least guys like Stockton, Malone, Ewing, and Barkley saw an NBA Finals. Until further notice, the Suns are stuck with the label of PLAYOFF CHOKERS. Sorry Nash. As a player you are a winner, but you should have been in an NBA Finals by now. And before anyone cries that Dallas was in the same situation for years, at least they finally broke through, even if only once, that's one more than the Suns. Next time Nash, shut your mouth and don't make any guarantees about winning a game. You are in no position to do that. Win a ring first, then you can be a big shot. You embarrassed yourself on that one. :facepalm:

.....there has only been one team NOT named the Lakers and Spurs that has won the west in the last 11 years. Again, this is an era of dynasties. When you're up against a top-5 all-time guard (who, for a few years, played with an top-3 all-time C) and the best power forward of all time, it's just bad timing.
Stockton, Malone, Barkley, these guys all played Jordan in the final and lost. Had they been in the East, they too would have never made the finals.
As for your other example, Ewing....he has a theory named after him as to why his team always played better when he wasn't on the floor. I don't mean to pick your argument apart, I just disagree, that's all.

evadatam5150
05-31-2010, 12:41 PM
.....there has only been one team NOT named the Lakers and Spurs that has won the west in the last 11 years. Again, this is an era of dynasties. When you're up against a top-5 all-time guard (who, for a few years, played with an top-3 all-time C) and the best power forward of all time, it's just bad timing.
Stockton, Malone, Barkley, these guys all played Jordan in the final and lost. Had they been in the East, they too would have never made the finals.
As for your other example, Ewing....he has a theory named after him as to why his team always played better when he wasn't on the floor. I don't mean to pick your argument apart, I just disagree, that's all.

Just sounds like excuses to me.. All post season Suns fan has been saying the Suns are better than the Lakers and the Suns have the best opportunity of any year to be in the Finals and win.. In truth I agree in part, they were much better than I thought and took it to the Lakers.. Tough team.. The thing is you can't have it both ways.. Either their good enough (Nash et all) or they aren't.. Once they lose we go back to the same old excuse.. He didn't have a good enough team.. Contradictions.. Before they lost they had a great team with a great supporting cast.. Which is it..??

Nash has had excellent chances to get there and it hasn't happened on any team in any year, he just hasn't been able to WIN that title yet.. So take what you will from that and stop making excuses for the guy..

BkOriginalOne
05-31-2010, 12:42 PM
He hasn't won it all - but I don't say that takes a way from the two time MVP team leader that he is.
Nash's biggest flaw is his defense.
The best defender he's ever played alongside was Raja Bell and they sent him packing.

Nash has also never had a great shot blocker or rebounder to cover up his defensive lapses. His teams have always been constructed so that offensively he can run the show, but defensively there have been no plans....
Give him more guys like Jared Dudely and maybe Sam Dalembert for cheap and he might win more. Imagine if he played with KG or Duncan as opposed to Amare, can't imagine he wouldn't have gotten to a finals by now.
He's a winner.

C_Mund
05-31-2010, 01:14 PM
Just sounds like excuses to me.. All post season Suns fan has been saying the Suns are better than the Lakers and the Suns have the best opportunity of any year to be in the Finals and win.. In truth I agree in part, they were much better than I thought and took it to the Lakers.. Tough team.. The thing is you can't have it both ways.. Either their good enough (Nash et all) or they aren't.. Once they lose we go back to the same old excuse.. He didn't have a good enough team.. Contradictions.. Before they lost they had a great team with a great supporting cast.. Which is it..??

Nash has had excellent chances to get there and it hasn't happened on any team in any year, he just hasn't been able to WIN that title yet.. So take what you will from that and stop making excuses for the guy..

