PDA

View Full Version : When its all said and done, where will Steve Nash rank all time?



AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 03:54 PM
Where do you think Steve Nash ranks as far as greatest players in NBA History??

Chronz
06-04-2010, 03:56 PM
Wheres the ahead of Iverson option?

Gibby23
06-04-2010, 03:56 PM
Top 50.

DaBUU
06-04-2010, 03:56 PM
just off the top of my head, top 10 PG all time, with an argument to be had for top 5 all time

ManRam
06-04-2010, 03:59 PM
Top 20 is too high, but just saying top 50 is being too harsh. I think around 30-35...just off the top of my head. I think he's the best offensive PG ever behind Magic and maybe Stockton. I think he has a case even over those two. If he was more physically blessed, and a better defender, he'd go down top 20 easily.

2 MVPs (deserving or not) puts you in extremely rare company.

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 04:06 PM
yeah i dont know why i made the poll like that i just thought of it damn. is there anyway i can edit the poll? anyways. I would put him in the thirties. In my opinion he is the greatest offensive point guard in the history of the game. (no disrespect to Magic Johnson). But Steve Nash's ability to score the ball is completely underrated. Most people think hes just a shooter, which is not the case at all. Not only is he arguably the best shooter of all time, when he sets his mind to score, he can carry a team like that with the best of em.

i dont really need to talk about his passing. Everyone already knows

natelpete
06-04-2010, 04:22 PM
It's hard to determine "when its all said and done", when its not all said and done. As of right now I'd go with top 25-30 all time.

Bashna
06-04-2010, 04:26 PM
I personally don't measure people's success based on Rings, because that's a team effort. As an individual, i'd put Nash around 13 to 15.

If i use everyone elses ridiculous Ideals of judgement based on Finals appearances/performances, he's around 20-25.

AntiG
06-04-2010, 04:42 PM
Top 20 is too high, but just saying top 50 is being too harsh. I think around 30-35...just off the top of my head. I think he's the best offensive PG ever behind Magic and maybe Stockton. I think he has a case even over those two. If he was more physically blessed, and a better defender, he'd go down top 20 easily.

2 MVPs (deserving or not) puts you in extremely rare company.

Saying top 50 is fine. The NBA has had a ton of amazing talent for a long time.

shep33
06-04-2010, 05:11 PM
I love Nash, I think he's top 50 easily, hall of famer for sure. I'll say this though, I don't think he's up there with Jason Kidd though. I have Kidd ahead of him just cause he's been to the finals, and he was a much better rebounder and defensive player then Nash.

Here's a question... Is Nash a top 10 pg in the history of the league?

Magic
Stockton
Isiah
Kidd
Payton
Frazier
Oscar
Cousy
Archibald
Nash

That was a list by ESPN a while back, anyone missing? This list ain't in order. I mean it's gonna be tough for Nash to keep that spot, especially with the many great pgs in the league today, CP3, Rondo, Rose, and Deron Williams, who puts up absolutely ridiculous numbers.

GSW Hoops
06-04-2010, 05:13 PM
I personally don't measure people's success based on Rings, because that's a team effort. As an individual, i'd put Nash around 13 to 15.

If i use everyone elses ridiculous Ideals of judgement based on Finals appearances/performances, he's around 20-25.

Wow, 13 to 15? It would be tough to argue that Nash is even in the top 10 in the past decade.

abe_froman
06-04-2010, 05:13 PM
top 50? yeah maybe,no way is he 30 though

whitemamba33
06-04-2010, 05:19 PM
No championship really hurts him in my opinion. And he's played on some really talented teams.

Bricklayer
06-04-2010, 05:21 PM
I love Nash, I think he's top 50 easily, hall of famer for sure. I'll say this though, I don't think he's up there with Jason Kidd though. I have Kidd ahead of him just cause he's been to the finals, and he was a much better rebounder and defensive player then Nash.

Here's a question... Is Nash a top 10 pg in the history of the league?

Magic
Stockton
Isiah
Kidd
Payton
Frazier
Oscar
Cousy
Archibald
Nash

That was a list by ESPN a while back, anyone missing? This list ain't in order. I mean it's gonna be tough for Nash to keep that spot, especially with the many great pgs in the league today, CP3, Rondo, Rose, and Deron Williams, who puts up absolutely ridiculous numbers.

I think Nash deffinitely belongs in that list of players you just mentioned.

PLAYERS FAN
06-04-2010, 05:23 PM
Wheres the ahead of Iverson option?

Something different about your avatar Chronz?:eyebrow:

COBY KARL
06-04-2010, 05:29 PM
just off the top of my head, top 10 PG all time, with an argument to be had for top 5 all time

i hope you're joking

shep33
06-04-2010, 05:31 PM
I think Nash deffinitely belongs in that list of players you just mentioned.

I think so too, I'd put him at the lower end of the top 10 right now... maybe 9-10 spot. If he wins a ring then he goes up, if he wins 2 i think he's top 5. But he's getting up there in age, and if Amar'e goes, then i guess there is no chance.

shep33
06-04-2010, 05:36 PM
I personally don't measure people's success based on Rings, because that's a team effort. As an individual, i'd put Nash around 13 to 15.

If i use everyone elses ridiculous Ideals of judgement based on Finals appearances/performances, he's around 20-25.

I agree that rings aren't everything. But they do matter when all is said and done to be in that elite category.

It's what seperates Duncan from Barkley or Malone; Olajuwan from Ewing; Magic from Stockton.

Nash is a great player, one of my faves ever, but its just about those darn rings that seperates you from being on that elite list. I'm rooting for him to get one for sure, don't know if it happens though.

abe_froman
06-04-2010, 05:40 PM
I personally don't measure people's success based on Rings, because that's a team effort. As an individual, i'd put Nash around 13 to 15.

If i use everyone elses ridiculous Ideals of judgement based on Finals appearances/performances, he's around 20-25.
joking? i can rattle of 15-20 guys better than him off the top of my head

SteveNash
06-04-2010, 06:29 PM
Top 100. He may be able to make it to the top 50, but will probably be pushed out of the top 100 30 years from now.

Bashna
06-04-2010, 06:38 PM
joking? i can rattle of 15-20 guys better than him off the top of my head

And that'd be your ****** opinion.

What I'm getting at here is, way to many people believe winning a ring is detrimental to where you end up in ranking. We're judging PLAY, not random luck, team, Gm's, Economy, ETC. Because ALL of those things, AND MORE, come into play to win a ring. Not everyone is as lucky as robert horry, or Luke Walton (Gasol and Kobe : "Heres a ring walton." Walton: "THXGUYSLOL"). Judging players based on TEAM accomplishments is wrong, and stupid.

Why should duncan be separated from Malone and Barkley based on rings? Well guess what, he shouldn't be separated from them based on Rings, but because of his OUTSTANDING PLAY!!!!

Whoever said Nash isn't top 10 in this decade is fckinz HIGH, he won 2 MVP, not THAT many people have done that.

Nash has been the best PG of this decade, better than Iverson, and better than Kidd. It's silly that we're having a discussion of where he should end up as a player, and basing our judgement on other variables that are out of his control.

Chronz
06-04-2010, 06:45 PM
Something different about your avatar Chronz?:eyebrow:

This guy is alil more interesting than that last guy I had

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 06:46 PM
As a point guard top ten. As a player top 50? Barely.

Reyes6
06-04-2010, 06:50 PM
Top 100.. Probably in the 70's. I just can't see him passing much of the 50 greatest players list and players like LeBron, Melo, CP3, Howard, and more will probably end up in front of him. MVP's make him top 100, but top 50 is pushing it too far.

thesparky33
06-04-2010, 06:51 PM
I'll say probably top 50. I'd be more comfortable saying top 75 though. No slight to Nash, but there have just been so many great players before and during his time, that it really is still quite an honor to be considered top 75 IMO.

