<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ballerman2112 @ Mar 13 2007, 08:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>yeah, and there are going to be nights were Nash is off....take your pick. Nash is a good shooter and the most clutch player on the team like I said, but there are others that can score. And I feel with Jason Kidd, they would have a better all around player on both sides of the ball. They would have another rebounder, alot better of a defender no matter what you say, and a guy that has gotten to the finals before, twice.</div>And those are the nights where they do poorly 90% of the time. Don't be stupid though, in 04/05 Nash lost to the eventual NBA champions. In 05/06, Nash lost to the best team in the NBA. Bringing up Kidd's 2 finals appearances is futile since he has clearly had less competition.
He still got there, and he lost in one matchup to one of the best teams in NBA history, and to a very good Spurs team in another one. Nash hasnt beaten a good team in the playoffs yet. The best team that they have beaten is last year's Clippers team, and look at them now...They have yet to beat Dallas or San Antonio which are the two elite teams in the western conference. I know that Kidd has gotten there twice and lost both times, but he has had far less support than Nash has.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ballerman2112 @ Mar 13 2007, 09:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He still got there, and he lost in one matchup to one of the best teams in NBA history, and to a very good Spurs team in another one. Nash hasnt beaten a good team in the playoffs yet. The best team that they have beaten is last year's Clippers team, and look at them now...They have yet to beat Dallas or San Antonio which are the two elite teams in the western conference. I know that Kidd has gotten there twice and lost both times, but he has had far less support than Nash has.</div>I guess beating Dallas in 04/05 didn't count as beating dallas in 04/05??
Well to be fair, comparing Dallas of 04'-05' to Dallas of last season, and most definately this season isn't even close.04-05 was Avery's first time as a coach, and only a month or so as a coach at that, and Dallas had all the young kids and Terry and Stack for their first years and such...it's not even the same.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Marvinmartian @ Mar 14 2007, 03:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well to be fair, comparing Dallas of 04'-05' to Dallas of last season, and most definately this season isn't even close.04-05 was Avery's first time as a coach, and only a month or so as a coach at that, and Dallas had all the young kids and Terry and Stack for their first years and such...it's not even the same.</div>Comparing those Dallas teams is the same as comparing that Suns team you beat to the one with 3 injuries and worn out players from a rare 2 straight 7-game series. At least you guys were healthy and only had 1 series before that one. This team is much better. I think of it as a clean slate. Neither has beat either team at their best or else both teams beat eachother once.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ballerman2112 @ Mar 13 2007, 08:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>yeah, and there are going to be nights were Nash is off....take your pick. Nash is a good shooter and the most clutch player on the team like I said, but there are others that can score. And I feel with Jason Kidd, they would have a better all around player on both sides of the ball. They would have another rebounder, alot better of a defender no matter what you say, and a guy that has gotten to the finals before, twice.</div>Nash distributes the ball a lot though and if players are hot then he gets them the ball. He is just as good or better than Kidd at passing, but if you watch this team then you know we need his shooting ability when the team is lagging. He always makes a big shot when we need that. Kidd just can't shoot and isn't as big of a threat that Nash is at bringing his team back in the game. Nash showed how much better in the clutch he is when the Suns and Nets played eachother in that 3 OT game. He made clutch shot after clutch shot and had a great passing game while Kidd passed well, made some nice shots but missed a few at the end and just couldn't take the game over like Nash can.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ballerman2112 @ Mar 13 2007, 09:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He still got there, and he lost in one matchup to one of the best teams in NBA history, and to a very good Spurs team in another one. Nash hasnt beaten a good team in the playoffs yet. The best team that they have beaten is last year's Clippers team, and look at them now...They have yet to beat Dallas or San Antonio which are the two elite teams in the western conference. I know that Kidd has gotten there twice and lost both times, but he has had far less support than Nash has.</div>It's a stupid argument saying he got there. Who did he lose to? The Western Conference champions? Who did Nash lose to? The Western Conference Champions. Nash has 3 wins against the WCC, Kidd has 2. Nash has won about...6-8 series' against the West, Kidd has won 0. If the Nets were in the West then Kidd would lose to the WCC again or maybe sooner to teams like the Kings and Blazers, and T-Wolves...whover was there at the time.Edit: And I wouldn't say beating 2 top 8 teams in the league over the last two years, and more like top 6 since it's the West means that he hasn't beat a 'good' team. He has beaten 2 very good teams so far.