Fair enough, but we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't mean to say that his teams never played up for him. It's just that to win an NBA championship takes a number of ingredients and he hasn't been some of the most important ones. Look at the great point guards of all-time and see the defensive presence their teams had....Isiah had the bad boys, Magic (people overlook how bad his defence really was...) had Kareem and Worthy behind him. Even Tony Parker won a finals MVP but it was still Duncan that made that clock tick. Drexler couldn't win until a. Jordan took a hiatus and b. he had the Dream.
This isn't just about Nash, it's the structure of the NBA. Not every great player will win a championship, period. Only great teams.

leftymo
05-31-2010, 01:15 PM
People have to stop making excuses about the Suns never being able to get to the Finals cus of the Spurs & Lakers. Nash played these teams for 7 years straight. It's not like he had a crappy supporting cast around him like LeBron has had in Cleveland for years. In Dallas, he had Nowitzki, Finley in his prime, & a solid 6th man in Jamison. A few years back, he had Diaw, Bell, & Marion with Amare. They had more than good enough teams to compete. He's a tough as nails player, and does everything to help his team win, but this Suns team this year was good enough to beat the Lakers. So there's no EXCUSE. That Game 5 loss was a stinger. At the end of the day, Nash is a Top 10 PG, but HE CAN'T WIN THE BIG GAME. At least guys like Stockton, Malone, Ewing, and Barkley saw an NBA Finals. Until further notice, the Suns are stuck with the label of PLAYOFF CHOKERS. Sorry Nash. As a player you are a winner, but you should have been in an NBA Finals by now. And before anyone cries that Dallas was in the same situation for years, at least they finally broke through, even if only once, that's one more than the Suns. Next time Nash, shut your mouth and don't make any guarantees about winning a game. You are in no position to do that. Win a ring first, then you can be a big shot. You embarrassed yourself on that one. :facepalm:

:clap:

great post.

Yes Nash is a winner, but as a franchise player, and a two time league MVP, he's never won the big game, and in this series the big time player put his stamp on the series in the two most important games (Game 1 & Game 6). That was Kobe Bryant, not Steve Nash. He's actually past his prime now so I wouldn't blame him now. But in the years he won the MVP was the only shot he had to win a title and he didn't do it.

But I think PG's can't be measured by championships b/c some of the best ones in the league haven't won. Deron? CP3? Nash? Stockton? Tony Parker might be the only PG to win a title carrying his team. Maybe Billups?

Unruly Fan
05-31-2010, 01:17 PM
The same question could be argued for players like Malone, Stockton or Nowitzki

evadatam5150
05-31-2010, 01:23 PM
Fair enough, but we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't mean to say that his teams never played up for him. It's just that to win an NBA championship takes a number of ingredients and he hasn't been some of the most important ones. Look at the great point guards of all-time and see the defensive presence their teams had....Isiah had the bad boys, Magic (people overlook how bad his defence really was...) had Kareem and Worthy behind him. Even Tony Parker won a finals MVP but it was still Duncan that made that clock tick. Drexler couldn't win until a. Jordan took a hiatus and b. he had the Dream.
This isn't just about Nash, it's the structure of the NBA. Not every great player will win a championship, period. Only great teams.

I'll agree that there are absolute intangibles involved in winning any championship and it rarely comes down to one guy having to do it all alone.. But sometimes, just sometimes, one guy has that effect on an entire team and lifts them to a Championship level.. There are plenty examples of this through out the years..

I'm not saying Nash is a loser.. I'm not saying he's a winner either.. I think it goes back to how we are going to define that word..

C_Mund
05-31-2010, 01:32 PM
I'll agree that there are absolute intangibles involved in winning any championship and it rarely comes down to one guy having to do it all alone.. But sometimes, just sometimes, one guy has that effect on an entire team and lifts them to a Championship level.. There are plenty examples of this through out the years..

I'm not saying Nash is a loser.. I'm not saying he's a winner either.. I think it goes back to how we are going to define that word..

word. good chat buddy

SLY WILLIAMS
05-31-2010, 01:32 PM
The record of the Suns without him playing drops so dramatically that I would say Steve Nash is the reason the Suns have had success in the last 6 years. He was much more important than either Suns coach, Marion, Amare, Diaw, etc during the last 6 years. Steve is a winner but not a champion. :)

ink
05-31-2010, 01:35 PM
The record of the Suns without him playing drops so dramatically that I would say Steve Nash is the reason the Suns have had success in the last 6 years. He was much more important than either Suns coach, Marion, Amare, Diaw, etc during the last 6 years. Steve is a winner but not a champion. :)

Nailed it right there.