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 06:58 PM
Top 100.. Probably in the 70's. I just can't see him passing much of the 50 greatest players list and players like LeBron, Melo, CP3, Howard, and more will probably end up in front of him. MVP's make him top 100, but top 50 is pushing it too far.

Yeah I'm rethinking it also. I said top 50 barely...But thinking a little more I think 50-75 is more of a lock.

ShockerArt
06-04-2010, 06:58 PM
I love Nash, I think he's top 50 easily, hall of famer for sure. I'll say this though, I don't think he's up there with Jason Kidd though. I have Kidd ahead of him just cause he's been to the finals, and he was a much better rebounder and defensive player then Nash.

Here's a question... Is Nash a top 10 pg in the history of the league?

Magic
Stockton
Isiah
Kidd
Payton
Frazier
Oscar
Cousy
Archibald
Nash

That was a list by ESPN a while back, anyone missing? This list ain't in order. I mean it's gonna be tough for Nash to keep that spot, especially with the many great pgs in the league today, CP3, Rondo, Rose, and Deron Williams, who puts up absolutely ridiculous numbers.

There's one thing that jumps out at me when looking at your list. How does John Stockton compare to Nash? They are very similar players. I'd say that Nash isn't too far behind Stockton as a passer, if at all. Nash is a better shooter and IMO quicker off the dribble. Both played the pick-and-roll to perfection. Both were outmatched athletically by most players when on defense. If you put Stockton in today's NBA with the current hand-checking rules, he probably gets a bump offensively. But, I think that he would have struggled a lot on defense, similar to Nash. Stockton got away with a lot of clutching and grabbing that probably wouldn't be overlooked today.

MacFitz92
06-04-2010, 07:04 PM
Top 20 is too high, but just saying top 50 is being too harsh. I think around 30-35...just off the top of my head. I think he's the best offensive PG ever behind Magic and maybe Stockton. I think he has a case even over those two. If he was more physically blessed, and a better defender, he'd go down top 20 easily.

2 MVPs (deserving or not) puts you in extremely rare company.

You mean passer?

Tons of better offensive PGs better than him. Allen Iverson for one.

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 07:08 PM
There's one thing that jumps out at me when looking at your list. How does John Stockton compare to Nash? They are very similar players. I'd say that Nash isn't too far behind Stockton as a passer, if at all. Nash is a better shooter and IMO quicker off the dribble. Both played the pick-and-roll to perfection. Both were outmatched athletically by most players when on defense. If you put Stockton in today's NBA with the current hand-checking rules, he probably gets a bump offensively. But, I think that he would have struggled a lot on defense, similar to Nash. Stockton got away with a lot of clutching and grabbing that probably wouldn't be overlooked today.

I would also say Stockton didn't turn the ball over as much and defensively was not as much as a liability as NAsh is. Also Stockton seemed more durable to me.

BTW on that List compiled by Stein He has Nash 9th below Archibald and above Payton but I would put him above Tiny in the 8 slot.

never mind the turnovers they both have averaged 3 turnovers over there careers...

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 07:21 PM
Top 20 is too high, but just saying top 50 is being too harsh. I think around 30-35...just off the top of my head. I think he's the best offensive PG ever behind Magic and maybe Stockton. I think he has a case even over those two. If he was more physically blessed, and a better defender, he'd go down top 20 easily.

2 MVPs (deserving or not) puts you in extremely rare company.

I can't believe you would say that offensively he was better than Isiah Thomas or Walt Frazier. Both averaged 4 or 5 more points per game than he did and Zeke also didn't have the luxury of an offense like a D'antoni offense and Frazier played without the 3pt line. Another player who is getting severely over looked is Kevin Johnson who averaged the same points as Nash but averaged more assists. Johnson also had a Higher PER than nash did. Top that with the fact that KJ got to the finals and I don't know.

MacFitz92
06-04-2010, 07:26 PM
Too many ignorant people.

Top 20, are you high? 8 people put that. I can name 20 players off the top of my head who are considered better basketball players than Nash.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Larry Bird
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Bill Russell
5. Shaq
6. Tim Duncan
7. The Dream
8. Magic Johnson
9. Kareem
10. Kobe
11. Oscar Robertson
12. Karl Malone
13. Julius Erving
14. Jason Kidd
15. David Robinson
16. John Stockton
17. Gary Payton
18. Bob Petit
19. LeBron James
20. Bob Cousy

The problem comes to top 50 or top 100. With all the great players that have been in this league like West, Baylor, Iverson, etc. it's hard to imagine that Steve Nash could be in the top 50. I am a huge Nash fan, don't get me wrong, but I'd put him around 65 or so most likely. So top 100.

But to the 8 people putting him in the top 20, this is for you! :facepalm:

GSW Hoops
06-04-2010, 08:01 PM
Too many ignorant people.

Top 20, are you high? 8 people put that. I can name 20 players off the top of my head who are considered better basketball players than Nash.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Larry Bird
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Bill Russell
5. Shaq
6. Tim Duncan
7. The Dream
8. Magic Johnson
9. Kareem
10. Kobe
11. Oscar Robertson
12. Karl Malone
13. Julius Erving
14. Jason Kidd
15. David Robinson
16. John Stockton
17. Gary Payton
18. Bob Petit
19. LeBron James
20. Bob Cousy

The problem comes to top 50 or top 100. With all the great players that have been in this league like West, Baylor, Iverson, etc. it's hard to imagine that Steve Nash could be in the top 50. I am a huge Nash fan, don't get me wrong, but I'd put him around 65 or so most likely. So top 100.

But to the 8 people putting him in the top 20, this is for you! :facepalm:

That's what happens when you get a bunch of 14-year-olds voting on "All-Time" threads.

SteveNash
06-04-2010, 08:03 PM
You mean passer?

Tons of better offensive PGs better than him. Allen Iverson for one.

:laugh::laugh:

MacFitz92
06-04-2010, 08:34 PM
:laugh::laugh:

So AI wasn't really a PG, but he was a damn better scorer than Nash.

Raidaz4Life
06-04-2010, 08:39 PM
Top 50... 30-40 somewhere

ManRam
06-04-2010, 08:54 PM
I love Nash, I think he's top 50 easily, hall of famer for sure. I'll say this though, I don't think he's up there with Jason Kidd though. I have Kidd ahead of him just cause he's been to the finals, and he was a much better rebounder and defensive player then Nash.

Here's a question... Is Nash a top 10 pg in the history of the league?

Magic
Stockton
Isiah
Kidd
Payton
Frazier
Oscar
Cousy
Archibald
Nash

That was a list by ESPN a while back, anyone missing? This list ain't in order. I mean it's gonna be tough for Nash to keep that spot, especially with the many great pgs in the league today, CP3, Rondo, Rose, and Deron Williams, who puts up absolutely ridiculous numbers.

Easily. Oscar was a borderline PG. But he runs laps around everyone up there besides Magic and Stockton. I really mean it. His offensive game, if you really examine the numbers, is just mind boggling; so much so that it makes up for his average defensiveness.

I don't discredit him for not winning because I don't think he's ever had a winning cast. It's a team sport. Can't expect him to beat teams that are better than his. You can't knock him for not winning when he's never been expected to. He's top 35...easily. Yes, "EASILY".

GSRaider
06-04-2010, 08:56 PM
top player of all time? cant say...

where does he rank among pgs... that i can do...

(imo)

1. magic
2. oscar robertson
3. isiah thomas
4. john stockton
5. jason kidd
6. steve nash
7. walt frazier
8. bob cousey
9. tiny archibald
10. gary payton

nash is a great great player... one of my all time favorites...

ManRam
06-04-2010, 08:58 PM
So AI wasn't really a PG, but he was a damn better scorer than Nash.

