Ok I know they both play real differant styles of play, but who is better overral? I would pick Steve Nash, he is the better passer, Iverson is the better scorer, but Nash is more of a team leader. I would pick Nash to lead my team anyday over Iverson.What do you think?
As an overall player? Iverson, easily.He is a much better scorer, and can hold his own in the passing department (very underrated there) against Nash although Steve is the best in the league in that aspect. They are both really bad defensively, but I'll give Iverson the advantage there because he can at least play the passing lanes very well and grab 2-3 steals a game.But like you said this shouldn't even be a question considering they play two completely different ways.
I really think it's Nash. Offensively, if you count points and assists, Nash is responsible for a couple more points than Iverson per game. Nash has also outrebounded Iverson by a little bit the last three years. Iverson and Nash are equal in man to man D, Nash isn't all that bad except he tries to help out his teammates a little too much and leaves people wide open. Iverson has the advantage in steals. But I choose Nash because his percentages are all much, much higher than Iverson and the last 3 seasons, like I said, he has equaled or bettered Iverson's offensive production while playing about 8 less minutes per game which is pretty big. If he played those 8 more minutes he could average about 5 more points, 2 or 3 more assists and grab another rebound which would make it obvious statistically who is the better player(playing Iverson's minutes would make him average 25, 4, 14 and over a steal per game which would be incredible). Nash also has less turnovers than Iverson throughout his career, but yes that would be the same if they played the same minutes.
I also want to add that Nash just has such a high basketball IQ. He may not get many steals or play stellar D, but he is always in the right position and draws charges better than most guards in the league. He's showing that today, and drawing charges are just as effective as stealing the ball, it just doesn't show up in the stats.Nash has also been, arguably, the most clutch scorer in the league this year if you saw that thread I started. And if he's not THE best, he is one of the best and better than Iverson at that.And an argument used for Iverson could be that he went to the Finals and Nash didn't. People use that for Kidd but I think it's just BS. The East has been very, very weak since the Bulls dynasty ended. Kidd and Iverson had and easier road to the Finals than Nash has had, and guess what? Both of the times that they went to the Finals they had a healthy team, which Nash hasn't had really in the WCF's, and they got clobbered in the Finals. Nash at least got to Game 6. Iverson and Kidd combined in 3 Finals appearances had 1 or 2 wins.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ASUFan22 @ Jan 28 2007, 02:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>and they got clobbered in the Finals.</div>whoa there buddy, the Nets were up by 18 in game 6 vs the Spurs. If they held onto that lead who knows what could have happenned in a game 7 against probably the best of the SA teams.\Anyway, to me it is Iverson. Nash has been incredible, but he never averaged 9APG or more in any other system. It also helps give him the incredibly high FG %. Before he arrived in Phoenix he never shot above 49%. In his past 3 seasons he has averaged over 50% each season. Nash is an amazing offensive player, and he keeps on improving, but I feel the Suns system somewhat skews his stats a bit. I don't think he could carry a team with scoring over 30PPG like AI can, and I don't think Nash is quite as versatile. To me AI is the better scorer, better defender, and is one of those players that you just have to watch play over the years to see why he is better. He only takes this comparison by a fairly small margin, but AI to me is the better player.
Nash only average 7-8 assists because he only played 33 minutes on average with Dallas. Over his entire career, including his first two years when he barely played, Nash averages .3 assists less than Iverson in a quarter less of playing time per game. Nash has always been a better passer, even outside the Suns' system.He never shot over 50% outside of Phoenix, but he shot 46-48% before that while Iverson was shooting 39-42%, in the high 20%'s in 3's and high 70's to low 80%'s on free throws. Nash has always scored more efficiently.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ASUFan22 @ Jan 28 2007, 03:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nash only average 7-8 assists because he only played 33 minutes on average with Dallas. Over his entire career, including his first two years when he barely played, Nash averages .3 assists less than Iverson in a quarter less of playing time per game. Nash has always been a better passer, even outside the Suns' system.He never shot over 50% outside of Phoenix, but he shot 46-48% before that while Iverson was shooting 39-42%, in the high 20%'s in 3's and high 70's to low 80%'s on free throws. Nash has always scored more efficiently.</div>I never argued that he was the bette rpasser or playmaker. Right now, despite the system he is in, he is the best pure playmaker in the league. But some of his stats are a bit decieving.Again, stats are skewed. He has never had to face the double teams AI has for years, he has never been the #1 scoring option of his team. And in past few years AI's FG % has gone up to mid-40's. he has many scoring titles, has scored over 40 countless times, and has a 60pt game to his credit. AI is the better scorer.