I'm a huge Nash fan and I think that's exactly the right way to look at it. Clearly he's a winner, but no one can say he's a champion. Much as I wish it was otherwise. :(

Raidaz4Life
05-31-2010, 01:36 PM
I think the real question here is whether or not Steve Nash is a franchise player that you can build your team around and have him carry it and the answer to that imo is no. He needs to have a bigger name next to him to carry the team in order to win and at this point in time he doesn't have that since Amare is in the same boat.

MrFastBreak
05-31-2010, 01:37 PM
I know some people will bring up rings and garbage like that.

if so, i put this to you.

DJ Mbenga has a ring and Steve Nash doesnt. Does that make Mbenga more of a winner than Steve Nash. Just ridiclious.

He didnt make any contributions to winning that ring, did he?

Sadds The Gr8
05-31-2010, 01:40 PM
The record of the Suns without him playing drops so dramatically that I would say Steve Nash is the reason the Suns have had success in the last 6 years. He was much more important than either Suns coach, Marion, Amare, Diaw, etc during the last 6 years. Steve is a winner but not a champion. :)

perfectly said

sargon21
05-31-2010, 01:44 PM
absolutely a winner

Paulliwali
05-31-2010, 01:50 PM
definitly a winner, when one can play through all the injuries he does in order for one's team to win, thats no doubt a winner.

Ansy
05-31-2010, 01:50 PM
No question he's a winner

koreancabbage
05-31-2010, 01:54 PM
The record of the Suns without him playing drops so dramatically that I would say Steve Nash is the reason the Suns have had success in the last 6 years. He was much more important than either Suns coach, Marion, Amare, Diaw, etc during the last 6 years. Steve is a winner but not a champion. :)

this

OC Knights #11
05-31-2010, 02:08 PM
He is a winner. And will be in the hall of fame, but he will never win a ring in Phoenix. He will most definitely jump ship to a team such as, the Lakers or maybe the Thunder?

clehmun
05-31-2010, 02:18 PM
winner yes.
but i'm a firm believer that a run and gun team cannot win a championship. and that's what steve nash brings if he's on your team. he's so good at that type of offense, it'd be a waste not to use it.

unless of course you make him into a role player, but i don't think that's right.

djeller1139
05-31-2010, 02:18 PM
If there is one player in this league who deserves a ring - it's Steve Nash. I really hope PHX finds him some final help to put him over the top so he can finally win that ring.

clehmun
05-31-2010, 02:48 PM
If there is one player in this league who deserves a ring - it's Steve Nash. I really hope PHX finds him some final help to put him over the top so he can finally win that ring.

see thats the thing, i just don't see what help they can add to help him.
nash has had some very stacked rosters.

i just don't think run and gun with minimal defense can win you anything in the NBA.

ldc62
05-31-2010, 02:51 PM
Nash is a winner. Its unfortunate that hes way more loyal than the avg. NBA player and re-upped with the Suns.

ivylleague1'
05-31-2010, 03:30 PM
yes !!!!!

SLY WILLIAMS
05-31-2010, 04:29 PM
see thats the thing, i just don't see what help they can add to help him.
nash has had some very stacked rosters.

i just don't think run and gun with minimal defense can win you anything in the NBA.

Championship teams usually can get key stops when they need to. Defense plays a very pivotal role for champions.

If reports are to be believed than the Suns owner and GM agreed with you about defense. Mike D Antoni agreed to consider adding a assistant coach. Ker brought in Tom Thibodeau who I think is one of the best of not the best defensive assistant out there. D Antoni refused to hire Thibodeau . D Antoni instead promoted his brother Dan D Antoni to lead assistant. Thibodeau went to Boston.

superkegger
05-31-2010, 04:43 PM
Most playoff games without a trip to the finals.

I don't know if I can call somewhat with that to their name a "winner".

heyman321
05-31-2010, 05:06 PM
Yes.

Are Barkley, Stockton, Malone, Miller not winners? The only reason they dont have rings is because of Michael Jordan.