Depends on how you define "better". If you mean scoring more points, and the ability to get to the rim, then sure. If you mean efficiency, then no way.

Nash is a career 50.7% shooter. That's INSANE for a PG. Iverson is a career 43% shooter. Nash has shot 43.2% from three; Iverson has shot 31.3%.

Nash's PPG is incredibly high...but if you add in efficiency, Nash creams Iverson.

Nash is the most efficient scoring PG ever...by miles and miles.

YourTeamSucks
06-04-2010, 09:00 PM
ahead of tim tebow and thats all that matters

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 09:09 PM
Depends on how you define "better". If you mean scoring more points, and the ability to get to the rim, then sure. If you mean efficiency, then no way.

Nash is a career 50.7% shooter. That's INSANE for a PG. Iverson is a career 43% shooter. Nash has shot 43.2% from three; Iverson has shot 31.3%.

Nash's PPG is incredibly high...but if you add in efficiency, Nash creams Iverson.

Nash is the most efficient scoring PG ever...by miles and miles.

Man ram no offense how are you coming to this conclusion?

I'm just comparing him to Kevin Johnson and KJ shot a higher FG% than Nash... Averaged more assists and more points.

Just explain how he would be considered more efficient than KJ?

Historically it is my opinion that KJ is one of the most overlooked and underrated PG of All time.

michelangelo
06-04-2010, 09:44 PM
Interesting. Stockton, Magic and Oscar are ahead of him for sure. (Like totally.) Who else? Isaiah has two rings.

So yeah, I have no problem putting him right there at No. 5. He'll pass Gary Payton and Isaiah on the all time list next year.

GP was the better scorer in his prime (and the superior defender) but didn't win any rings either.

Easily top six or seven.

There's Jerry West after all.


just off the top of my head, top 10 PG all time, with an argument to be had for top 5 all time

michelangelo
06-04-2010, 09:46 PM
Nice list. As far as "pure" point guards, i.e., guys who simply look to pass first, Kidd is right there. In their respective primes, I'd have to go with Kidd over Nash.


top player of all time? cant say...

where does he rank among pgs... that i can do...

(imo)

1. magic
2. oscar robertson
3. isiah thomas
4. john stockton
5. jason kidd
6. steve nash
7. walt frazier
8. bob cousey
9. tiny archibald
10. gary payton

nash is a great great player... one of my all time favorites...

dodie53
06-04-2010, 10:00 PM
imo,
will definitely in the top 50 if he wins a ring

Bruno
06-04-2010, 10:07 PM
Top 20 is too high, but just saying top 50 is being too harsh. I think around 30-35...just off the top of my head. I think he's the best offensive PG ever behind Magic and maybe Stockton. I think he has a case even over those two. If he was more physically blessed, and a better defender, he'd go down top 20 easily.

2 MVPs (deserving or not) puts you in extremely rare company.

2 MVP's is rare. He might have an argument over Stockton, (only because of the MVP's) but nobody touches Magic at the point. He has the stats, the rings, the MVPs both regular season and finals. I also think top 50 is too harsh and would agree with the 30-35 range.

The most amazing thing about Nash, IMO is how late in age he peaked, as a player. The dude didn't enter his prime till 30, lol. (Maybe not physically, but you know what I mean).

Bruno
06-04-2010, 10:08 PM
imo,
will definitely in the top 50 if he wins a ring

He's not going to win a ring, but he doesn't need one to be top 50. How many guys have two MVPS?

kj_
06-04-2010, 10:29 PM
Wow, 13 to 15? It would be tough to argue that Nash is even in the top 10 in the past decade.

Seriously? The guy won back to back MVP's this decade.

Chronz
06-04-2010, 10:39 PM
If Nash was the better offensive player why could he never quarterback a truly great offense?

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 10:44 PM
Seriously? The guy won back to back MVP's this decade.

MVP's really? They don't mean much. How many does Shaq have? 1 or 2. Even though for 10 years no one could touch him.

RadiantShot
06-04-2010, 10:45 PM
I've always been a fan of Nash. He's one of my favorites. He's very consistent, and probably one of the most sound shooters, in any field, that Basketball has ever seen. He won't get enough respect because he doesn't have that ring, but I think he deserves a lot more respect than he gets.

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 10:48 PM
If Nash was the better offensive player why could he never quarterback a truly great offense?

are u ****ing joking me??? Nash has been the point guard for either the 1st or second best offense in the league for like 8 years.
:facepalm:

_KB24_
06-04-2010, 10:49 PM
Top 50 is the best answer. Fair or not, he could never lead a team to the Finals, not once, despite playing with some great teams.

RadiantShot
06-04-2010, 10:52 PM
are u ****ing joking me??? Nash has been the point guard for either the 1st or second best offense in the league for like 8 years.
:facepalm:

You don't get what he's saying. Erase that facepalm.
He's saying, Nash has had opportunities to play well for a truly lethal offensive squad, but hasn't been able to lead them to an NBA Title. You just restated the same the thing he said, without posing a question.

Slap a pretty facepalm on that one.
;)

Chronz
06-04-2010, 10:52 PM
Man ram no offense how are you coming to this conclusion?

I'm just comparing him to Kevin Johnson and KJ shot a higher FG% than Nash... Averaged more assists and more points.

Just explain how he would be considered more efficient than KJ?

Historically it is my opinion that KJ is one of the most overlooked and underrated PG of All time.
KJ is one of the most underrated players of all time but Nash was still slightly more efficient overall, career ppp rating; 119 vs 118. Though KJ carried the bigger load upon himself Nash sports the more impressive assist marks. Just keep in mind Nash wasnt ready to dominate till year 5 and he shot an incredible % from distance, hes just the ideal playmaker but yes KJ made it close, I just doubt he had the big game ability to earn the most efficient tag.

RadiantShot
06-04-2010, 10:52 PM
Top 50 is the best answer. Fair or not, he could never lead a team to the Finals, not once, despite playing with some great teams.

Because he always had those darn Lakers in the way. ;)

Chronz
06-04-2010, 10:52 PM
are u ****ing joking me??? Nash has been the point guard for either the 1st or second best offense in the league for like 8 years.
:facepalm:

Oh yea your right, how silly of me. AI cant compete with that. And I swear Im not being sarcastic. Nash=:worthy:

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 10:54 PM
You don't get what he's saying. Erase that facepalm.
He's saying, Nash has had opportunities to play well for a truly lethal offensive squad, but hasn't been able to lead them to an NBA Title. You just restated the same the thing he said, without posing a question.

Slap a pretty facepalm on that one.
;)

no. if thats what he is saying then i apologizing for facepalming him, but it doesnt look like hes saying that. if looks like hes saying nash shouldnt be considered a great offensive player becuz he has never orchestrated a good offense, with is a ridiculous statement

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 10:55 PM
Oh yea your right, how silly of me. AI cant compete with that. And I swear Im not being sarcastic. Nash=:worthy:

??? what the **** does that even mean? what does AI have to do with that??

Chronz
06-04-2010, 10:56 PM
You don't get what he's saying. Erase that facepalm.
He's saying, Nash has had opportunities to play well for a truly lethal offensive squad, but hasn't been able to lead them to an NBA Title. You just restated the same the thing he said, without posing a question.

Slap a pretty facepalm on that one.
;)

While I would be clever enough to unleash that fury of a post on you guys, it really was just a typo. Nash had talent but it was talent he always made more efficient and therefore increased his offensive capability. Sad his shortcomings defensively made it very hard to build a contender.

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 10:57 PM
if ur trying to make fun of me thinking im an Allen Iverson fan and not a Steve Nash fan, then i can see wher u could come up with that assumption becuz of my name, but no. Im a suns fan and Nash is one of my idles. AI 4 MVP is my name becuz alot of people call me AI becuz im smaller then everyone else but can score on anyone

RadiantShot
06-04-2010, 10:57 PM
Well, like it or not, Steve Nash is probably the most fundamentally sound player in this league, besides his liable defense. I can honestly say that. It's either him, or Kobe Bryant.

