<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">Jeff Hornacek was good, quite true, as was Russell. But, lets look at what Nash has. Stoudemire is better than anyone but Malone. Same with Marion. Throw in Joe Johnson just last season as better than everyone Stock had outside of Malone. QRich, while he jacked up a lot of treys, still was very good for that type of offense. Raja Bell is better than Russell. He's a better defender and a better shooter than Russell was. To say the least, everything Nash had was essentially better than everyone Stockton had, with the exception of Karl Malone.</div> Bell isn't better than Russell, your seriously overrating the guy. Russell was a valuable piece in Utah, and one of the best defenders in his hay. Bell is an slightly above average defender, and resorts to flopping when his opponent outplays him. That's doesn't necessarily make him a good defender. Also, let's not forget that Marion, Amare, Bell, Joe Johnson etc, NEVER played that good until Nash got there. The reason that you claim that they're better is because of Nash. He's the best at makin players better, something Stockton couldn't do at that level.
I know Rock4Life has made a rather "questionable" claim, but please respect his opinion and keep it on a basketball level. Thanks.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rock4life:</div><div class="quote_post">Bell isn't better than Russell, your seriously overrating the guy. Russell was a valuable piece in Utah, and one of the best defenders in his hay. Bell is an slightly above average defender, and resorts to flopping when his opponent outplays him. That's doesn't necessarily make him a good defender. Also, let's not forget that Marion, Amare, Bell, Joe Johnson etc, NEVER played that good until Nash got there. The reason that you claim that they're better is because of Nash. He's the best at makin players better, something Stockton couldn't do at that level.</div>I almost laughed myself to tears when I read this. WOW. Shwn Marion was never THAT good until Nash came? Have you EVER watched him play? Did you ever hear about him prior to Nash coming and making him a household name? If you had, you'd known he was a consistent double double guy almost every night. Before Nash, he had a career average of 17.92 ppg and 9.41 rpg. For that matter, he had arguably his best year before Nash came there, when he averaged 21.2ppg, 9.5rpg, 2.28spg, and 1.17bpg. Now lets switch over to Amare. Not sure if you remember, but he won ROY over Yao Ming his first year in the league. He also averaged 20.6ppg and 9.0rpg. Yea...a ROY and and 20/9 season is so awful, I can tell why he needed Nash. Now lets switch to Joe Johnson. The year before Nash came, he averaged 16.7ppg. He leaves the Suns and bolts to Atlanta where he has a career year, averaging 20.2ppg and 6.5apg. Yea....he totally needed Nash to be successful too, that's why he did well pre-Steve Nash and post-Steve Nash in Atlanta. Now....onto QRich. Prior to coming to Phoenix, he had a career high of 17.2ppg which he established as a Clipper. He also had a good post game prior to going to the Suns. If anything, playing for the Suns hurt him. He became nothing more than a chucker from behind the arc, completely abandoning the post game that he used effectively as a Clipp and at DePaul. Onto Raja Bell we go now. Prior to last season he had a couple seasons of averaging double figures in Utah. Beyond that, he was still regarded as one of the top defenders in the league. And how is his defense overrated? He did an admirable job against Kobe in the playoffs, as you should note that the only game Bell missed, Kobe exploded for 50, every other game he was held in check. Beyond that, he did a good job against Kobe in the 01-02 Finals when he was with Philly. Ok...I think I'm done now.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rock4life:</div><div class="quote_post">Bell isn't better than Russell, your seriously overrating the guy. Russell was a valuable piece in Utah, and one of the best defenders in his hay. Bell is an slightly above average defender, and resorts to flopping when his opponent outplays him. That's doesn't necessarily make him a good defender. Also, let's not forget that Marion, Amare, Bell, Joe Johnson etc, NEVER played that good until Nash got there. The reason that you claim that they're better is because of Nash. He's the best at makin players better, something Stockton couldn't do at that level.</div> Nash joined the Suns in '04-'05. Marion was a 20/10 type player before Nash came to Phoenix. Stoudamire has been in the league for 4 years, two of which under Nash. His first year, as a rookie, he was pretty good. His second year, he was a 20/9 player. With or without Nash, it was apparent he was going to become a good player. He averaged 20/9 in his second year as a pro coming straight from HS. Bell began making a name for himself in Utah. He didn't average double digit points per game until he went to Utah. Then he did it in back to back seasons. And while Johnson did develop on Phoenix (after all, its where has spent most of his career), he achieved his career high last year, out from under Nash... To say Stockton didn't make players around him better is foolish. Eisley got his free agent contract bec. of Stockton. And secondly, the system Pheonix plays in, is VERY beneficial for players...since they constantly run, they can up their points per game. Utah's offense was more structured, and relied upon the pick and roll. You are stretching, grasping for straws. Edit: Damnit Moo2k4. I leave to go to the bathroom, finish the post, and find out you had already replied.