I would take Nash over Iverson. Even though I think that his stats are boosted because of who that he plays with, you cant really deny the man of what he has done while he has been in Phoenix. Although, I think that it is kinda ridiculous that with all of that talent, they have never been to the finals, they still have a good chance to do it this year. If Nash cant lead his team to a championship this year, I will have almost zero respect for Nash. He has been given the perfect team in order to get there.I think that Iverson over his career has been more successful, but I would rather have Nash on my team than AI as of right now. He not only gets you nearly 12 assists a night, but he also gets you 20 points on a very high percentage.
It's not even close. Nash does everything better than Iverson except defense. Shooting and passing efficiency of Nash is amazing.
Is this current or career?Career is AI hands downCurrent, If Nash had more endurance than AI I'd take him over Iverson in a heartbeatHere's AI's career #s28.1 ppg, 6.2 apg, 2.3 spg, .779 ft shooting, .310 3pt shooting and .422 fg shootingHere's nash's prorated to AI's minutes19 ppg, 10.2 apg, 1.1 spg, .481 fg, .428 3pt, .895 ftHere are AI's #s this year:28.8 ppg, 7.5 apg, 2.03 spg, .430 fg, .307 3pt, .852 ftAnd Nash's prorated to AI's minutes:23.5 ppg, 14.1 apg, 1 spg, .536 fg%, .500 3pt, .873 ftBut the reason that I might take AI is because AI can play 43 minutes per game. Nash may be better when he's in, but AI's can play more minutes. Still, I think Nash this year is clearly better
Nash can play 43 minutes a game as well.....His team just doenst need him to pay 43 minutes a game to win. It is amazing how much he gets done in the amount of time that he is on the floor. Even though he plays a pretty dang good amount, if he played as much as AI, his stat line would be ridiculous.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mavsfan1000 @ Jan 28 2007, 05:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It doesn't help Iverson's cause that Philly is doing just as good without him as they were with him.</div> That is a pointless statement since Dallas is doing better without Nash than they were with him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Jan 29 2007, 12:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That is a pointless statement since Dallas is doing better without Nash than they were with him.</div>Dallas picked up Terry, Harris, Stackhouse, and Dampier? Philly just gained Miller which turned out to be just as much as AI was.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mavsfan1000 @ Jan 28 2007, 07:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Dallas picked up Terry, Harris, Stackhouse, and Dampier? Philly just gained Miller which turned out to be just as much as AI was.</div>And we got rid of Webber, who was the absolute biggest problem on our team.Either way, it's a moot point in the overall argument since both teams are better off without the two, and in Philly's case we won't see the impact of the trade for another year or two, and that is ultimately when we can judge the trade and how it impacted us.Short term, yeah we are winning more games since the trade, but that isn't going to continue for the next few years.
Man this is a tough question with 2 completely different styles of play but if I had to pick one of the two I would definately have to go with the two time mvp Steve Nash. Iverson is a much better scorer and plays better defense but there is no one in the league that is as important to his team as Steve Nash is. He is shooting a career high in fg pct this year and about 49 percent from three which is absolutely incredible. Also he averages more assists than Iverson but the opponet has to be so aware of Nash because he can both score and create shots for his teammates with his great passes. Now saying that Iverson is a really good player but I just couldn't pick him in this 1 on 1 choice.