Chronz
06-04-2010, 10:57 PM
??? what the **** does that even mean? what does AI have to do with that??

Because the guy I was responding to was saying AI was a better offensive PG when clearly Nash has proven to be the best quarterback of choice for a teams offense.

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 10:58 PM
While I would be clever enough to unleash that fury of a post on you guys, it really was just a typo. Nash had talent but it was talent he always made more efficient and therefore increased his offensive capability. Sad his shortcomings defensively made it very hard to build a contender.

it doesnt matter what talent Nash had around him. Nash made every player that ever played with him have career years (except Shaq and Joe Johnson becuz Joe Johnson was very young at the time)

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 10:58 PM
KJ is one of the most underrated players of all time but Nash was still slightly more efficient overall, career ppp rating; 119 vs 118. Though KJ carried the bigger load upon himself Nash sports the more impressive assist marks. Just keep in mind Nash wasnt ready to dominate till year 5 and he shot an incredible % from distance, hes just the ideal playmaker but yes KJ made it close, I just doubt he had the big game ability to earn the most efficient tag.

Chronz KJ averaged almost 1 more assist than nash per game throughout his career. He averaged roughly 5 more points than nash did throughout his career and shot a higher FG% than Nash and he averaged almost 1 more steal than Nash did. The only edge Nash has on him is he shot the three better than him and his career sample is more current.

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 10:59 PM
Because the guy I was responding to was saying AI was a better offensive PG when clearly Nash has proven to be the best quarterback of choice for a teams offense.

ohh ok i see where ur coming from now. Ok i misread some of your stuff i guess. But yeah i think we agree on those things

Bruno
06-04-2010, 11:00 PM
Top 50 is the best answer. Fair or not, he could never lead a team to the Finals, not once, despite playing with some great teams.

He got robbed in 2007 and everyone knows it.

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 11:00 PM
In 1989 KJ averaged 12 assists and 20 PPG. Nash never had a season to rival those numbers. Close but never better.

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 11:00 PM
Chronz KJ averaged almost 1 more assist than nash per game throughout his career. He averaged roughly 5 more points than nash did throughout his career and shot a higher FG% than Nash and he averaged almost 1 more steal than Nash did. The only edge Nash has on him is he shot the three better than him and his career sample is more current.

As a Suns fan, i can tell you that the amount that Kevin Johnson is underrated is really frusterating.

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 11:06 PM
As a Suns fan, i can tell you that the amount that Kevin Johnson is underrated is really frusterating.

It's because of the Michael Jordan craze. But KJ would dominate games. His game was so smooth and he was so athletic. A very under appreciated player. But you look back and he had a stellar career.

Luv Da New Pack
06-04-2010, 11:10 PM
Wow, 13 to 15? It would be tough to argue that Nash is even in the top 10 in the past decade.

Have to look at longevity too.


No championship really hurts him in my opinion. And he's played on some really talented teams.



He's not going to win a ring, but he doesn't need one to be top 50. How many guys have two MVPS?

Once again, that's actually what hurts him. The fact that he's never even MADE it to the Finals kills his legacy. When you gauge a player...you would like to say you're looking at his career as a whole but everybody knows that the true value is proven in the playoffs and to not make it to the Finals is brutal. It's not even the rings, it's the lack of even competing for one.

Honestly, he can blame Kerr for his failings. They blew up that team one season too early and there wasn't anything that showed that they couldn't make it back. Remember, they were possibly one flagrant foul away from competing for one.


Because he always had those darn Lakers in the way. ;)

What do you mean?

RadiantShot
06-04-2010, 11:11 PM
Have to look at longevity too.






Once again, that's actually what hurts him. The fact that he's never even MADE it to the Finals kills his legacy. When you gauge a player...you would like to say you're looking at his career as a whole but everybody knows that the true value is proven in the playoffs and to not make it to the Finals is brutal. It's not even the rings, it's the lack of even competing for one.

Honestly, he can blame Kerr for his failings. They blew up that team one season too early and there wasn't anything that showed that they couldn't make it back. Remember, they were possibly one flagrant foul away from competing for one.



What do you mean?

I meant his competition was always fierce.
Either way, I was joking, but you understand the jist of what I was saying.

Chronz
06-04-2010, 11:12 PM
Chronz KJ averaged almost 1 more assist than nash per game throughout his career. He averaged roughly 5 more points than nash did throughout his career and shot a higher FG% than Nash and he averaged almost 1 more steal than Nash did. The only edge Nash has on him is he shot the three better than him and his career sample is more current.
You have to factor in pace of play, and efficiency. Nash at his peak had an AST% of 51, KJ could only muster a 44.5%. Remember the faster pace of play made it so everyone experienced a boost in assist per game.


In 1989 KJ averaged 12 assists and 20 PPG. Nash never had a season to rival those numbers. Close but never better.
Nash of 07 trumps any season KJ ever had and hes had 1 extra great year than him and is still going strong.

Chronz
06-04-2010, 11:12 PM
As a Suns fan, i can tell you that the amount that Kevin Johnson is underrated is really frusterating.

I thought you liked KJ? Saying hes underrated is a compliment friend

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 11:13 PM
I thought you liked KJ? Saying hes underrated is a compliment friend

i do love KJ. Im saying its frusterating how much he is underappreciated and overlooked

jackdawson
06-04-2010, 11:14 PM
Wow, 13 to 15? It would be tough to argue that Nash is even in the top 10 in the past decade.

Get real son. A tow time mvp and arguably the best point guard of the decade is not a top ten overall of the decade? :facepalm::facepalm:

97NYer
06-04-2010, 11:14 PM
Wheres the ahead of Iverson option?

Top 100

RadiantShot
06-04-2010, 11:17 PM
Get real son. A tow time mvp and arguably the best point guard of the decade is not a top ten overall of the decade? :facepalm::facepalm:

I'll agree.
Nash is definitely top 10, and possibly top 5, in the last decade.

jackdawson
06-04-2010, 11:17 PM
This guy is alil more interesting than that last guy I had

No. That was a trademark pic with I've come for blood.

_KB24_
06-04-2010, 11:18 PM
He got robbed in 2007 and everyone knows it.

No, they broke a rule and were suspended. They even choked up that double digit lead the next game. He couldn't get them to the Finals once with all the talent that surrounded him. Everyone knows it.

thesparky33
06-04-2010, 11:19 PM
Easily. Oscar was a borderline PG. But he runs laps around everyone up there besides Magic and Stockton. I really mean it. His offensive game, if you really examine the numbers, is just mind boggling; so much so that it makes up for his average defensiveness.

I don't discredit him for not winning because I don't think he's ever had a winning cast. It's a team sport. Can't expect him to beat teams that are better than his. You can't knock him for not winning when he's never been expected to. He's top 35...easily. Yes, "EASILY".

First of all, a truly great player is great on both ends. So being amazing on one end, and horrific on the other doesnt make up for it. Not one bit.

Second, how can you say that he didnt have a winning cast? He played with a LOADED Mavs team for a stretch of 3-4 years, and then played with a talent-heavy Suns team for the rest of his career. I agree that you can't blame him for not winning a title, but saying he didnt have a supporting cast is weak, because Nash had one of the best supporting casts you could get, and it happened with 2 different tenures and teams. Very rare to get that opportunity.

And you can't cite the Suns increase in wins from the 03-04 season to the 04-05 season because the 03-04 team traded away its PG middle of the season for cap space to grab Nash, and having a PG was the missing puzzle piece. Stoudemire was already blooming into an all-star caliber player before Nash, and Marion already was an all-star.