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">I almost laughed myself to tears when I read this. WOW. Shwn Marion was never THAT good until Nash came? Have you EVER watched him play? Did you ever hear about him prior to Nash coming and making him a household name? If you had, you'd known he was a consistent double double guy almost every night. Before Nash, he had a career average of 17.92 ppg and 9.41 rpg. For that matter, he had arguably his best year before Nash came there, when he averaged 21.2ppg, 9.5rpg, 2.28spg, and 1.17bpg. Now lets switch over to Amare. Not sure if you remember, but he won ROY over Yao Ming his first year in the league. He also averaged 20.6ppg and 9.0rpg. Yea...a ROY and and 20/9 season is so awful, I can tell why he needed Nash. Now lets switch to Joe Johnson. The year before Nash came, he averaged 16.7ppg. He leaves the Suns and bolts to Atlanta where he has a career year, averaging 20.2ppg and 6.5apg. Yea....he totally needed Nash to be successful too, that's why he did well pre-Steve Nash and post-Steve Nash in Atlanta. Now....onto QRich. Prior to coming to Phoenix, he had a career high of 17.2ppg which he established as a Clipper. He also had a good post game prior to going to the Suns. If anything, playing for the Suns hurt him. He became nothing more than a chucker from behind the arc, completely abandoning the post game that he used effectively as a Clipp and at DePaul. Onto Raja Bell we go now. Prior to last season he had a couple seasons of averaging double figures in Utah. Beyond that, he was still regarded as one of the top defenders in the league. And how is his defense overrated? He did an admirable job against Kobe in the playoffs, as you should note that the only game Bell missed, Kobe exploded for 50, every other game he was held in check. Beyond that, he did a good job against Kobe in the 01-02 Finals when he was with Philly. Ok...I think I'm done now.</div> Very nice post, man. I love the Q-rich point. Playing in PHX hurt him. He was one of the best post guards. He was also one of the best rebounding gurads in the league, but PHX and Nash made him just a perimeter player, which has hurt him a lot.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Vintage:</div><div class="quote_post">.Edit: Damnit Moo2k4. I leave to go to the bathroom, finish the post, and find out you had already replied.</div>I apologize....I just can't help it.
Moo2k4: <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">He's won two MVPs...big whoop.</div> I find this to be HILARIOUS. Oh man, although I also think Nash isn't better than Stock or JKidd, you have to give respect where respect is due. You can't say 2 MVPs Big Whoop LOL. You act as if an MVP is nothing, but I bet you're on the bandwagons thinking Kobe should've won, so that's why you say that.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Mr.Wade:</div><div class="quote_post">Moo2k4: I find this to be HILARIOUS. Oh man, although I also think Nash isn't better than Stock or JKidd, you have to give respect where respect is due. You can't say 2 MVPs Big Whoop LOL. You act as if an MVP is nothing, but I bet you're on the bandwagons thinking Kobe should've won, so that's why you say that.</div>To me, MVPs are not that big of a deal. While I will give him props for winning them, they don't get him anything. Personal accolades don't lead to wins. Nor do they lead to playoff success. Nor do they lead to an NBA Finals appearance or win. While Kidd nor Stockton had the MVPs, they at least made it to the Finals. Plus, Nash dind't even deserve the last one. Kobe or LeBron would have been better MVPs than him, but the media just loves the guy and hates Kobe. But that's a whole different debate that I'm not going to get into.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Mr.Wade:</div><div class="quote_post">Moo2k4: I find this to be HILARIOUS. Oh man, although I also think Nash isn't better than Stock or JKidd, you have to give respect where respect is due. You can't say 2 MVPs Big Whoop LOL. You act as if an MVP is nothing, but I bet you're on the bandwagons thinking Kobe should've won, so that's why you say that.</div> How does an MVP mean anything if you can't win a title? If anything, Nash benefits from playing in PHX. Was Nash ever mentioned as a hall of famer before PHX? No. Was he ever mentioned as one of the best PG's in the league before PHX? No. Was he ever mentioned as an MVP candidate before PHX? No. Nash needed a team with more than just Dirk Nowitzki and Michael Finley on it. He needed a team where he could become the number one option and just run. That might work in the regular season, but that doesn't work in the playoffs. An MVP awards means nothing if you can't win the finals. Look at Karl Malone. He has an MVP award, but nothing to show for his hard work. No rings. You think he'd give up that MVP award for a ring. Probably. A championship ring means a lot more than an MVP award, plain and simple. As for this debate, if you compare their best season's on a per 40 statistical comparison, it's not even close. John Stockon's 1989-1990 Season Per 40 18.4 PPG, 15.5 APG, 2.8 SPG, on a TS% of 60.7 Steve Nash's 2004-2005 Season Per 40 18.0 PPG, 13.4 APG, 1.2 SPG, on a TS% of 60.7 Even in their best years, Nash wasn't better than Stockton. In the year's I compaired, in their actual MPG, Nash played 3 less MPG than Stockton did. So if you want those compared to the exact number of minutes Stockton played, Nash would've averaged 16.9 PPG, 12.5 APG, and 1.1 SPG. Still not better than Stockton's season of 17.2 PPG, 14.5 APG, and 2.65 SPG. I don't how you come to the equation that Nash is better than Stockton when he loses to Stockton statistically, in the eyes of most posters here, in the eyes of most NBA analysts, and probably in the eyes of most NBA players today. Nash is a great PG, but he's not on the level of Kidd, Magic, and Stockton. Did I also forget to mention that Stockton's career high for assist in a game is 28. NOTE: I absolutely hate both these players, but I respect them. You have to give Stockton the respect he deserves here. He's leagues better than Nash.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Vintage:</div><div class="quote_post">And secondly, the system Pheonix plays in, is VERY beneficial for players...since they constantly run, they can up their points per game. Utah's offense was more structured, and relied upon the pick and roll. </div> /end argument, while no one here thinks Nash is not a great player, but the pho sun's entire offense is in over drive the whole game, stats get padded. with amare back, Nash really has to take his team to the finals and make a serious run for the title to be even considered on the same level.
