I'll take Chauncey. Both have just emerged as great point guards in recent years. I like Billups better though just because of his D. He is a top defensive point guard in the league while Nash is one of the worst. I think that makes the difference. I think Nash is better on offense. He's the better play maker and he is a very good shooter and can score if he is needed, but Billups scores plenty of points and is also a good passer so there isn't a huge difference there like there is on D. I'd go with Billups but I think Nash is right behind him.
Chauncey Billups for sure. More versatile, plays well on BOTH sides of the floor, and more success in the postseason. Easy choice for me.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Nov 1 2006, 09:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Chauncey Billups for sure. More versatile, plays well on BOTH sides of the floor, and more success in the postseason. Easy choice for me.</div>Exact same thoughts. Billups is a great leader, better shooter, defender, need I go on? Nash can really spread the ball but that can only get you so far.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ELiiiTE @ Nov 1 2006, 08:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Exact same thoughts. Billups is a great leader, better shooter, defender, need I go on? Nash can really spread the ball but that can only get you so far.</div>homer pick or not I would still give the edge to Nash.Nash+Playmaker+Shooter+LeaderBillups+DefenderPlayoff #s: both played 86 postseason gamesNash 17.1 ppg, 8.2 apg, 46.8 FG%, 41.1 3P% & 90.1 FT%Billups 17.3 ppg, 5.8 apg, 40.2 FG%, 34.0 3P% & 89.5 FT%IMO for whatever it is worth Billups only has last year to his credit as a top 5 PG and spent half of his career bouncing from team to team where as Nash has been up there basically since 2000 and has been at the top for the past 2-3 years. If you were to create a list of their combined 5 greatest seasons 4 of them would belong to Nash.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Diawsome @ Nov 2 2006, 05:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>homer pick or not I would still give the edge to Nash.Nash+Playmaker+Shooter+LeaderBillups+DefenderPlayoff #s: both played 86 postseason gamesNash 17.1 ppg, 8.2 apg, 46.8 FG%, 41.1 3P% & 90.1 FT%Billups 17.3 ppg, 5.8 apg, 40.2 FG%, 34.0 3P% & 89.5 FT%IMO for whatever it is worth Billups only has last year to his credit as a top 5 PG and spent half of his career bouncing from team to team where as Nash has been up there basically since 2000 and has been at the top for the past 2-3 years. If you were to create a list of their combined 5 greatest seasons 4 of them would belong to Nash.</div>Chauncey is not that far off as a playmaker, Steve has a lot more talent around him to get the ball to. Shooting is also debateable, both are premier shooters in the league and either could be ahead of one another. Leader is also very very debateable. Some would call Chauncey the best leader in the league, not to say Nash isn't a good leader, but Chauncey makes the better desicions, and more importantly shots in the clutch. The defense is far and away Chauncey, and with everything else being as close as it is that is enough to give Chauncey the edge. Not to mention a ring and Finals MVP.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Diawsome @ Nov 2 2006, 04:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>homer pick or not I would still give the edge to Nash.Nash+Playmaker+Shooter+LeaderBillups+Defender</div>Um, no. Just no. Billups is as good if not a better shooter, a good leader (no need to compare), more clutch, more success. Homer pick = yes.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Diawsome @ Nov 2 2006, 04:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Playoffs: both played 86 postseason gamesNash 17.1 ppg, 8.2 apg, 46.8 FG%, 41.1 3P% & 90.1 FT%Billups 17.3 ppg, 5.8 apg, 40.2 FG%, 34.0 3P% & 89.5 FT%</div>Basing it just on playoffs? Well first of all that was one season... both made it just as far as a team and as you know stats don't always tell the game.
I also forgot a little something, you compare their playoff stats, but Chauncey has been to two Finals, one of them he won, and was Finals MVP.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Diawsome @ Nov 2 2006, 02:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>homer pick or not I would still give the edge to Nash.Nash+Playmaker+Shooter+LeaderBillups+DefenderPlayoff #s: both played 86 postseason gamesNash 17.1 ppg, 8.2 apg, 46.8 FG%, 41.1 3P% & 90.1 FT%Billups 17.3 ppg, 5.8 apg, 40.2 FG%, 34.0 3P% & 89.5 FT%IMO for whatever it is worth Billups only has last year to his credit as a top 5 PG and spent half of his career bouncing from team to team where as Nash has been up there basically since 2000 and has been at the top for the past 2-3 years. If you were to create a list of their combined 5 greatest seasons 4 of them would belong to Nash.</div>Your pretty much contradicting yourself there. You say Nash is the better shooter there but the stats you showed have Billups with better fg and 3pt %.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ELiiiTE @ Nov 2 2006, 06:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Um, no. Just no. Billups is as good if not a better shooter, a good leader (no need to compare), more clutch, more success. Homer pick = yes.Basing it just on playoffs? Well first of all that was one season... both made it just as far as a team and as you know stats don't always tell the game.</div>Nothing shows that Billups is as good of a shooter/better than Nash. Nash's career FG% is better then Billups best single season %. The only season Billups has ever shot better than Nash is the 1999 season (39%-36%). Nash sweeps Billups in every season they have both played in 3P%. Also Nash holds comfortable leads in career eFG% (.540-.489) and TS% (.591-.565).For leadership they both hold identical player wins/losses at 6.1 wins per season and 2.5 losses per season. I gave the edge to Nash because Billups has never went and turned a franchise while helping everyone around him perform at levels they had never seen before like Nash has done with Phoenix. Without Billups the Pistons were still a very good team where as the Suns without Nash were just bad. As for the playoffs those numbers were for their careers not just last season.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Nov 2 2006, 08:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Your pretty much contradicting yourself there. You say Nash is the better shooter there but the stats you showed have Billups with better fg and 3pt %.</div>I think you mis-read the percentages
Oh crap lol I did Even though your argument isn't bad I think your realying on stats to much. Plus I think we are talking about now and right now Nash and Billups are about identical in leadership and shooting. You also never mentioned the fact that billups is lightyears ahead of Nash on defense which is a huge factor in this.
Im giving it to Nash. He is the better playmaker, and the better scorer and shooter. Billups is better at defense, but come on. Look at how Nash helps his teammates. He won MVP for a reason.
Totally depends on the team they are playing for. On MOST teams in the NBA, I'd rather have Chauncey Billups. Great defender, great playmaker, great scorer, clutch, great leader, proven winner, and has a finals ring and MVP. But in the rare case that I have a team that could flourish in the open court, it is definately Nash. Right now, he is the best PG on the break in the league.But most of the time, it's Billups.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Diawsome @ Nov 2 2006, 07:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nothing shows that Billups is as good of a shooter/better than Nash. Nash's career FG% is better then Billups best single season %. The only season Billups has ever shot better than Nash is the 1999 season (39%-36%). Nash sweeps Billups in every season they have both played in 3P%. Also Nash holds comfortable leads in career eFG% (.540-.489) and TS% (.591-.565).For leadership they both hold identical player wins/losses at 6.1 wins per season and 2.5 losses per season. I gave the edge to Nash because Billups has never went and turned a franchise while helping everyone around him perform at levels they had never seen before like Nash has done with Phoenix. Without Billups the Pistons were still a very good team where as the Suns without Nash were just bad. As for the playoffs those numbers were for their careers not just last season.I think you mis-read the percentages </div>What is up with all of these stats that are irrelevent.Chauncey and Steve are both very close in every category offensively, but Steve is nowhere near as good of a defender as Chauncey is, and he doesn't have near the postseason success. You can bring up stats all you want, but a player is measured by not only stats, but success, and Chauncey has that.