AI4MVP
06-04-2010, 11:21 PM
First of all, a truly great player is great on both ends. So being amazing on one end, and horrific on the other doesnt make up for it. Not one bit.

Second, how can you say that he didnt have a winning cast? He played with a LOADED Mavs team for a stretch of 3-4 years, and then played with a talent-heavy Suns team for the rest of his career. I agree that you can't blame him for not winning a title, but saying he didnt have a supporting cast is weak, because Nash had one of the best supporting casts you could get, and it happened with 2 different tenures and teams. Very rare to get that opportunity.

And you can't cite the Suns increase in wins from the 03-04 season to the 04-05 season because the 03-04 team traded away its PG middle of the season for cap space to grab Nash, and having a PG was the missing puzzle piece. Stoudemire was already blooming into an all-star caliber player before Nash, and Marion already was an all-star.


what are u trying to say??? and yes i can cite the suns increase in wins in 04-05, becuz they got off to a terrible start in 03-04, and in 02-03 we barely made the 8th seed. We went from that, to a Finals contender.

boriquaabe
06-04-2010, 11:27 PM
You have to factor in pace of play, and efficiency. Nash at his peak had an AST% of 51, KJ could only muster a 44.5%. Remember the faster pace of play made it so everyone experienced a boost in assist per game.


Nash of 07 trumps any season KJ ever had and hes had 1 extra great year than him and is still going strong.

I'm not familiar with the ASST % number.

I'm not saying he would be ranked higher. I initially stated Nash wasn't miles and miles ahead of some of the other offensive oriented PG's.

SO you are saying the pace of play increased for KJ's career? Was it at higher clip than Nash's Suns?

JordansBulls
06-04-2010, 11:45 PM
Top 35

LA_Raiders
06-04-2010, 11:48 PM
PGs Top 20

All Players Top 100

jackdawson
06-04-2010, 11:59 PM
PGs Top 20

All Players Top 100

For real?? Hating much?? I beg you to come up with 15-19 PGs better than Steve Nash. Let alone the top 100 overall :facepalm::facepalm:

ink
06-05-2010, 12:02 AM
Top 20 is too high, but just saying top 50 is being too harsh. I think around 30-35...just off the top of my head. I think he's the best offensive PG ever behind Magic and maybe Stockton. I think he has a case even over those two. If he was more physically blessed, and a better defender, he'd go down top 20 easily.

2 MVPs (deserving or not) puts you in extremely rare company.

Even top 50 is pretty amazing in a league with the stars this one has had.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 12:02 AM
PGs Top 20

All Players Top 100

oh

my

god
:facepalm:

THE MTL
06-05-2010, 12:04 AM
There's one thing that jumps out at me when looking at your list. How does John Stockton compare to Nash? They are very similar players. I'd say that Nash isn't too far behind Stockton as a passer, if at all. Nash is a better shooter and IMO quicker off the dribble. Both played the pick-and-roll to perfection. Both were outmatched athletically by most players when on defense. If you put Stockton in today's NBA with the current hand-checking rules, he probably gets a bump offensively. But, I think that he would have struggled a lot on defense, similar to Nash. Stockton got away with a lot of clutching and grabbing that probably wouldn't be overlooked today.

WHOA! Chill out my dude. John Stockton actually played great defense. And has 5 defense team selections to prove that as well as leading the league in steals on several occasions.

THE MTL
06-05-2010, 12:05 AM
The NBA has ALOT of greats and imma be safe and say Top 100. He might get onto the Top 50 list, but there is a long list of guys and more ppl coming.

Chronz
06-05-2010, 12:26 AM
No. That was a trademark pic with I've come for blood.

You do realize that Dexter is a blood splatter analyst who murders cons for fun right?

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 12:30 AM
Nate Archibald
Paul Arizin
Charles Barkley
Rick Barry
Dave Bing
Bob Cousy
Dave Cowens
Billy Cunningham
Dave DeBusschere
Elvin Hayes
Hal Greer
Sam Jones
Jerry Lucas
Lenny Wilkens
Bill Walton
Wes Unseld
Nate Thurmond
Bill Sharman
Dolph Schayes
Earl Monroe

those are 20 players that are on the current NBA top 50. I woul rather have Steve Nash then any of them

Alot of people are gunna rip me for saying Nash>Cousy, but its true

and im not just pciking those names outa my ***. Im a huge fan of the history of the game and research it alot.

_KB24_
06-05-2010, 12:42 AM
Alot of people are gunna rip me for saying Nash>Cousy, but its true

and im not just pciking those names outa my ***. Im a huge fan of the history of the game and research it alot.

I would love for you to explain your Nash and Cousy point. I think it's ridiculous to be honest, but I'll give you a chance to explain before I rip like you said.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 12:49 AM
I would love for you to explain your Nash and Cousy point. I think it's ridiculous to be honest, but I'll give you a chance to explain before I rip like you said.

actually, lets flip this. u explain to me how cousy is better then nash

Bruno
06-05-2010, 12:58 AM
No, they broke a rule and were suspended. They even choked up that double digit lead the next game. He couldn't get them to the Finals once with all the talent that surrounded him. Everyone knows it.

I just gotta disagree with ya.

Petty fights shouldn't effect who wins, or doesn't win the championship. As coach Dantoni said after the suspensions were given, “We have the most powerful microscopes and telescopes in the world in Arizona, [and] you could use those instruments and not find a shred of fairness or common sense in that decision. That's kind of how it feels. It really benefits no one. It doesn't benefit us, obviously. It doesn't benefit the Spurs. It doesn't benefit the fans. It doesn't benefit the NBA."

As you said, the fact that the Suns even got a double digit lead against the Spurs in game five (without Amare and Diaw) is a testimony to Nash and his greatness. The Suns lost that game 88-85. They deserved a better chance to be the champs, I'll stand by that.

Ultimately, it's a big what if, and we'll never know. Both sides have an argument (I do think you have an argument, for where you're coming from. The rules should be respected).

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 01:02 AM
I would love for you to explain your Nash and Cousy point. I think it's ridiculous to be honest, but I'll give you a chance to explain before I rip like you said.

What does Cousy do better then Nash? Win championships? That is the most overrated thing u can possibly say right now. Dont even try to tell me that Nash wouldnt have won all thoe championships if he wasnt playing with Bill Russell in the sixties. Get that **** outa here.

i really appreciate that Cousy was an inovator of the game, but Nash took what Cousy did and did it better. What did Cousy shoot for his career? .375! Thats worse then Brandon Jennings. Nash is a top 3 shooter in the history of the game.

Dont give me that inovator crap. If thats the case, then u can say James Naismith is the best player in the history of basketball.
Steve Nash>Bob Cousy

_KB24_
06-05-2010, 01:03 AM
actually, lets flip this. u explain to me how cousy is better then nash

He did a little thing called.....win :eyebrow:

He was clearly the most dominant PG back then and paved the way for all these modern day PGs. He was the one who brought the flashy ball-handling and crazy passes into the league. He won six rings, six more than Nash. Don't bring in the argument of "DJ Mbenga has a ring, is he better than Nash?", because Nash and Cousy are both comparable when dealing with players.

_KB24_
06-05-2010, 01:08 AM
What does Cousy do better then Nash? Win championships? That is the most overrated thing u can possibly say right now. Dont even try to tell me that Nash wouldnt have won all thoe championships if he wasnt playing with Bill Russell in the sixties. Get that **** outa here.

i really appreciate that Cousy was an inovator of the game, but Nash took what Cousy did and did it better. What did Cousy shoot for his career? .375! Thats worse then Brandon Jennings. Nash is a top 3 shooter in the history of the game.