Truheatfan
05-31-2010, 05:16 PM
steve nash is definetly a winner and a warrior. his team wins 50 games year in and year out and hes 1 of the best point guards ever! so yes he is a winner!

lxl Lou zer lxl
05-31-2010, 05:29 PM
The record of the Suns without him playing drops so dramatically that I would say Steve Nash is the reason the Suns have had success in the last 6 years. He was much more important than either Suns coach, Marion, Amare, Diaw, etc during the last 6 years. Steve is a winner but not a champion. :)


End of discussion.

Let's leave it at that.

"Steve is a winner but not a champion."

Kingz4L
05-31-2010, 05:50 PM
Ill just say this, was Kobe a winner when the Lakers became his team before the Gasol trade, same applies for Steve Nash, someone give him Dwight and now you got equal talent with the Lakers....thats all

braveniler58
05-31-2010, 05:56 PM
Steve Nash is absolutely a winner. He tries his best, gives his all, sacrifices his body, etc etc etc to win. He tries.

You know who's not a winner? Amar'e Stoudemire.

yankkiller
05-31-2010, 05:58 PM
Nash is a winner, without a supporting cast, the big three in dallas dirk falls asleep in the playoffs, and as far as the suns, amare don't play big, and shaq can't run with that team.

Nexus
05-31-2010, 06:00 PM
A winner who has never won.

gcoll
05-31-2010, 06:06 PM
So it's a coincidence that the best players of all-time all have rings?
That's not true.

Some of the best players of all time do not have rings.


People have to stop making excuses about the Suns never being able to get to the Finals cus of the Spurs & Lakers. Nash played these teams for 7 years straight. It's not like he had a crappy supporting cast around him like LeBron has had in Cleveland for years. In Dallas, he had Nowitzki, Finley in his prime, & a solid 6th man in Jamison. A few years back, he had Diaw, Bell, & Marion with Amare. They had more than good enough teams to compete. He's a tough as nails player, and does everything to help his team win, but this Suns team this year was good enough to beat the Lakers. So there's no EXCUSE. That Game 5 loss was a stinger. At the end of the day, Nash is a Top 10 PG, but HE CAN'T WIN THE BIG GAME. At least guys like Stockton, Malone, Ewing, and Barkley saw an NBA Finals. Until further notice, the Suns are stuck with the label of PLAYOFF CHOKERS. Sorry Nash. As a player you are a winner, but you should have been in an NBA Finals by now. And before anyone cries that Dallas was in the same situation for years, at least they finally broke through, even if only once, that's one more than the Suns. Next time Nash, shut your mouth and don't make any guarantees about winning a game. You are in no position to do that. Win a ring first, then you can be a big shot. You embarrassed yourself on that one. :facepalm:

You can tell this guy means business because he wrote his post in all red.


Look at a few things with Steve Nash. The year prior to the Suns getting Nash, they won 29 games. The next year all they did was add Steve Nash. It was the same 29 win team plus Steve Nash, and it won 62 games. Ultimately got defeated in the WCF by San Antonio, but Joe Johnson was injured for most of that series.

Then the next year, Amare Stoudemire goes down for the whole year. Played in a few games. At the beginning of the season people were predicting us to be a .500 team without Amare. We win 54 games, and get back to the WCF, ultimately falling to Dallas. Now. It didn't culminate in a finals appearance, but come on. Losing your all star power forward for an entire year, and still contending is a feat.

The next year the Suns get Stoudemire back and we're ready to make a run at the finals. This is the year of the suspensions. Won in San Antonio. We were returning home for game 5 tied 2-2, and Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw were both suspended for game 5. A game we still almost won. It should also be noted that this was the same series where Steve Nash got his nose busted up, and missed the last couple minutes of game one. A game that was close, but San Antonio pulled out.

So. To wrap up Steve Nash's time in Phoenix. He has pulled off some extremely impressive feats. He has also had some terrible luck in the playoffs.

But there aren't too many players who could accomplish what Steve Nash has done in Phoenix.

maddBat
05-31-2010, 06:24 PM
the man is a winner. one of the most humble players in the game and focuses more on making plays 4 his teammates. just unfortunate in the playoffs.

raptor fan
05-31-2010, 06:26 PM
he is a true champion and a winner. however, because he has never won a ring, he will never be mentioned in the same class as lebron, kobe, or wade. i understand that lebron has not won a ring either, but he's much younger, and it's probably going to happen sooner or later.

gcoll
05-31-2010, 06:31 PM
They had eliminated the Lakers in '06 and '07 back to back. What was different then?
Are you ****ing serious?

