Exactly. If you just want a pure point guard to set up the offense and run it, Nash is your man. But if you want a player who can score, distribute the ball, and beat the opposition in a variety of different ways... Iverson is your man.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 14 2006, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Holy sh*t! Annilhated! I think bigmo is the best poster here.Anyway, iversonfan, Im choosing not to continue with you because your too ignorant. You dont seem to get that Nash is the better passer and playmaker then Iverson. I would take Nash running my offense over Iverson really.Iverson is the better overall player because of what he does on the scoring end, but Nash is the better "true" pg if I had to choose one to run my team.</div>What the F*ck are you talking about? Tell me where I said Iverson is a better passer and playmaker than Nash. Quit telling people they said things they didn't. Go read my posts and tell me where I said those two things and I won't believe your full of sh*t. BTW don't even call anyone ignorant. Your the one who thought AI doesn't care about winning. I know Nash is a better pure PG. That is a given. I never said he isn't. Anyone would be crazy to say Iverson is a better pure PG than Nash. I don't get how you always think people said things they didn't. Seriously go quote where I said all these thing syou say I supposively said because I no i didn't. I basically said exactly what BigMo said exept he went into more detail and also broughp up defense.
No, it's that I kept on pointing out that Nash is better at passing, and running an offense but you just completely ignored that and started talking about how bad Iverson's teammates are..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 14 2006, 04:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No, it's that I kept on pointing out that Nash is better at passing, and running an offense but you just completely ignored that and started talking about how bad Iverson's teammates are..</div>It's true. I basically said about the teamates what BigMo said he just gave more detail and you agree w/ him about the teammates but not me. Makes no sense and don't try and make excuses for saying what you said. I never said those thigns and you know it. Its funny how you say I'm ignorant for saying something I never even said. And once again you shouldn't even be able to call people ignorant.BTW Nash might be better at passing but honestly Iverson isn't far behind him in running an offense. He led a team that wasn't that great of a team offensively and he was making plays whether it was finishing imself or dishing it out to open teammates. This was a mediocre offensive team and they averaged nearly 100 ppg that season. I mean Chris Webber averaged 20 ppg while shooting only just above 40% from the field. Thats basically proof right there that Iverson was dishing it out to him a lot. He was creating plays for the offense. Sometimes the offense would do something with it and sometimes they wouldn't. If they weren't he would do the scoring. I mean people don't realize how bad of a shooting team his supporting cast was. Chris Webber shot about 42%, Kyle Korver shot 43%, John Salmons shot 42%. Iggy and Dalembert both respectively shot atleast 50% from the field but a majority of both of their points came from Iverson finding them for easy buckets. Iverson doesn't have a lot to work w/ on offense as you can see but last season he still managed to get th job done on offense. That is very good playmaking. I mean liek BigMo said defense was our killer along w/ depth aswell. I believe our bench scored less than 20 ppg last season. If we would've had more depth I bet we could've slipped in the playoffs w/ the 7th or 8th seed even w/ horrible defense. Anyways the point I'm making though is Iverson is really a very good playmaker. Not as good as Nash but still a very good one and not far behind Nash in it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 14 2006, 04:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>And HisGreatness, that was like the worst post of the day. You didnt even explain why..</div>What's the point in it? everyone knows Im a 76ers fan, Iverson is better on BOTH sides of the ball regardless of Nash's extreme assist stat which is VERY overrated, he's only averaged about 10 in the AST since he came to Phoenix with two of the best forwards in the L as his sidekick. Iverson brought his team to the finals with Ratliff as his second man and other nobodys, AND was the frontman on the team. Nash? Never been past the WCF on a team with Dirk and with Stat/Matrix. On Dallas squad, Dirk was JUST as important if NOT more than Nash. Enough said, "case closed".
