Can a player in the nba be the best at their position and not be a great defender??

[gangsta207therevolution]

Jordan wasnt a great defender. Defensive awards dont mean squat in the NBA.

Paul isnt close to being a good defender.To me hes worse than Williams in this regard cause his weaknesses are on the table.

 

[supersaiyan415]

Originally Posted by jplikejayz

how can anyone not mention monta ellis?

because no one considers him the best at his position

 

[rocboys]

Paul is not that great defender, he's just stay active moving his hands a lot. Chandler is the reason why Paul looks like he's better defender. if Paulwas a good defender, Byron would let paul guard Deron not Pargo or Mo Pete. If Stoudamire is a better defender, then Nash wouldn't get that much blame.

 

[rocboys]

Originally Posted by redstorm24

nash winning 2 mvps is a black eye on the nba

the best point guard is either chris paul or jason kidd still not this nash bs just because hes free to do whatever he wants and gets liek 56 assists a game doesn't mean hes the best point guard

jsut look at the way chris paul has carried the hornets

doesn't Paul free to do what he wants? Byron Scott practically jacked D'Antoni's offense. The similarities in these two teams, it's crazy.

 

[throwbacksinsf]

At the time Nash won those MVPs he was the best in the league. I think the PG position by nature is more about what you do with the ball, how you run thefloor, etc. Low post positions have more emphasis on D because ultimately they're the last barrier to the hoop. That's not to say the guys up top canslack off, especially how the game is today with shooters, slashers, slashers who shoot, shooters who slash...you gotta be on your toes. But also not everyteam plays man to man, you get help off screens, etc. Basically what I'm saying is when Naismith invented the game he meant for the PG to guard theshooters and the big men to handle things down low.

 

[bullsrepeat3peat]

Originally Posted by gangsta207therevolution

Jordan wasnt a great defender. Defensive awards dont mean squat in the NBA.

man I love NT

 

[rexanglorum]

If you are not a liability for you team on the defensive end and you are doing spectacular things on the offense, you can be considered for MVP. Guys likeSteve Nash, Chris Paul and in the past, Magic were average defenders who could make every single teammate of his better and basically run the offense. It alsodid not hurt Magic that he was a very good rebounder, the same is true for Charles Barkley. Also, Larry Bird and some day soon, LeBron James, will get MVPs forbe walking triple doubles, who are the clear cut focal points of their teams.

I would agree that if you are a total sieve on defense, you should not get the MVP because all of your offensive accomplishments are dampened if you are aterrible defensive players. In addition, the only players, who are not great defensive players, I would vote for would be guys who are flat out amazing in atleast two of the folloing three areas: rebounding, scoring and passing. Furthermore I would usually only make that exception for point guards and pointforwards and tweener fours. Centers, true power forwards, classic small forwards and shooting guards and had better be very good defenders to get an MVP votefrom me.

 

[ph3n0m3n0n]

Nash's defense may not have been super but the Suns won. A lot and for three consecutive seasons.

His numbers were mvp worthy those years as well so where was the black eye?

 

[gko2408]

Originally Posted by redstorm24

nash winning 2 mvps is a black eye on the nba

the best point guard is either chris paul or jason kidd still not this nash bs just because hes free to do whatever he wants and gets liek 56 assists a game doesn't mean hes the best point guard

jsut look at the way chris paul has carried the hornets

Because Wes Unseld was and still is an embarrassment to the NBA

.