What was different then? No Pau Gasol. No Ron Artest. No Derek Fisher.

The Lakers are much better now than they were in the two years the Suns eliminated them. All the red text in the world won't hide what a truly ridiculous statement this is.

valade16
05-31-2010, 06:34 PM
You actually gotta point.. nobody wud call AI a winner and he actually played in the finals

If you don't call Allen Iverson a winner it's because your jaded and stupid. Yes I said it.

:mad:Dammit I'm tired of idiots who've seen 3 years of the NBA try to comment on NBA history like they have any kind of clue what their talking about.

If you did watch the NBA as recently as 2000 you'd know Iverson is ABSOLUTELY a winner, he wants to win, and he sacrificed everything he possibly could when he played for the 76ers.

Did anyone but me witness Iverson leading the 76ers to the Finals with DIKEMBE MUTOMBO as his second man??!!

Or how they beat, yes BEAT the Shaq and Kobe led Lakers the first game in overtime on the Lakers home floor! Not many people back then were beating the Lakers in the playoffs.

Iverson is absolutely a winner, don't let the amazing Lakers team of the early decade rob very good players of their legacies, otherwise everyone in the 90s not named Jordan or Olajuwan were garbage....

Robbw241
05-31-2010, 06:34 PM
I think so. He's done a lot with this Suns team. Sure he hasn't made the finals but he's always been compeitive. Throw in two MVP awards and I'd classify him as one.

gcoll
05-31-2010, 06:36 PM
The reason people may not classify Iverson as a winner is because he was a ball hog, and a moron.

SpeedyRecovery
05-31-2010, 06:38 PM
of course he is.. what a stupid thread. a too much time on your hands thread i would say

Mrphilly
05-31-2010, 06:54 PM
of course he is.. what a stupid thread. a too much time on your hands thread i would say

Its a good question. Its all about perception. When Dirk won the MVP and got put out in the first round, people said he wasnt a winner.

Every year people hate on Lebron because he hasnt won a ring.

You can be a great player and not win a ring, but are you a winner? The ultimate prize it a ring right? Im not saying that Antwoine Walker is a winner and Nash isnt. Im saying, if you are great player and you have not won it it all, you are just a great player and not a winner(Not calling him a loser either)

kblo247
05-31-2010, 07:54 PM
Look, I don't think him not winning a ring hurt his legacy at all, but I'm not sugar coating it and saying him being the only MVP, let alone 2 time MVP to not make the Finals doesn't hurt. That is going to hurt him when people look through the history books and basically lead guys who haven't seen him say he doesn't belong in that group of players.

ivylleague1'
05-31-2010, 08:19 PM
Iverson achieved a lot more than Nash !!!!! Iverson is a superdupa winner !!!! If he gets himself together, and gets healthy enough no current player will out play him. He won the scoring championship Four times !!!!! Holds the NBA record for the highest number of steals in a playoff game!!!!! 1st team all NBA team, Rookie of the year (yes better than Kobe and everyone else!!!!). The MVP!!!! Iverson is the greatest when he is healthy and in top form.
Nash is a winner, Kobe is a solid winner (Best shooter in the universe, shoots the ball like he has a radar on his head !!!), TMac is a winner, Howard, Lebron, Melo, Wade, Billups and Bosh are all winners and Allen Iverson (the answer, is definitely a winner !!!!).

SteveNash
05-31-2010, 08:21 PM
Regular season winner.

Post season loser.

His style means failure for his teams.


Iverson achieved a lot more than Nash !!!!! Iverson is a superdupa winner !!!! If he gets himself together, and gets healthy enough no current player will out play him. He won the scoring championship Four times !!!!! Holds the NBA record for the highest number of steals in a playoff game!!!!! 1st team all NBA team, Rookie of the year (yes better than Kobe and everyone else!!!!). The MVP!!!! Iverson is the greatest when he is healthy and in top form.
Nash is a winner, Kobe is a solid winner (Best shooter in the universe, shoots the ball like he has a radar on his head !!!), TMac is a winner, Howard, Lebron, Melo, Wade, Billups and Bosh are all winners and Allen Iverson (the answer, is definitely a winner !!!!).