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ASUFan22 @ Mar 14 2007, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Comparing those Dallas teams is the same as comparing that Suns team you beat to the one with 3 injuries and worn out players from a rare 2 straight 7-game series. At least you guys were healthy and only had 1 series before that one. This team is much better. I think of it as a clean slate. Neither has beat either team at their best or else both teams beat eachother once.</div>That's actually a very fair point, but at the end of the day, both the Mavs and Suns have to play the hand they're delt, regardless of injury or not.The Suns, are of course better with Amare, but are the better than the team that beat them in 6 games last year, who also has improved about as much? I don't think so, but that's just my opinion.That's like tonights game. I hope no PHX fans, or even Dallas haters, will take a win by the Suns as proof that the Suns are the better team because of one regular season win...it'll mean more for the Mavs as it's their 3rd win of the season against PHX, but It wouldn't mean much more, as I wouldn't say a win by the Mavs means the Suns don't have a chance to beat them in the playoffs either.This Suns/Mavs arguement is like spinning your wheels...nothing will be decided until they meet in the playoffs, it's almost tiring, and I wish we could just fast foward to the second round of the playofs already, and see who actually advances to the WCF's.
It won't show that the Suns are better but it will show that the Mavs are not on some other level. The Suns improved greatly with Amare and Kurt coming back and well as having a healthy Raja. They are more playoff ready than ever. If the Mavs didn't get any better than last season I wouldn't be worried about them at all because with Amare back, and just Amare, last season I'm pretty sure that we would have won. I don't think of either team as being any better than the other this season. I just hope D'Antoni gets some bench players ready for the playoffs because the injuries will come and there shouldn't be any more excuses this year.I'm so happy now, I just saw a Suns-Mavs commercial here in Mexico so I actually may be able to see it!Edit, they don't need to be so much more improved than the Mavs either. The difference is that with some inside scoring and the better D this year the Suns may actually keep some of the big leads that they gave up against the Mavs last season. I expect a 7-game WCF. One of the best that'll every be seen at least in the 8 or so years I've been a fan. Of course San Antonio could beat either team, but every team is dangerous in the playoffs, like a healthy LA and Houston team.
Well he was called the best player in the world today so I guess I can't totaly disagree with the topic..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ASUFan22 @ Mar 14 2007, 01:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It's a stupid argument saying he got there. Who did he lose to? The Western Conference champions? Who did Nash lose to? The Western Conference Champions. Nash has 3 wins against the WCC, Kidd has 2. Nash has won about...6-8 series' against the West, Kidd has won 0. If the Nets were in the West then Kidd would lose to the WCC again or maybe sooner to teams like the Kings and Blazers, and T-Wolves...whover was there at the time.Edit: And I wouldn't say beating 2 top 8 teams in the league over the last two years, and more like top 6 since it's the West means that he hasn't beat a 'good' team. He has beaten 2 very good teams so far.</div>I stated that they lost to pretty much equal teams, but look at how much less of help Kidd had then Nash...The talent level isnt even close and you know that.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ASUFan22 @ Mar 15 2007, 12:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well he was called the best player in the world today so I guess I can't totaly disagree with the topic.. </div>haha...I heard that too. He isnt the best player in the world obviously, but he is one hell of a player. He played an amazing game tonight. Made some big shots, and distributed the ball well. It must be nice to have all of those options on his team...Damn. But not only did he shoot and pass the ball well, but he got some key rebounds, and some key hustle plays as well. Like the steal and deflection off of Terry near the end of the 2nd OT. Although I think Nash is overrated somewhat, he is still the best PG in the NBA, and has definitely proven to be at worst a top 7 player or so.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ballerman2112 @ Mar 14 2007, 09:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I stated that they lost to pretty much equal teams, but look at how much less of help Kidd had then Nash...The talent level isnt even close and you know that.</div>When he was with Dallas it was still the same. I just don't think Kidd is better, but yes Nash is overrated by the media but he deserves to be listed as a borderline to 5 guy, 7 to me.