Dont give me that inovator crap. If thats the case, then u can say James Naismith is the best player in the history of basketball.
Steve Nash>Bob Cousy

Don't bring "ifs" into the convo. They are not real, just like the championships Nash has won. Cousy dominated an era of basketball. He completely changed the game. You know it as well. It's debatable that Nash isn't even a Top 5 Player of this era, let alone the best PG.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 01:10 AM
Don't bring "ifs" into the convo. They are not real, just like the championships Nash has won. Cousy dominated an era of basketball. He completely changed the game. You know it as well. It's debatable that Nash isn't even a Top 5 Player of this era, let alone the best PG.

No. Just because Bob Cousy played along side Bill Russell, the winningest player of all time, does not make him a better player then Steve Nash.

Yes he has a better legacy, but there is not a single thing that Bob Cousy did on the basketball court better then Steve Nash

Just because he played with Russell and all his highlights are in black and white and it makes him look more legendary doesnt mean hes better then Nash. Open your mind.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 01:16 AM
If Nash played on the on the Lakers the last three years, He would be known as the second best point guard of all time.

I hate how unfair and flawed the" number of championships" arguement is

tredigs
06-05-2010, 01:22 AM
What does Cousy do better then Nash? Win championships? That is the most overrated thing u can possibly say right now. Dont even try to tell me that Nash wouldnt have won all thoe championships if he wasnt playing with Bill Russell in the sixties. Get that **** outa here.

i really appreciate that Cousy was an inovator of the game, but Nash took what Cousy did and did it better. What did Cousy shoot for his career? .375! Thats worse then Brandon Jennings. Nash is a top 3 shooter in the history of the game.

Dont give me that inovator crap. If thats the case, then u can say James Naismith is the best player in the history of basketball.
Steve Nash>Bob Cousy

The shooting discrepancy is valid being that Nash is definitely one of the greats at it, but just posting the FG% from a player in the 50s/60s and being amazed at how low it was is a common mistake. It was a different style of play, and during Cousy's years there wasn't a player in the league that even eclipsed >50%.

Argument for Cousy = Innovator of the game, 8x straight Assist leader (lower totals, but that's due to the fact that assists rules made it much tougher to earn one than it is in todays game), and 6x champion (this does matter when you're the best PG in the league, and the 2nd best player on your team only to a top 5 player all time).

Cooz in his time was undeniably greater than Nash in his time. When comparing players in different eras (which is nearly impossible to do effectively), that means a lot.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 01:25 AM
i still believe, unbiasedly and thinking as a basketball fan first and suns fan 2nd, that Steve Nash is better the Cousy

MacFitz92
06-05-2010, 01:38 AM
Depends on how you define "better". If you mean scoring more points, and the ability to get to the rim, then sure. If you mean efficiency, then no way.

Nash is a career 50.7% shooter. That's INSANE for a PG. Iverson is a career 43% shooter. Nash has shot 43.2% from three; Iverson has shot 31.3%.

Nash's PPG is incredibly high...but if you add in efficiency, Nash creams Iverson.

Nash is the most efficient scoring PG ever...by miles and miles.

Nash has been a very good offensive player, but let me end this before you embarrass yourself.

Allen Iverson is one of the best offensive players this league has seen. 4 time scoring champ speaks for it self. To put things in perspective, in Allen Iverson's rookie year, he had more PPG than Nash has ever had in any season, and it's not even close.

And on your "Nash is the most efficient scoring PG ever...by miles and miles.", you clearly do not know what you are talking about. Guys like Kidd and Iverson took their respective teams on their back to the Finals. Shoot Allen Iverson literally asked his team to jump oh his back and carried them to the Finals. The second best scorer on that 76ers team was Theo Ratliff who put up 12.6 ppg.

I mean look at Nash when he was at his best. He had Marion in his prime, Amare, a prime Barbosa and Bell. I mean, he had some damn good players around him. Every single one of those guys scored more points than any player AI played with the year he went to the Finals.

Nash had more than enough to make it to a handfull of NBA Finals if he was anywhere near the best PG of all time. What Allen had around him was about a fourth of the talent that Nash had, and you cannot deny that.

Personally I like Nash a lot more than Iverson, but the way you guys talk ridiculous, I mean... Let us stay objective here.

/Discussion.

MacFitz92
06-05-2010, 01:43 AM
If Nash played on the on the Lakers the last three years, He would be known as the second best point guard of all time.

I hate how unfair and flawed the" number of championships" arguement is

Quit trying to make up extremely outlandish excuses. Nash couldn't make it to the Finals with all the talent in the world around him. Read my previous post if you want to know about Guards who made it to the Finals with a fourth of the talent that Nash had.

gcoll
06-05-2010, 01:49 AM
Allen Iverson is one of the best offensive players this league has seen. 4 time scoring champ speaks for it self. To put things in perspective, in Allen Iverson's rookie year, he had more PPG than Nash has ever had in any season, and it's not even close.
That poster did not say Nash was the most prolific scoring point guard. Just said he was the most efficient.


And on your "Nash is the most efficient scoring PG ever...by miles and miles.", you clearly do not know what you are talking about. Guys like Kidd and Iverson took their respective teams on their back to the Finals
Another point which has nothing to do with efficiency.

Both of those players took their teams to the finals, in a very weak Eastern Conference.


I mean look at Nash when he was at his best. He had Marion in his prime, Amare, a prime Barbosa and Bell. I mean, he had some damn good players around him. He had 4 guys on his team that scored more than 14 ppg, AI had NONE.
Didn't he have Carmelo Anthony for a few years?

Put Allen Iverson on the floor with Boris Diaw, Shawn Marion, Raja Bell, and Kurt Thomas and you're telling me he averages almost 11 assists a game? No ****ing way.


Nash couldn't make it to the Finals with all the talent in the world around him
That makes no logical sense. He is only good enough to be better than every other team in a conference, except one? Absurd.

abe_froman
06-05-2010, 01:54 AM
If Nash played on the on the Lakers the last three years, He would be known as the second best point guard of all time.

I hate how unfair and flawed the" number of championships" arguement is

i highly doubt that,ratings arent as dependent on where you play as much as you want to say.case in point,tim duncan being called best pf of all time while famously playing in s.a.,while kg(in bos) and gasol in la arent called that title.

there are just way to many pg's that are better than him for him to be considered top 3 at the position(big o,thomas,stockton...no way can he crack that,the opportunity to passed years ago)..what hurt him most,in my opinion,is the allergy to defense

boriquaabe
06-05-2010, 02:24 AM
I can't believe you are trying to make an argument as to why Nash is better than Cousy by looking at stats?

This by far is the most outlandlish thing I have ever read on PSD.

Cousy innovated the position in so many different ways. Back in those days guys didn't even dribble the ball up the court. The ball was passed up the court. Cousy was the first guard to use the dribble as a weapon. He was the first player to influence the game from his position. He was the first showman. He gave the first no look pass. He was just as important to that team as Bill Russell. Russell was great but some would have argued Chamberlain was better. But nobody argued that X PG was better than "the cous". At one time Cousy was the highest paid player in the NBA. You think that was for fun? Have some respect AI and don't insult us older fans.

gcoll
06-05-2010, 02:56 AM
Comparing different players from different generations is always a bit hazardous.

And many times absolutely pointless.

JordanPippen
06-05-2010, 03:24 AM
Top 100. He may be able to make it to the top 50, but will probably be pushed out of the top 100 30 years from now.

Overcompensating a bit?

iFYouSeekAmy
06-05-2010, 03:45 AM
I'd say Top 11-20.

Top 5-10 is reserved for the "beastly" caliber superstars along with all-stars.

