Where Does Nash Rank Among The Greatest PGs Of All Time?

Are you serious? Nash IS THE SYSTEM.

In his first 4 years (where he either wasnt given any playing time or was getting playing time but still learning) the mavs' wins-losses were 24-58, 20-62, 19-31, and 40-42. In nash's 5th year, which is when he made his big leap in play, the maves were 53-29, 57-25, 60-22, 52-30, 59-24, 60-22.

And shaq was a stupid move by the suns front office. Shaq needs to play in a system where he gets the ball and doesn't have to run.
Imagine putting Yao Ming into the Suns team, its not nash's fault that Yao Ming can't keep up, he shouldn't be on the team in the first place.

 

I disagree.

Ok this is my view.

As a PG your offensive capabillities are extremely important. Nash has created other players just because of his court vision. Offensively one Magic is better IMO.

Nash is the worst outta everyone in that list defensively. However, as a PG defense is not AS important as offense. Good help defensive players can hide weakness.

It's the opposite for centers. Defense is more important because you can make up for others mistakes as well as not have. Offensively you don't create as much.

 

Sorry, Nash wasn't on the team for the 59-24 and 60-22 seasons.

And when the suns got shaq they lost shawn marion.

 

OK, you're really going out on a limb here. I'm not going to bother comparing the obvious choices for better offensive players like Wilt, Jordan, KAJ, etc, or even a guy like John Stockton; how about looking at Mark Price's numbers versus Steve Nash's numbers, we'll use advanced stats too (courtesy of B-R). These guys had similar career arcs and Price was crap at the end of his career, so that's in Nash's favor if it's in anyone's favor.

Mark Price:
15.2 ppg
6.7 apg
2.5 TOpg
19.6 PER
TS% .586
Assist% 36.1
Turnover% 16.0

Steve Nash:
14.6 ppg
8.3 apg
2.8 TOpg
20.2 PER
TS% .605
Assist% 40.3
Turnover% 18.8

So how much better is Steve Nash than Mark Price, a barely second tier point guard (possibly in the tier of KJ, Tim Hardaway, and Terry Porter or possibly in a lower tier) in the 1990's?

 

KJ vs. Nash is a tough one. Below are the stats during their 9-year primes.

They're almost identical. Main difference is Nash could shoot threes a lot better and KJ could get to the line more. Overall, I think I'd have to give the nod to Nash simple because he was able to stay on the floor. KJ missed too much time with injuries.

Kevin Johnson
19.8 PPG
10.02 APG
3.34 TOs
49.6 FG%
31.7 3P%
83.0 FT%
7.1 Free throws per game
64 Games per Season

Steve Nash
16.9 PPG
9.8 APG
3.21 TOs
49.7 FG%
43.9 3P%
90.9 FT%
3.31 Free throws per game
79 Games per season

 

Well, at least one person does. That would be me. I hated that Pistons team. Not Isiah, but them AS A TEAM. But when I think of the Suns, I think of Nash. Isiah may have belonged with a more talented group/coaching staff. But Nash WAS the Suns. Other players and coaches came and left, but Nash remains and the offensive juggernut continues to roll.

As for Payton/Kidd, I don't know what to say. Why do you care about PG defense that much? Did you see what the Rockets defense looked like with Yao out? PG defense is overrated, a reason why Morey dumped Alston to the first sucker who came along and promoted Brooks. OTOH, the ability to pass, shoot, create for others, are all paramount to the position. Kidd and Payton lacked the shooting. And in Payton's case, also much inferior passer.

 

Price minutes played: 21560
Nash minutes played: 31644 and COUNTING.

Price is considered a second tier PG because HE KEPT GETTING HURT. It had nothing to do with his ability or play on the court. If Mark Price was as durable as Stockton, he'd easily be in the discussion of the top 10 PGs of all time. Same with KJ. But none of that matters because neither had any career longevity due to their injuries.

 

Price, Stockton, and KJ were contemporary, so it is entirely fair to compare them by the number of accolades they got in the same years and their numbers. Stockton and KJ have Price beat in numbers, and they all played on teams with plenty of surrounding talent, and all had similar level of success in the playoffs. Price got 3 All-NBA Thirds, and a first, while Stockton had 2 Firsts and Second about 6 times, and KJ has 4 All-NBA 2nd and one 3rd. Even just considering peak years Price I don't think is as good as those two other guys.

So if Nash is so comparable to Price, is Nash really an all time great player? Price was good no doubt, but not all time great and there were at least 3-4 point guards who were better than Price in his time.