Nash didnt have Amare last year. And the thing is, he puts his players on the map.Do you how many players had their career highs in ppg last year with the Suns? Guess why?Iverson is better at scoring, but Nash is the better passer and playmaker. It depends what you want in your pg.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 15 2006, 01:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nash didnt have Amare last year. And the thing is, he puts his players on the map.Do you how many players had their career highs in ppg last year with the Suns? Guess why?Iverson is better at scoring, but Nash is the better passer and playmaker. It depends what you want in your pg.</div>No sh*t, look at what I said, he STILL had Matrix who's arguably the most versatile player in the L, and is better than any player Iverson ever played with, let alone the '01 Squad, Marion over Webber, ANY DAY of the week. He didn't have Amare but he WILL have him this upcoming season too, as the season before.Everyone that had a career high is because STAT wasn't there to be filling the sheets OR because they're either YOUNG or hitting their primes. Nash had some to do with it, but look who's surrounding him. Nash has it easier than Iverson, WAY easier. Iverson also is a better defender. But AI SCORES the most on his team and LEADS his team in assists with 7.5 ( i think). Nash has a 10.5 APG. A GREAT PG is one who can score moderately and be a great playmaker with two superstars. An EXCELLENT PG is one who can score outstanding and still rack up alot of assists with terrible teammates.Nash=Great Iverson=Even better
Thats bull sh*t. Everyone had career highs because Nash set them up with good passes for easy shots or dunks. No, not until most of these guys got to Phoenix did their ppg numbers really go up. Also, Nash makes guys 3pt%'s go up enormously.Nash could score 24-25 ppg if he wanted to. Look at his fg%, it is up over .500, and that is remarkable because most of his shots come off jumpers. If he wasnt so unselfish, he could score quite a bit more. I'm not saying that Nash is the better all around player, but he is definately the better passer. Nash makes his teammates aroudn him better, and turned his team without JJ, Q or Amare into the top offensive club in the League, when everyone thought that their offense would go down the tubes..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 15 2006, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Thats bull sh*t. Everyone had career highs because Nash set them up with good passes for easy shots or dunks. No, not until most of these guys got to Phoenix did their ppg numbers really go up. Also, Nash makes guys 3pt%'s go up enormously.Nash could score 24-25 ppg if he wanted to. Look at his fg%, it is up over .500, and that is remarkable because most of his shots come off jumpers. If he wasnt so unselfish, he could score quite a bit more. I'm not saying that Nash is the better all around player, but he is definately the better passer. Nash makes his teammates aroudn him better, and turned his team without JJ, Q or Amare into the top offensive club in the League, when everyone thought that their offense would go down the tubes..</div>Oh? RAJA had a career year BECAUSE now he actually STARTS and has a TWO PPG change in his average, not to mention the dude is in his damn prime and its inevitable that it's going to be the peak of his career. MATRIX's stats were all steadily increasing when Nash wasn't even here, the kid's 28 years old and was an ENORMOUS talent coming out of college, he was having a career year after another so it was pretty much unavoidable. Everyone else had a "career year" because they finally garnered in some playing time. Don't even forget Boris Diaw who ALSO helped his teammates. Sure he made them better but anyone (including Iverson) could EASILY be doing the same thing. Like said, NASH has it easier than Iverson.But we don't see him doing it do we? I dont care if he can "easily" do it, unless he DOES it then it doesn't matter. Look at the Finals squad, EVERYONE on that lineup had their career year in Philly. Look at Franchise, when he was in Houston, Ming had his career year in 2004 with him, Mobley had his career year with Stevie...is HE also better than Iverson now? How about Juan Dixon, Steve Blake and Darius Miles...they had their career year with Telfair...is Bassy better than Iverson now? Lmao what a joke. I dont deny that Nash made his teammates better, but so does EVERY OTHER legitimate point guard. sh*t, look at Steve's career averages vs Ivey and the margins aren't too far away neither.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (His Greatness @ Jul 15 2006, 05:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Oh? RAJA had a career year BECAUSE now he actually STARTS and has a TWO PPG change in his average, not to mention the dude is in his damn prime and its inevitable that it's going to be the peak of his career. MATRIX's stats were all steadily increasing when Nash wasn't even here, the kid's 28 years old and was an ENORMOUS talent coming out of college, he was having a career year after another so it was pretty much unavoidable. Everyone else had a "career year" because they finally garnered in some playing time. Don't even forget Boris Diaw who ALSO helped his teammates. Sure he made them better but anyone (including Iverson) could EASILY be doing the same thing. Like said, NASH has it easier than Iverson.But we don't see him doing it do we? I dont care if he can "easily" do it, unless he DOES it then it doesn't matter. Look at the Finals squad, EVERYONE on that lineup had their career year in Philly. Look at Franchise, when he was in Houston, Ming had his career year in 2004 with him, Mobley had his career year with Stevie...is HE also better than Iverson now? How about Juan Dixon, Steve Blake and Darius Miles...they had their career year with Telfair...is Bassy better than Iverson now? Lmao what a joke. I dont deny that Nash made his teammates better, but so does EVERY OTHER legitimate point guard. sh*t, look at Steve's career averages vs Ivey and the margins aren't too far away neither.