Mplsman
06-05-2010, 09:07 AM
Very difficult question. Nash has to be up with some of the best pgs all time imo... and still tearin it up.

skinsfan4life80
06-05-2010, 09:53 AM
Im a Nash fan but the fact is Nash has played on some of the most talented teams ever put together and still has won nothing. Those Mavs went to the finals as soon as they got rid of Nash and actually should have won. At one point in Dallas he had five all stars and 20 point scorers coming off the bench and they still won nothing. He was on a team so louded that Joe Johnson was the fourth option. Nash has played with prob more all stars then any other point guard in NBA history..and no he didnt make them all stars because every single one has been an All Star with out him...Dirk, Finely, Jamison, Walker, Marrion. Amare, Joe Johnson,josh howard, van excel, and more..come to think of it you would be hard pressed to find a player who has done less with more talent. He was in the NBA for 8 eights and never even cracked 9 ast per game any season before he played in Dantoni's system. Can you imgaine what kind of number Zeke would have put up in a system like that. He was putting up 10 dimes on the bad boys. Yea he is fun to watch tough as nails and you have to love him...but the fact is to have played with that kind of talent he should have been to several finals. Top 60 at best.

jetsforever
06-05-2010, 10:20 AM
Best Canadian... :).

KnicksorBust
06-05-2010, 12:09 PM
Let's take a look at the resume:
6x All-Star
2x NBA MVP ('05, '06)
5th All-Time in 3-Pt Field Goal Pct (43.1%
2nd All-Time in Free Throw Pct (90.3%)
5th All-Time in Assist Percentage (40.3%)
8th All-Time in Assists (8397)
10th All-Time in Assists Per Game (8.3)
58th All-Time in Player Efficiency Rating (20.2)
12th All-Time in True Shooting Percentage (60.5%) [3rd PG behind Magic and Stockton]
10th All-Time in Offensive Rating (118.7)

That resume sounds like a top 20-25 player.

Playoff Resume:

As a complimentary player on the Mavs
2001 - Lost 4-1 to Spurs in Semis
2002 - Lost 4-1 to Kings in Semis
2003 - Lost 4-2 to Spurs in WCF
2004 - Lost 4-1 to Kings in 1st Round

As a lead player on the Suns
2005 - Lost 4-1 to Spurs in WCF
2006 - Lost 4-2 to Mavs in WCF
2007 - Lost 4-2 to Spurs in Semis
2008 - Lost 4-1 to Spurs in 1st Round
2009 - Didn't make Playoffs
2010 - Lost 4-2 to Lakers in WCF

That's a decade of not quite good enough. I just ask myself... How can you be one of the 20 greatest players to ever play basketball, be surrounded by All-Stars for an entire decade, and never make an NBA Finals? It doesn't add up. The one year everyone loves to make excuses for is a year they went down 4-2 in the Semis. Let's be honest. Was there ever a season where you thought "Nash is too good, they are winning the finals this year." Or was it always "Nash is so fun, I hope they make it to the Finals." Even when they shocked everyone by thoroughly destroying the Spurs, I didn't believe for a second they could get by LA. Overall, he's always a below average to poor defender (At least players like Magic and Iverson made up for it with plenty of steals for easy fastbreak buckets) and for 80% of his career he played like a set up man and not a closer.

The regular season resume is too outstanding to slip him out of the top 50 but the playoff resume knocks him out of the top 25. I'd put him around #30 All-Time.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 12:10 PM
I can't believe you are trying to make an argument as to why Nash is better than Cousy by looking at stats?

This by far is the most outlandlish thing I have ever read on PSD.

Cousy innovated the position in so many different ways. Back in those days guys didn't even dribble the ball up the court. The ball was passed up the court. Cousy was the first guard to use the dribble as a weapon. He was the first player to influence the game from his position. He was the first showman. He gave the first no look pass. He was just as important to that team as Bill Russell. Russell was great but some would have argued Chamberlain was better. But nobody argued that X PG was better than "the cous". At one time Cousy was the highest paid player in the NBA. You think that was for fun? Have some respect AI and don't insult us older fans.

trust me im not trying to insult anyone. and trust me im a huge fan of the history of the game. as a matter of fact im a huge bob cousy fan. and i agree with everything you said.

that being said, i think i have found that you cannot compare a player from 1960 to a player from now

CowboysKB24
06-05-2010, 12:11 PM
Nash is top 50 IMO. He lacked playoff success to be considered in the top 25. Top 50 a is remarkable accolade. Basketball has been going on for so long that top 100 is even great.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 12:13 PM
Let's take a look at the resume:
6x All-Star
2x NBA MVP ('05, '06)
5th All-Time in 3-Pt Field Goal Pct (43.1%
2nd All-Time in Free Throw Pct (90.3%)
5th All-Time in Assist Percentage (40.3%)
8th All-Time in Assists (8397)
10th All-Time in Assists Per Game (8.3)
58th All-Time in Player Efficiency Rating (20.2)
12th All-Time in True Shooting Percentage (60.5%) [3rd PG behind Magic and Stockton]
10th All-Time in Offensive Rating (118.7)

That resume sounds like a top 20-25 player.

Playoff Resume:

As a complimentary player on the Mavs
2001 - Lost 4-1 to Spurs in Semis
2002 - Lost 4-1 to Kings in Semis
2003 - Lost 4-2 to Spurs in WCF
2004 - Lost 4-1 to Kings in 1st Round

As a lead player on the Suns
2005 - Lost 4-1 to Spurs in WCF
2006 - Lost 4-2 to Mavs in WCF
2007 - Lost 4-2 to Spurs in Semis
2008 - Lost 4-1 to Spurs in 1st Round
2009 - Didn't make Playoffs
2010 - Lost 4-2 to Lakers in WCF

That's a decade of not quite good enough. I just ask myself... How can you be one of the 20 greatest players to ever play basketball, be surrounded by All-Stars for an entire decade, and never make an NBA Finals? It doesn't add up. The one year everyone loves to make excuses for is a year they went down 4-2 in the Semis. Let's be honest. Was there ever a season where you thought "Nash is too good, they are winning the finals this year." Or was it always "Nash is so fun, I hope they make it to the Finals." Even when they shocked everyone by thoroughly destroying the Spurs, I didn't believe for a second they could get by LA. Overall, he's always a below average to poor defender (At least players like Magic and Iverson made up for it with plenty of steals for easy fastbreak buckets) and for 80% of his career he played like a set up man and not a closer.

The regular season resume is too outstanding to slip him out of the top 50 but the playoff resume knocks him out of the top 25. I'd put him around #30 All-Time.

probably the best post in this thread so far. well said :clap:

ldc62
06-05-2010, 12:50 PM
PGs: Top 15, but all time: Top 100. No way is he a top 50 player.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 12:59 PM
PGs: Top 15, but all time: Top 100. No way is he a top 50 player.

ok. tell me 14 point guards that are better then him alltime

Raoul Duke
06-05-2010, 01:08 PM
I don't know how you could possible leave him out of the top 50. Two MVP awards and his place amongst the greatest shooters of all time pretty much speak for themselves.

If you ask any true fan who the best team of the last decade was, they're going to say that it was either LA or SA, and consequently Nash did a lot of his losing against The Spurs. I can't really hold that against him too much. Plus I seem to remember his team getting completely boned a few years back, when Horry and The Spurs were rewarded for their direct provocation of the other team.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 01:20 PM
I don't know how you could possible leave him out of the top 50. Two MVP awards and his place amongst the greatest shooters of all time pretty much speak for themselves.

If you ask any true fan who the best team of the last decade was, they're going to say that it was either LA or SA, and consequently Nash did a lot of his losing against The Spurs. I can't really hold that against him too much. Plus I seem to remember his team getting completely boned a few years back, when Horry and The Spurs were rewarded for their direct provocation of the other team.

dont forget the tim donaghy thing

Vidball
06-05-2010, 01:46 PM
Top 100. Never made it to the Finals, wasn't an all star for a full career, he's a liability defensively, and he only made the All-NBA first team 3 times. Top 100 is generous.

thekmp211
06-05-2010, 01:46 PM
if he could win a ring it would really help.

top 50 for sure, i think he's probably even better than that but it's so hard to compare. championships are an easier barometer and he has none. not that it's really been his fault.

kikeyanez
06-05-2010, 01:55 PM
he got a couple years left on his contract ill let you know in a couple years

Montana_Rob
06-05-2010, 01:58 PM
he is in the 50-75 range.

