Pay close attention to the FG%,FT%, TO, AST, and PPG. Nash: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3103/career Francis http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3325/career Is it youth? Could it be that Nash has two more years experience? Nash'es incredible physical ability? Nah...it's Francis's incompetence as a PG. Note: Nash shot *nearly* 50% (always above 45%) for two years, keeps his 3pt percentage around 40%. And his FT percentage near 90% for this career. Oh, and his TO ratio is around 2.1 per game all while averaging around 17 points per game.
I'm not trying to say Francis is the greatest pg, but maybe if we stopped counting Francis stats after he's only played around 26 minutes like Nash did his first few years he'd have fewer TO's and better percentage. Just basing it on the first four years of Nash and the first four of Francis, I'd take Steve on my team. Now after that Nash's numbers start to go up. Hoepfully Steve's will too.
Not to mention how different these two players roles on their respective teams are. Nash basically passes to Dirk and Michael gets out the way and BOOM instant assist, he isn't asked to break people down off the dribble and if he does get to the hole it's because the other team was paying too much attn. to the other stars. Steve N's shooting percentage can be explained by all the open shots he gets because other teams are doubling Dirk. Can and should Steve F. play smarter and more under control? The answer is yes and I think he will, that is why I'm in favor of Antoine Walker, this team needs a player who can score in the post with his back to the basket and Yao is not there yet.
I DISAGREE 100% with what you just said. If All Nash does is pass, then why is his turnovers so low and Francis's so high? Stop looking at the first four years, and instead, look at the trends (whole career). It's more telling. Besides, Nash would not being getting 17ppg if all his job was to "pass to Dirk." Also, Nash's shooting percentage is not completely reflective of his open shots, but shots that present themselves, rather. That's smart basketball. Francis has the one-on-one ability to get open shots, yet he's unable to hit those consistently. Nash hits most of his open shots. Francis misses more, even when open (and even when he has God given athletic ability). This is pure shooting/passing talent we're talking about here. I guarantee of you put Nash and Francis on the 3-point line and had them shoot open shots, Nash would destroy Francis's numbers. Fact is, Nash is a better shooter, and smarter PG than Francis. The only leg that Francis has to stand on is the the fact that he depends more on his athletic ability (speed, quickness and jumping ability) more than Nash. But it's because of this "dependence" that hurts Francis's game. Nash does not "depend" on anything. He uses all his faculties. Not just his physical ability. Wake up people. Francis is supposed to be the "leader" not an "ESPN highlight." He needs to grow up and start acting like one.
So, points per game equates a competent basketball player? Narrow-mined. Nevertheless, moving Francis to the 2 would be the best thing this team could do.
Nash is just better. Sure, Francis is more athletic and explosive, but Nash is a better passer, is better at breaking defenses down, is a beter shooter, and makes better decisions.
Got to agree with Clutch, but I'd like to add that not only does Nash play for better team (like a lot of you have said), but he also make the other players around him better with his passing, it's like the "Chicken or the egg, who came first syndrome, but it's really some of both with Dallas. All you can really say that SF has over Nash is his one on one dribbling ability, dunking, and rebounding. Nash's decision making helps his FG% a lot because he doesn't shoot crap shots like SF does. Also Nash doesn't turn it over like SF, and he's still a good passer, even with the stupid, over-the-top-fancy passes.
...has anybody seen a 7 footer that can dribble like a guard, shoot threes, and has an unstoppable pull up jumper anywhere around here? I see one, oh, about 250 miles up I45.... Nash's FG% went from 36 to 48 the year Nowitski started getting big minutes...funny how that works out... Quit whining about what we don't have, and worry about what we do have...
Nash depends on his athletic ability just as much as Francis. One of Nash's best attributes is his quickness. If he weren't so quick then he wouldn't be able to drive to the basket and create all of the open shots for his teammates. And if you watch Dallas a lot, you see that that's how Nash gets most of his assists. He drives to the basket, defense collapses, and he kicks it out to an open shooter (which Dallas has plenty of). That's also how Nash gets a lot of his open shots....being on the receiving end of a pass created by the defensive collapsing on a someone driving. I'm not taking anything away from Nash (I think he's better at this stage of his career than Francis), but it can't be stated enough how much being on a team with so many weapons helps. The one huge thing that I wish Francis would take from Nash is the speed at which Nash initiates the offense. Nash doesn't play with the ball a lot via multiple cross overs. He usually makes his one move and goes. If Francis could learn this then I think it would improve both him and our offense. Of course, it wouldn't hurt if we had a few more players that could hit some open shots.