</div>Not only that. Look how much his 3 pt% changed this year too. And I'm not only talking about Raja. Barbosa had a career year, and improved his 3 pt% from 37% to 44%. That is a huge change. Look at James Jones too. He had a career year after coming to the Suns..whad'ya know? Also Shawn Marion scored the most points in his career, and the highest fg% of his career by about .055.Dont feed me that bullsh**. I dont think all of these guys' 4 pt%'s would go up that high just because there in their primes. It's because Nash gets them open looks that they didnt have before on other teams. Yeah, but like I said before Matrxi's fg% improved a ton. Part of that can really be given to Nash. Nash gets Matrix open jumpers and also nice passes when he is cutting in. Ok, Nash has it easier then Iverson, but alot of these guys were no names before they came to Phoenix. No one had really ever heard of James Jones or Boris Diaw before they came to the Suns. Everyone thought Nash was going to have a tough year, but he worked with what he had, and if he had a shooter like Korver, he could do some great things with him.Your making it sound like Iverson is the better passer here. That's not true at all, so just stop it. Nash is better at setting up his players for shots, and like I said before, people thought the Suns would do alot worse on offense with Amare, JJ and Q missing, but Nash compensated and he made the new guys better. And guess what? The Suns still finished #1 in the L in offense. Nash is obviously the better passer than Iverson. Dont even go there. I didnt understand what you were saying in the 2nd paragraph there..
I'm just going to say this... Nash obviously had something to do with everybody on Phoenix having career highs, but another big factor is the pace of the game. If they don't run all day, Nash doesn't get 10+ assists, and not everybody has career years. Also, Amare's absence was a huge reason why people were allowed to break out. They had to replace that scoring punch somehow, and the best way is to get a little more production out of everybody, which is exactly what they did.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 15 2006, 04:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Not only that. Look how much his 3 pt% changed this year too. And I'm not only talking about Raja. Barbosa had a career year, and improved his 3 pt% from 37% to 44%. That is a huge change. Look at James Jones too. He had a career year after coming to the Suns..whad'ya know? Also Shawn Marion scored the most points in his career, and the highest fg% of his career by about .055.Dont feed me that bullsh**. I dont think all of these guys' 4 pt%'s would go up that high just because there in their primes. It's because Nash gets them open looks that they didnt have before on other teams. Yeah, but like I said before Matrxi's fg% improved a ton. Part of that can really be given to Nash. Nash gets Matrix open jumpers and also nice passes when he is cutting in. Ok, Nash has it easier then Iverson, but alot of these guys were no names before they came to Phoenix. No one had really ever heard of James Jones or Boris Diaw before they came to the Suns. Everyone thought Nash was going to have a tough year, but he worked with what he had, and if he had a shooter like Korver, he could do some great things with him.Your making it sound like Iverson is the better passer here. That's not true at all, so just stop it. Nash is better at setting up his players for shots, and like I said before, people thought the Suns would do alot worse on offense with Amare, JJ and Q missing, but Nash compensated and he made the new guys better. And guess what? The Suns still finished #1 in the L in offense. Nash is obviously the better passer than Iverson. Dont even go there. I didnt understand what you were saying in the 2nd paragraph there..</div>Your abstaining from the points being made again. Korver and Iguodala both had higher three point percentages. Your point? I disclaimed the fact that Nash made them better, but if have at least an ELITE POINT GUARD there going to make everyone better. And also Iguodala scored the most points his career. The BIGGEST REASON these nonames are doing so well is because they finally GET TO START. Nash had some to do with it. THEY FINALLY GOT TO START. DIAW came to the scene because of his versatility and his stellar ability to PASS THE BALL. And Korver couldn't create his own shot ever, Iverson and his teammates always had to create for him, I'd rather take Raja, House and Barbosa over him, who are both proven shooters and aren't one dimensional like Kyle. I'm not, but your making it seem like Steve Nash is god just because he's making his teammates have "career years". Big deal, I could say the same for about 75% of the 1 Guards in the whole league. Little know fact for you: Nash has never been into the playoffs without a superstar, let alone the finals. IVERSON has been to the Finals with no superstars and reliable players. Nash MAY be better at passing but Iverson is better at scoring, defense and everything else you can have in a PG. God, I'd give everyone on the 76ers roster (except for Iggy ) for Matrix, STAT or Dirk.