Tony_Starks
06-05-2010, 02:19 PM
3rd best PG ever behind Magic and Stockton...

RISE ABOVE
06-05-2010, 02:21 PM
Here is a good article about the top ten all-time point guards, which includes Nash. (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-greatestpointguards)
(Top Ten)
Years PPG RPG APG PER
M. Johnson 13 19.5 7.2 11.2 24.1
O. Robertson 14 25.7 7.5 9.5 23.2
I. Thomas 13 19.2 3.6 9.3 18.1
J. Stockton 19 13.1 2.7 10.5 21.8
B. Cousy 14 18.4 5.2 7.5 19.8
W. Frazier 13 18.9 5.9 6.1 19.1
J. Kidd 13 14.5 6.7 9.2 18.9
T. Archibald 13 18.8 2.3 7.4 18.0
S. Nash 11 14.0 2.9 7.6 19.9
G. Payton 17 16.3 3.9 6.7 18.9

RISE ABOVE
06-05-2010, 02:26 PM
3rd best PG ever behind Magic and Stockton...

Maybe 9th or 10th. Check out the top ten list. His scoring is 9th. Assists are 6th. Rebounds are 8th, and he's done it for the least amount of years. Zero titles and the least amount off All-Star appearances of the group.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 03:08 PM
he is also IMO the third best point guard of all time behind Magic Johnson and John Stockton. IMO Steve Nash is one of the top 10 most offensively talented players in the history of the NBA.

ldc62
06-05-2010, 03:26 PM
ok. tell me 14 point guards that are better then him alltime

I said TOP 15 because I didn't want people to say "No hes not" and then list 10 players better than him. God...... damn..... it......

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 03:54 PM
1.Magic Johnson
2.John Stockton
3.Steve Nash

Magic Johnson is the 2nd best player in the history of the NBA. Arguably, and IMO tied with Michael Jordan as the best player of all time. That being said, John Stockton is actually a closer 2nd then alot of people think. Stockton was the PERFECT POINT GUARD. Great shooter, phenominal passer, all time leader in steals. Nash is third simply because the man is the greates offensive point guard of all time, along with Magic Johnson, and if he played a lick of defense, and had better luck in the playoffs, wed be talking about him being a top 10 player all time

Raoul Duke
06-05-2010, 04:08 PM
He's top 50, but it's laughable to put him ahead of Jason Kidd, let alone Oscar Robertson or Zeke. Zeke was the best player on a team that won back-to-back and The Big O was... yeah. Pretty shooting percentages and some impressive regular season hardware don't make him better than those guys. Let's not take this too far.

_KB24_
06-05-2010, 04:24 PM
1.Magic Johnson
2.John Stockton
3.Steve Nash

Magic Johnson is the 2nd best player in the history of the NBA. Arguably, and IMO tied with Michael Jordan as the best player of all time. That being said, John Stockton is actually a closer 2nd then alot of people think. Stockton was the PERFECT POINT GUARD. Great shooter, phenominal passer, all time leader in steals. Nash is third simply because the man is the greates offensive point guard of all time, along with Magic Johnson, and if he played a lick of defense, and had better luck in the playoffs, wed be talking about him being a top 10 player all time

No we wouldn't. Once again, stop talking about "ifs". They don't exist. If you could add one little attribute to all the greats, they would have been even that much better. Just stop.

As for PGs, Nash does not even make the Top 5 IMO.

1. Magic
2. Stockton
3. Oscar
4. Cousy
5. Kidd

All these guys led their teams to the Finals multiple times as the leading man. They had the great stats to prove it as well.

Nash can be discussed anywhere from 6-10.

MacFitz92
06-05-2010, 04:37 PM
3rd best PG ever behind Magic and Stockton...

:facepalm:

Last thing I am going to post on this thread, because the ingorance and youth of the majority PSD users is frustrating.

Jason Kidd: Jason Kidd had a third of the talent that Steve Nash had. Kidd made it to the Finals twice. Kidd could do anything. Played defense, rebounded, two things Nash has never done.

Oscar Robertson: If players' greatness was solely based off of stats, this guy might be the best player who ever played, but it isn't. Just to put things in perspective O-Train had a higher career PPG, APG, RPG, was the superior defender, and better player overall by far.

Gary Payton: One of the best defensive players in the history of the NBA. He made the All NBA Defensive Team 9 times, and is the only player in NBA history to accumulate 20,000 points, 5,000 rebounds, 8,000 assists and 2,000 steals in a career.

There's more guys who I don't feel like explaining to you why they were better than Nash, like Frazier, Isiah Thomas, Archibald, and even Cousy. Nash is up there but he isn't top 3. How can you honestly argue that Nash is better than Oscar Robertson, Kidd, or Thomas?

Nash is a top 10 PG most likely, and a top 100 player.

Nash isn't really a top 50 player of all time, and not even close to a top 20 player. See my list of guys who were undoubtly better than Nash on page 7 if you are ignorant enough to disagree.

AI4MVP
06-05-2010, 04:39 PM
:facepalm:

Last thing I am going to post on this thread, because the ingorance and youth of the majority PSD users is frustrating.

Jason Kidd: Jason Kidd had a third of the talent that Steve Nash had. Kidd made it to the Finals twice. Kidd could do anything. Played defense, rebounded, two things Nash has never done.

Oscar Robertson: If players' greatness was solely based off of stats, this guy might be the best player who ever played, but it isn't. Just to put things in perspective O-Train had a higher career PPG, APG, RPG, was the superior defender, and better player overall by far.

Gary Payton: One of the best defensive players in the history of the NBA. He made the All NBA Defensive Team 9 times, and is the only player in NBA history to accumulate 20,000 points, 5,000 rebounds, 8,000 assists and 2,000 steals in a career.

There's more guys who I don't feel like explaining to you why they were better than Nash, like Frazier, Isiah Thomas, Archibald, and even Cousy. Nash is up there but he isn't top 3. How can you honestly argue that Nash is better than Oscar Robertson, Kidd, or Thomas?

Nash is a top 10 PG most likely, and a top 100 player.

Nash isn't really a top 50 player of all time, and not even close to a top 20 player. See my list of guys who were undoubtly better than Nash on page 7 if you are ignorant enough to disagree.

is this seriously coming frmo the dude that thinks AI is a point guard?

ldc62
06-06-2010, 03:39 AM
1.Magic Johnson
2.John Stockton
3.Steve Nash

Magic Johnson is the 2nd best player in the history of the NBA. Arguably, and IMO tied with Michael Jordan as the best player of all time. That being said, John Stockton is actually a closer 2nd then alot of people think. Stockton was the PERFECT POINT GUARD. Great shooter, phenominal passer, all time leader in steals. Nash is third simply because the man is the greates offensive point guard of all time, along with Magic Johnson, and if he played a lick of defense, and had better luck in the playoffs, wed be talking about him being a top 10 player all time

You're joking right? Zeke is better than him and give me Payton over Nash. Payton could never win as the man... but a rings a ring, even if you steal it.

ldc62
06-06-2010, 03:41 AM
Like I have stated before: Nash is in the top 100, maybe a top 10 PG... but putting him in the top 3-5 is just idiotic.

AI4MVP
06-06-2010, 03:43 AM
You're joking right? Zeke is better than him and give me Payton over Nash. Payton could never win as the man... but a rings a ring, even if you steal it.

u can not be ****ing serious right now! ur gunna use THAT as an arguement????

rhino17
06-06-2010, 03:51 AM
It would be hard for him to be top 50 if he is not a top 10 PG if all-time