AI, regular season loser, post season loser, loser at life. Just an all around loser.

borat
05-31-2010, 08:23 PM
Steve Nash is a hero to all white people.

SpeedyRecovery
05-31-2010, 08:27 PM
Its a good question. Its all about perception. When Dirk won the MVP and got put out in the first round, people said he wasnt a winner.

Every year people hate on Lebron because he hasnt won a ring.

You can be a great player and not win a ring, but are you a winner? The ultimate prize it a ring right? Im not saying that Antwoine Walker is a winner and Nash isnt. Im saying, if you are great player and you have not won it it all, you are just a great player and not a winner(Not calling him a loser either)

yes i understand the question. but with nash and asking is he a winner? a guy that has won the mvp twice? of course he is. winning a ring is great and fine, even if a great player wins one, not often they can double that performance unless they are on one of the big market teams that have a chance every year. (bulls, lakers, celtics, etc etc) but a winner? out of the 10s of thousands of people that play the game around the world he has been able to come into the league, be a complete professional, and have some of the best numbers in the game.. playing night in and night out breaking every bone in his face. i don't want to start a conspiracy thread on here but unless your on one of the teams that often succeed you have a very hard time winning a ring in general. to be judged on a playoff series of 7 or less games and forget about the 80 plus games in the season is stupid.. he's one of the best point guards ever and if he was put on the lakers this year, or many other teams it would be clear he would take them to the finals. he hasn't had the blessing of a stacked team like kobe has.. if he did, look out!

kblo247
05-31-2010, 09:14 PM
yes i understand the question. but with nash and asking is he a winner? a guy that has won the mvp twice? of course he is. winning a ring is great and fine, even if a great player wins one, not often they can double that performance unless they are on one of the big market teams that have a chance every year. (bulls, lakers, celtics, etc etc) but a winner? out of the 10s of thousands of people that play the game around the world he has been able to come into the league, be a complete professional, and have some of the best numbers in the game.. playing night in and night out breaking every bone in his face. i don't want to start a conspiracy thread on here but unless your on one of the teams that often succeed you have a very hard time winning a ring in general. to be judged on a playoff series of 7 or less games and forget about the 80 plus games in the season is stupid.. he's one of the best point guards ever and if he was put on the lakers this year, or many other teams it would be clear he would take them to the finals. he hasn't had the blessing of a stacked team like kobe has.. if he did, look out!

Last two lines are bull ****.

Nash wouldn't lead the Lakers or no team to the finals because he hasn't led any team there before. He would help them get there, but the other guy on the team would do the leading.

Also, don't give me that bull ****. Kobe has played on great teams without a doubt but Nash has had help (Dirk, Finley, Van Exel, Jamison, and Walker) (Amare, Marion, Bell, Shaq, Hill, Richardson, Q, Joe). He just hasn't led that team to the grand stage. You give Kobe that same help and you know that he gets them to the dance because he has shown that he and another star can get there with less depth oh say 7 times.

I didn't even want to bash Nash but you opened it up for me to say what the **** are you thinking posting that bull ****.

I mean Nash is a hell of a PG and the second best of his era behind Kidd but you didn't have to take a shot at Kobe to justify Nash not winning. For me it comes down to the fact he isn't a winner in the I have a ring sense but he is one because he gives his all. I just think that guys will look back and question his legacy years from now when they see him as the only MVP, let alone 2 time MVP to not get to the Finals and win his own conference.

td0tsfinest
05-31-2010, 09:38 PM
Yes.

Are Barkley, Stockton, Malone, Miller not winners? The only reason they dont have rings is because of Michael Jordan.

but all those guys have made it to the finals at least once.

shep33
05-31-2010, 10:04 PM
Awesome player, he like Kobe are winners in my mind. They always try their hardest when its time to win, even in defeat they give it their all.