This is just full of Nash haters... I can't even bother to reply, because there's no changing anyone's minds. Especially Laker fans.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rock4life:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm not a Suns fan at all. But this guy is incredible. For a player his size, to be putting up numbers like that is ridiculous. I know it's a little early to be saying this. But by the time he retires, I think Steve Nash will be the greatest point guard behind Magic. John Stockton was a beast, but to me, Nash is better and more talented. They were smart, and Stockton was a tougher defender. But Nash needs to be considered one of the best pg's ever right now.</div> Wow.. just disrespectful..
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">To me, MVPs are not that big of a deal. While I will give him props for winning them, they don't get him anything. Personal accolades don't lead to wins. Nor do they lead to playoff success. Nor do they lead to an NBA Finals appearance or win. While Kidd nor Stockton had the MVPs, they at least made it to the Finals. Plus, Nash dind't even deserve the last one. Kobe or LeBron would have been better MVPs than him, but the media just loves the guy and hates Kobe. But that's a whole different debate that I'm not going to get into.</div> Actually, winning the MVP award does entail that the player did lead his team to wins. While this personal accolade does not imply playoff success (that's what the Finals MVP is for), the player who recieves it definitely has to experience a certain level of success. That's precisely the reason that Kobe didn't win it. It's a bit off topic, but I think Rock4life's original claim has been disproved enough already. I don't think you're giving his MVP awards the respect they deserve. You may not agree with him winning them, but that's no reason to ignore the significance of the award. And, Mamba, I don't know why you're trying to argue against Mr. Wade. He only took exception to the dismissal of Nash's MVP seasons, as do I.
Nash is an apple Stockton is an oragne They play totally different games, totally different offenses with totally in a totally different league.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Mr.Wade:</div><div class="quote_post">This is just full of Nash haters... I can't even bother to reply, because there's no changing anyone's minds. Especially Laker fans.</div> Theres no changing anyones mind because the arguments for Nash > Stockton or Kidd are either weak or being sufficiently rebutted against. I've read every single post on this thread and the arguments for Nash aren't very convincing or numerous at all. Also Marion was an All-Star before Nash. Doesnt anyone remember Jordan hittin that game tying shot in the all-star game?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">Nash is an apple Stockton is an oragne They play totally different games, totally different offenses with totally in a totally different league.</div> oranges are way better than apples
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Mr.Wade:</div><div class="quote_post">This is just full of Nash haters... I can't even bother to reply, because there's no changing anyone's minds. Especially Laker fans.</div> please say how nash is better besides range.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Mr.Wade:</div><div class="quote_post"> You can't say 2 MVPs Big Whoop LOL. You act as if an MVP is nothing, but I bet you're on the bandwagons thinking Kobe should've won, so that's why you say that.</div> And you're probably one the Nash bandwagoners. BIG WOOP. Nash didn't deserver it, neither did Kobe. If anyone in the NBA deserved it, it was LeBron.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Chutney:</div><div class="quote_post">Actually, winning the MVP award does entail that the player did lead his team to wins. While this personal accolade does not imply playoff success (that's what the Finals MVP is for), the player who recieves it definitely has to experience a certain level of success. That's precisely the reason that Kobe didn't win it.</div>So apparently 47 wins and a scoring title isn't success? Wow, I didn't know that. What's next, does 60 wins and #1 seed in the playoffs become unsuccessful? Cause, regardless of what you think, 47 wins and a 7 seed in a stacked and competetive Western Conference is an accomplishment. Also, look at his team. It wasn't much of anything outside of him. On some nights, others would step up. But usually, he was the only one consistently showing up until the last 6 weeks of the season. If the Lakers would have played the way they did the last 6 weeks for the entire season, they'd have been a 50 win team easily. But, as you said, 47 wins and a scoring title isn't successful, so I guess 50 wins wouldn't have been too successful either, seeing as how it's only a few wins more. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">It's a bit off topic, but I think Rock4life's original claim has been disproved enough already. I don't think you're giving his MVP awards the respect they deserve. You may not agree with him winning them, but that's no reason to ignore the significance of the award.</div>I completely respect his MVPs, but I don't feel he deserved both of them, nor do I think their overly important. What you do in the regular season isn't nearly as important as what you do in the playoffs. To put an MVP in perspective....lets switch sports real quick. A few years ago, ARod won an MVP on a team that didn't even break .500. That shows how important an MVP is. You don't even have to be on a winning team to get it, it's just preferred.