Nash has to run an offense. Steve has to run an offense and get his own shot. You put Steve on the Mavs, and Steve would avg. 10 ast and 20 pts w/ high percentages. He wouldn't be the goto guy on the team, so he would let other players draw the defense so he could have easy open shots like Nash.
you put steve on the mavs and they are a worse team. if you look at the mavs offense, it is almost entirely predicated on nash's ability to a) get up the court quickly b) get in the paint quickly; and c) make decisions quickly which of those three things is steve good at? try none of them. as for nash only having to run an offense, that's crap. if opponents don't respect nash's ability to score, the entire mavs offense breaks down. of course he has to get his shot...do you think that 17ppg is purely accidental??? oh, and as for steve letting other players draw the defense so he could have easy shots like nash...it's usually the other way around: nash usually sets up his teammates off of his quick penetration. his points generally come from times where the defense a) does not collapse completely b) does not pick up at the 3 point line; or c) concentrates so much on dirk that the ball gets swung around to nash. option "c" happens the least frequently. hey, it's obvious you think highly of steve...as well you should because he is very talented. but nash is undoubtedly the better point guard.
d) concentrates too much on finley that the ball gets swung around to nash e) concentrates too much on van exel that the ball gets swung around to nash I'm not 100% sure that the Mavs would be worse if you swap Francis and Nash. I agree with the 3 "quickly" points addressed above, but I think that Francis wouldn't necessarily play the exact same kind of game if thrown into an offense with those kind of weapons. I have a feeling that he would adapt to the high speed offense of the Mavs. Of course its just pure speculation. I just wish that Francis (and the Rockets in general) would make a concerted effort to initiate the offense more quickly. I really see that as one of our biggest problems.
Nash is so great, but it's Nick Van Excel that is playing the point for most of the game. Without Nick the Mavericks would already be at home.
Good analysis Verse. Anyone who watches Dallas sees that Nash creates a lot of the offense for Dallas. Having Nowitzki helps, no doubt, but it all starts with Nash. People are trying to say that he's like Richard Jefferson, benefiting from superstars. But it is definitely not true.
Then why do his numbers inexplicably go up with the emmergence of Dirk Nowitski? The guy only averaged 8 pts his fourth year in the league, which was only Dirk's second, then in Dirk's third year when his average goes from 17 to 21, Nash's average drastically goes up to 17. Are you going to seriously argue that one has nothing to do with the other.
I agree that Dirk and the other talent on Dallas has a lot to do with Nash's success. However, most people point to the offseason between 99-00 and 00-01 seasons as the turning point. That was when Nash was the star for Canadian Olympic team and almost single-handedly got them to the medal round. He gained a ton of confidence from that experience. Oh yeah, it hasn't been mentioned yet, but I'm sure that Nash playing behind KJ and Kidd for a couple of years didn't hurt, either.
BTW, I like Steve Nash, but he is a compliment player who occasionally takes over games. Steve is a potential Franchise player. Whenever comparing Steve with Bibby, Nash, Parker, or other good point guards, I ask the question, Could these guys have lead the Rockets to 45 wins two years ago with Mobley, Shandon, Mo Taylor, and a broken down Hakeem. I doubt it. There's your difference.
In 1999 he played only 56 games and averaged 27 minutes per game. He averaged 8.6 ppg and 4.9 apg. In 2000, he played 70 games and averaged 34 minutes per game. He averaged 15.6 ppg and 7.3 apg. I think it was just as much experience and playing more minutes as it was Dirk Nowitzki. Also, if having a great player on the team helps, why did Bibby's stats go down in Sacramaneto? Why did Andre Miller's stats go down with the Clippers? Why did Steve's stay basically the same with the emergence of Yao? Why did Stoudamire's numbers tank when he moved out of Toronto? It's not because of Dirk. It's because of Nash. Otherwise, please give me another example of a player dramatically improving based solely on the emergence of a teammate.