I just don't think Nash would get a ring cause of the style the Suns play. They played decent D in the last couple games against LA, but they also scored fewer points. It's almost like a trade-off, either do one or the other with the Suns style. It's not on Nash, but the system in general I just have a problem with. When your droppin in 120 points, guys just tend not to play D as much.

xxxplicit69
05-31-2010, 10:09 PM
An NBA player who isn't a winner to me is someone who is more concerned with money and glory than winning. You can't say either of the two apply to Nash.

Well said. Nash to me is definitely a winner. If you look at his numbers, especially as of late and he playoff performances, he always comes to play. Definitely a clutch player. He just ran across better franchises than the one's he was on. I consider Barkely, Reggie Miller,Allen Iverson, Stockton and Malone to me are winners too; possibly even Dominque Wilkins.

A player that might fall into the catagory of not being a winner, is Tracy McGrady. Possibly, but I wouldn't quite throw him under that bus like that but his durability wasn't great and his talent faded way too soon, which to me could equate to him not pushing himself past injuries.

the route Gilbert Arenas is going is also taking him out of consideration of being a winner. Both Tracy and Gilbert have not played up to the level of their big contracts.

I like Amare Stoudemire but his decision not to go to Cleveland wasn't a winners choice either. Obviously LeBron and Amare would have done damage but to pass up Cleveland because of money or location isn't a winner's attitude. (this is in reference to this year's cleveland team, before all the lebron rumors came up).

Ny3r97
05-31-2010, 10:11 PM
Yes. He is a winner because of the way he leads. Finals are only good if you are the leader of the team. Does the final that the celtics won make Brian Scalabrine a winner...? or does the lakers championship make Adam Morrison or D.J Mbenga a winner?...No only the leaders are winners like Kobe and Kevin Garnett. So yes he is a winner and anyway look at all the other things he has won.

tredigs
05-31-2010, 11:10 PM
So it's a coincidence that the best players of all-time all have rings? I understand your point but there's a reason why the teams of the best individual players do better. Duncan in 99 and Wade in 06 are two damn good examples of individual players carrying their teams to rings. I actually think Nash is a "winner" but he couldn't have done what either one of those guys did.

Except for, you know, two of the best big men of all time on their teams (at an age where they were still highly effective). The only player I can think of that truly carried their team to an NBA championship with no elite role players was Hakeem in 1993-94 (by '95 they got Drexler to sidekick).

To me winning is an attitude. Does Steve Nash do everything in his power to win the game, and show up with as much or more vigor in the big games than he does in the regular season? I think he does. The guy is willing to play hurt, plays with passion, and gives the opposing team hell in every series he plays.

Bottom line is that he probably just isn't good enough of a player (or at least enough of a matchup nightmare) to win a title as the best (or arguably best) player on his team (nearly every PG falls into this category. Even Magic had Kareem and later Worthy, etc). His teams have always been weak defensively (which he certainly does not help despite his best efforts) and flat out aren't quite good enough to beat the elite teams of the NBA in a 7 game series. That said, I think that if he plays for the Magic, Lakers or Celtics instead of Jameer/Rondo/Fish, those teams are as tough or tougher to beat in the playoffs. And he would be in contention for Finals MVP on any of them were they to win.

Winning is as much about your situation as it is your desire/ability to get the job done. He's still a first ballot HOFer who brought nothing but positives to every team he's ever played on. He makes teams better, period. That's a winner.

PrettyBoyJ
06-01-2010, 12:31 AM
If you don't call Allen Iverson a winner it's because your jaded and stupid. Yes I said it.

:mad:Dammit I'm tired of idiots who've seen 3 years of the NBA try to comment on NBA history like they have any kind of clue what their talking about.

If you did watch the NBA as recently as 2000 you'd know Iverson is ABSOLUTELY a winner, he wants to win, and he sacrificed everything he possibly could when he played for the 76ers.

Did anyone but me witness Iverson leading the 76ers to the Finals with DIKEMBE MUTOMBO as his second man??!!

Or how they beat, yes BEAT the Shaq and Kobe led Lakers the first game in overtime on the Lakers home floor! Not many people back then were beating the Lakers in the playoffs.