No sh*t sherlock. Iguodala was a 2nd year player, how would he not improve? Also, Korver was a 3rd year player, so of course he should improve. Nash made vets. Proven shooters? Didnt I just show you how much Barbosa and Raja improved in their 3 point shooting? Barbosa was just an average shooter really until last season. Raja was a good shooter before, but Nash made him one of the best by getting him open looks. Wow. Nash has never been in his prime without a superstar either. Little known fact there. Nash was the leader of the Mavs when Dirk wasnt ready to lead them team emotionally. Nash always took the end of the game shots in Dallas, and he is the leader of the team in Phoenix too.I know that Iverson has made the Finals. Didnt I already tell you that I thought Iverson was the better all around player? Why are we even debating this?Iverson>Nash, but Nash>Iverson at running an offense..That's not true. Nash is the better shooter then Iverson. Is that not a skill you want in a pg?Iverson isnt really good at defense anyway, so you can say that if you want, but it isnt that impressive..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jul 15 2006, 05:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No sh*t sherlock. Iguodala was a 2nd year player, how would he not improve? Also, Korver was a 3rd year player, so of course he should improve. Nash made vets. Proven shooters? Didnt I just show you how much Barbosa and Raja improved in their 3 point shooting? Barbosa was just an average shooter really until last season. Raja was a good shooter before, but Nash made him one of the best by getting him open looks. Wow. Nash has never been in his prime without a superstar either. Little known fact there. Nash was the leader of the Mavs when Dirk wasnt ready to lead them team emotionally. Nash always took the end of the game shots in Dallas, and he is the leader of the team in Phoenix too.I know that Iverson has made the Finals. Didnt I already tell you that I thought Iverson was the better all around player? Why are we even debating this?Iverson>Nash, but Nash>Iverson at running an offense..That's not true. Nash is the better shooter then Iverson. Is that not a skill you want in a pg?Iverson isnt really good at defense anyway, so you can say that if you want, but it isnt that impressive..</div>No sh*t smart one, Barbosa and Diaw are young, HOW WOULD THEY NOT IMPROVE? Lmao, your just a walking contradiction, and I'd MUCH rather'd have a renowned player that's been able to study the game more in his PRIME than a young player starting off. What a dumb statement, seriously, players in their primes are going to do much better than they did in their rookie/sophmore seasons, NASH is an example, IVERSON is an example. And stop riding Nash so much, Barbosa WAS ALREADY a good 3 Point shooter, his ROOKIE YEAR he set a record for 3Pointers with a player from the Suns, you don't need to shoot over 45% beyond the arc to be called as a "good shooter", smartass. Nash has never been in his prime without a superstar? Are you serious? HIS WHOLE CAREER he's been with at least ONE superstar, HES IN his prime right now and he's with AMARE+MATRIX. Gimme a break...don't say stupid things like that. LMAO at Nash "being the leader" in Dallas, FINLEY was more of a leader than Steve. Nash didn't even start the pair of his beginning years as a Maverick, until his third season in Dallas did he finally play, but he wasn't a damn leader just because he's a point guard. Dont get it twisted, being a PG doesn't necessarily make you the "leader of your team", it makes you the leader of the offense, but not the leader of the team, Dirk was the franchise player for the Mavericks AND he's the one leading his team, the Mavs didn't need Nash and he could've been easily replaced, look at how well Jet's doing in Dallas and how far they got this season. He's the leader in Phoenix though. And SAME WITH IVERSON, he's BEEN the leader of his team and HES the one that's gonna take the last shots. Allen is 8/20 for Game Winners, Nash is 1/15. And WHOOPS Steve has never been to an NBA Final which gives another point to Answer WOW he's a better shooter, big deal, Allen is the better scorer, that settles it. Iverson is at least sub par at defense and can play at least a lick of defense, Nashty on the other hand cant."Case Closed."
