Ok, who's your NBA MVP?

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
Assani,

Like I said, I was obviously reaching towards the end but..

I suggest you go back and look at the numbers. Malone, Robinson, Stockton, and Barkley are so obvious to me I find it puzzling you don't agree.

Also you really have to count in longevity in this. Sure, Nash is a better shooter than Stockton, but... Stockton was amazing for almost 20 years. Nash has been Nash for about 7.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, I'm sure all of the anti-Nash crowd is rolling their eyes right now. You all think his weak D hurts him more than I do, you all think the Phoenix system helps him, and so on and so on. I get that. You get my points. Are we ever going to agree?


[/ QUOTE ]

What? My point is that he's just not on the levels as some of the legends of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that scoring in the late 80s/early 90s was up almost 20 points per game(10 points per team) over what it is now, right? Since we're comparing players relative to their era, thats of the utmost importance when comparing stats.

I'm looking at all of the numbers right now. Those players were all very good, and its a tough call.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
So basically Nash could be even better than he already is("one of the best ever, better than Robinson, Pippen, et al") he just chooses not to?

Okay, got it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, Nash could score 30 a game but it would be worse for the team if he did so he doesn't.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
Assani if I was 7" tall I could be an NBA player what's your point?
If Kobe shot less he would get at least two more assists and one more rebound a game. See how I'm creating arbitrary numbers in hypothetical situations in an attempt to argue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most players score a ton and don't have many assists or have a bunch of assist but only score a bit. Nash does both. In an attempt to compare a player that does both against a player that does only one, I was trying to show what Nash could do if he concentrated on one. Sorry if this wasn't clear.



Why do you guys want to argue this with me still? You havn't brought up anything that we havn't discussed before. I don't really care- I'm just watching tv and playing online poker, so its not like I have much better to do now...but it just seems like we're not going to get anywhere.

[Jack of Arcades]

Assani,

Stockton was Nash before Nash was in college. He was also Nash for 18 years! For Nash's career he averages... 14 and 7.5. Stockton, for his career, averaged 13 and 10.5! He even once managed 17/15. He averaged over 10 assists 10 times. In fact, he only averaged less than 7.5 assist total 3 times in 19 years.

Stockton led the league in assists... 9 times in a row! He's the all time assist and steals leader, and he made 4 All-Defense 2nd-Teams.

Also look at Payton's career averages. 17/7! And Payton has gone through a terrible decline - plus he's one of the best defenders of all time. Oh, and he did this all for about 12 years. What will Nash be doing when he's 38?

[Assani Fisher]

JoA,

Earlier in this thread Pudge argued that we absolutely had to take era into account when judging players.

Stockton's best year was 88-89. In that year the average team scored 109.2 points per game. In Nash's two MVP years the average team scored 97.2 and 97.0 points per game.

Clearly this means that you can't just compare numbers straight up. I'm sure that you'd agree, correct?

[Pudge714]

Assani,
Nash's stats are inflated because Phoenix plays an upstyle tempo which leads to more possession, more ppg.

[Assani Fisher]

Basically heres my breakdown of the two players:

Nash is a better jump shooter, and a better all around scorer. Nash is a better rebounder.

Stockton is a better passer when it comes to basic passing in the halfcourt.

They are about even leading the fastbreak. They are about even at protecting the ball.

Stockton is by far the better overall defender, although I will note that he gambled for steals a bit more while Nash would be more likely to try to take a charge.



Overall its very close, and I'm not sure which I would take. Stockton was included in my "a few others" that I mentioned not being sure about.

Edited to add: I really don't believe that strongly either way. I'm going to stop the Nash/Stockton argument right now, because I really have no huge opinion. I could see valid arguments for both of them. If you wish to add Stockton to the list of players better than Nash, I won't argue and we can just move on.

[Pudge714]

Assani,
Stockton played at a high level for a much longer period of time, that is the primary reason he is better than Nash.

[Victor]

wtf this argument is stupid. how many mvps does stockton have?

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
Assani,
Stockton played at a high level for a much longer period of time, that is the primary reason he is better than Nash.

[/ QUOTE ]Obviously when you take a retired player and compare him to a player in his prime, theres a good chance that the retired player will have done it longer. Nash's game doesn't rely upon athleticism very much at all. Therefore I wouldn't be surprised to see him stay in his prime for a long time.