Iverson is absolutely a winner, don't let the amazing Lakers team of the early decade rob very good players of their legacies, otherwise everyone in the 90s not named Jordan or Olajuwan were garbage....

You takin it out of context I def. agree Iverson is a winner.. but the media would never admit that.. They wud rather say nash is a winner who hasnt made it to the finals oppose to AI who actually made it to the finals..

PrettyBoyJ
06-01-2010, 12:37 AM
Iverson achieved a lot more than Nash !!!!! Iverson is a superdupa winner !!!! If he gets himself together, and gets healthy enough no current player will out play him. He won the scoring championship Four times !!!!! Holds the NBA record for the highest number of steals in a playoff game!!!!! 1st team all NBA team, Rookie of the year (yes better than Kobe and everyone else!!!!). The MVP!!!! Iverson is the greatest when he is healthy and in top form.
Nash is a winner, Kobe is a solid winner (Best shooter in the universe, shoots the ball like he has a radar on his head !!!), TMac is a winner, Howard, Lebron, Melo, Wade, Billups and Bosh are all winners and Allen Iverson (the answer, is definitely a winner !!!!).

Kobe is a solid Winner???? I think his name should define the word winner..

OutOfTHEBLUE
06-01-2010, 01:36 AM
Kobe is a solid Winner???? I think his name should define the word winner..

Of course Nash is a winner. Just because you're not a champion doesn't mean you're not a winner...

PrettyBoyJ
06-01-2010, 03:32 AM
Of course Nash is a winner. Just because you're not a champion doesn't mean you're not a winner...

how are steve nash and AI considered winners.. and Kobe is a "solid winner"

dodie53
06-01-2010, 03:50 AM
ofcourse he is a winner

CowboysKB24
06-01-2010, 12:18 PM
No. He is a big loser IMO. I like Nash, but he isn't a winner. He has never won anything as a team, just individual. That isn't a winner to me. It is a team sport.

DerekRE_3
06-01-2010, 12:37 PM
No. He is a big loser IMO. I like Nash, but he isn't a winner. He has never won anything as a team, just individual. That isn't a winner to me. It is a team sport.

Right, and Nash can't do it all by himself. He just ran into better teams. He has done everything he can possibly do so far in his career.

masalex1205
06-01-2010, 12:39 PM
**** this thread. Of course Steve Nash is a winner

Unruly Fan
06-01-2010, 12:44 PM
2x league MVP = Winner all day long.

Unruly Fan
06-01-2010, 12:46 PM
how are steve nash and ai considered winners.. And kobe is a "solid winner"^that^ on the other hand is a fail

promixxer
06-01-2010, 12:48 PM
Of course he is a Winner. He has proven that on the court.

His is NOT a Champion.

NYtilIdie
06-01-2010, 12:55 PM
2x league MVP = Winner all day long.

Lebron has 2 MVP's also but people still question his ability to win.

JNA17
06-01-2010, 01:15 PM
hey nash. if you cant beat them, join them

this. Lakers will welcome you with open arms :D

JNA17
06-01-2010, 01:19 PM
Right, and Nash can't do it all by himself. He just ran into better teams. He has done everything he can possibly do so far in his career.

I'm guessing most people here forgot that just last season or a season before that, nash had a chance to go to a team like the lakers, spurs, or whatever other contending team, but he chose to stick with the suns and this is his punishment for it. If Nash really wanted to win, he would have left and went ring chasing like shaq did.

DerekRE_3
06-01-2010, 02:21 PM
I'm guessing most people here forgot that just last season or a season before that, nash had a chance to go to a team like the lakers, spurs, or whatever other contending team, but he chose to stick with the suns and this is his punishment for it. If Nash really wanted to win, he would have left and went ring chasing like shaq did.

So riding the coat-tails of a contending team is being a winner? Come on. Nash plays like a winner, that's all that matters. Whether he gets a ring or not won't change that.

29$JerZ
06-01-2010, 02:25 PM
So riding the coat-tails of a contending team is being a winner? Come on. Nash plays like a winner, that's all that matters. Whether he gets a ring or not won't change that.

Agreed

I never understood how going to a championship team during your declining years or twilight solidified your legacy.