 

And the offensive juggernaut rolls all the way to the...championship..nope...NBA Finals...nope...ah, yes, the Western Conference Finals. The Suns have done nothing in the playoffs beyond the WCF since 1993- with Barkley and KJ- why didn't Amare and Nash, two supposedly just-as-good if not better players, take their team to the Finals? Or win it? Sorry, I feel that Isiah Thomas, Jason Kidd, and even Gary Payton were much more impactful players than Nash. Now, I'd probably put him in my top 10, and that's among 1,000s of point guards who have been in the NBA over the past 50 years. And he's probably a better passer than some of the ones I mentioned. And a better shooter- however, why should a point guard's offense be the most important thing? Did John Stockton's lack of offensive greatness (yes, he was very good, but not great) put him down the list? Hell no- as much as I hated him and Malone, I'd take Stockton any day over Nash- a great passing point guard and an efficient shooter, plus he was a tough defensive player (albeit dirty).

I stand by my list:

Magic
Stockton
Thomas
Robertson
Archibald
Frazier
Payton
Kidd
Johnson
Nash

#s 5-10 are interchangeable. #1 and #2, I feel, are indisputable, and as I mentioned, Isiah was a consistently great player who was also one of the best clutch players ever- his 3-year playoff performance from 1988 to 1990 is one of the best I've ever seen, just below Jordan's 2 runs, Hakeem from 1993 to 1995, Shaq from 2000 to 2002, Duncan from 2003 to 2005, Magic from 1980 to 1982, and Bird from 1984 to 1986.

BTW, LOVED that Pistons team. Except for Laimbeer and Mahorn, that Bad Boys thing was way, way overdramatized. Dumars, Thomas, the Microwave, Aguirre, Salley, James Edwards, and Rodman in his early incarnation back then very rarely played dirty (OK, Rodman did a bit, but it was much more controlled than his later years)- Laimbeer and Mahorn, definitely, though. But I liked that team because they were very much a team- yes, Thomas and Dumars had many spectacular moments, but they also had a great bench and guys who did things unorthodox to their positions at the time- Laimbeer shooting 3s, Dumars and Rodman excelling in defensive assignments against guys much bigger than them, Zeke not being the typical point guard (who still managed to rack up a lot of assists), James Edwards' smooth stroke- that team was great to watch and felt like much more of a "team" even than Jordan's Bulls back in 1991.

 

Barkley was better than Amar'e. Nash didn't make the NBA finals because of bad luck half the time against the Spurs. That's like saying T-Mac is worse than Robert Horry because of first round vs 8 rings.

Nash's impact is definitely beyond statistics. He single handedly turned around a franchise the same way a Lebron did.

 

Oh, come on, you're going to use BAD LUCK for all the times Nash and the Suns were knocked out of the playoffs? Wow. T-mac-Horry is a dumb comparison and I'm sure you know this, which is why I have no idea why you used this. Saying that Nash single-handedly turned around that franchise is a bit much, also- the year they went 22 and whatever with Marbury was followed by Nash's 60+-win seasons Suns, but they also had Amare at full strength that year, as well as Joe Johnson, Shawn Marion, and Quentin Richardson in their lineup. Methinks that those players kinda had a little bit to do with the Suns success. Sure, Nash was the straw that stirred the drink, but I'm just not as enamored with his success with the Suns as others apparently on this board are. He is what he is: one of the best point guards in the game today, if not the current best, and he's in the top 10 all time. If you want to just define it as "point guard," maybe he's in the top 5. But I'm looking at him as a player in the point guard position, not just his point guard skills. And he's still not cracking my top 8.

 

Actually, I think the main difference is what I highlighted. KJ missed too many games, while Nash is playing almost every night.

 

Nash made Shawn Marion what he was. Quentin Richardson was just a role player, and Amare is far too overrated.

He won't come close to a 20/10 next year without Nash, unless of course he is on a sub .500 team.

 

What? Look at his 2005-2006 team. Absolutely terrible and he led them to the NBA finals. Joe Johnson left as well.

All the players you listed were in the lineup in 2003-2004 so dunno what you're saying.

Something interesting is Steve Nash's offensive rating has been above 120 consistently. That is quite amazing.

Look at everyone who has left the Suns. Everyone except Joe Johnson is not a star. Apart from Marion they aren't even top 4 options on a solid team.

 

Very good points, except that Steve Nash has never led any team to the NBA Finals. Last finals for the suns was 1993.

 

Nash probably cracks my top ten but definitely not my top five. He's a horrible defender and no matter how much some of you are trying to pretend defensive isn't a big deal for PG, it is.

Nash is Stockton without the defense but with a better shot.

 

As long as you're heavily weighting unimportant points, keep in mind that Nash had the worst hairstyle in the league for several years. That should allow you to knock him down a few additional spots, right?

 

I don't remember Stockton missing too many shots.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stockjo01.html

career 52% shooter

vs Nash
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nashst01.html

career 49%