Iverson is a poor defender, but when he needs to, he locks down on his man (i.e. last minute or so of the game). I can't say the same about Nash.Iverson is better defensively than Nash, but considering they are both poor defenders, that isn't really saying too much.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (His Greatness @ Jul 15 2006, 05:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No sh*t smart one, Barbosa and Diaw are young, HOW WOULD THEY NOT IMPROVE? Lmao, your just a walking contradiction, and I'd MUCH rather'd have a renowned player that's been able to study the game more in his PRIME than a young player starting off. What a dumb statement, seriously, players in their primes are going to do much better than they did in their rookie/sophmore seasons, NASH is an example, IVERSON is an example. And stop riding Nash so much, Barbosa WAS ALREADY a good 3 Point shooter, his ROOKIE YEAR he set a record for 3Pointers with a player from the Suns, you don't need to shoot over 45% beyond the arc to be called as a "good shooter", smartass. Nash has never been in his prime without a superstar? Are you serious? HIS WHOLE CAREER he's been with at least ONE superstar, HES IN his prime right now and he's with AMARE+MATRIX. Gimme a break...don't say stupid things like that. LMAO at Nash "being the leader" in Dallas, FINLEY was more of a leader than Steve. Nash didn't even start the pair of his beginning years as a Maverick, until his third season in Dallas did he finally play, but he wasn't a damn leader just because he's a point guard. Dont get it twisted, being a PG doesn't necessarily make you the "leader of your team", it makes you the leader of the offense, but not the leader of the team, Dirk was the franchise player for the Mavericks AND he's the one leading his team, the Mavs didn't need Nash and he could've been easily replaced, look at how well Jet's doing in Dallas and how far they got this season. He's the leader in Phoenix though. And SAME WITH IVERSON, he's BEEN the leader of his team and HES the one that's gonna take the last shots. Allen is 8/20 for Game Winners, Nash is 1/15. And WHOOPS Steve has never been to an NBA Final which gives another point to Answer WOW he's a better shooter, big deal, Allen is the better scorer, that settles it. Iverson is at least sub par at defense and can play at least a lick of defense, Nashty on the other hand cant."Case Closed."</div>o dang! That is a good arguement i have to say. I literally agree with everthing that he had to say about Iverson being a better player.CB4, you have to understand that Nash doesnt just miraculouly make these guys better. It is the system that they play in and the offense that they run. Any good passing pg could run that offense and do a very good job. And, any good point guard could play for that team and win that many games.
I'm not gonna debate this anymore. I already said that Allen was the better all-around player. It's just that Nash is the better passer, and playmaker. He plays in the Suns system, but he does a top notch job at it, and I dont think any other pg in the League could do it as well as Nash does.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Hughes2James23 @ Jul 13 2006, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nash no doubt, he gets everyone involved. AI just jacks up shots and has a poor shooting percentage</div>HAHA this was funny thought I bring it up. The dude probably never actually watched AI play.But Yeah I just wann answer about Iverson not being a good on the Suns. AI would have that team in the same position as Nash. And if you don't think so need to watch AI's game more. AI would kill to have those kinda guys around him like someone said.And this is no contest actually Nash does get more assists, but it's clearly Iverson. AI even plays better D then Nash. And the funny part is AI does not even play much D still better then Nash's D though. :HAHAHA: If AI was on the Suns he get the assists also.
