Does Steve Nash make it into the Hall minus the MVP's?

[classy lawrence]

WITHOUT THE MVP's? lol

 

[airfreshazn]

If the dude steps up his defense..

 

[Truth]

he'll be the worst player ever to get in the HOF

he's already the worst MVP of all time

 

[aubstuh86]

i hope he doesnt make it.

 

[kash55]

All the hate disgusts me. Nash is Top 10 greatest point guard of all time.
And I think I know what the reason for most of the hate is about, but everybody would deny it.

 

[dearwinter219]

Originally Posted by kash55

All the hate disgusts me. Nash is Top 10 greatest point guard of all time.
And I think I know what the reason for most of the hate is about, but everybody would deny it.

Now, I'm not gonna try THAT hard... but let me guess...it's because the league is now majority black and all the biggest stars are black(and atheletic for that matter) so the main reason ppl hate on Nash is because he can't guard a flag pole. Duh,everyone knows that. What did you think I was gonna say?

Also... ahem... and this is easy as hell..

Magic
Kidd
Paul
Thomas
Parker
Cousy
Stockton
Payton
Pistol
Iverson


Pick one... they're all EASILY better point guards than Nash if you want to talk peak performances.

 

[kal ripped ken]

he's probably the best canadian to ever play, that holds significance too

 

[dearwinter219]

Originally Posted by Kal Ripped Ken

he's probably the best canadian to ever play, that holds significance too

Nuh uh!

NBA hall of fame FTW

Nah, but seriously... that doesn't matter at all..

 

[mister friendly]

Originally Posted by DearWinter219

Originally Posted by kash55

All the hate disgusts me. Nash is Top 10 greatest point guard of all time.
And I think I know what the reason for most of the hate is about, but everybody would deny it.

Now, I'm not gonna try THAT hard... but let me guess...it's because the league is now majority black and all the biggest stars are black (and atheletic for that matter) so the main reason ppl hate on Nash is because he can't guard a flag pole. Duh, everyone knows that. What did you think I was gonna say?

Also... ahem... and this is easy as hell..

Magic
Kidd
Paul
Thomas
Parker
Cousy
Stockton
Payton
Pistol
Iverson


Pick one... they're all EASILY better point guards than Nash if you want to talk peak performances.

.....I think you're taking it too far

I dont think Iverson and Pistol are true point guards and Parker and Paul are kinda young

Nash is a borderline top 10 point guard all time.

The names that usualy come up on lists are like this

Magic
Oscar Robertson
Isiah
Stockton
Cousy
Walt Frazier
Kidd
Payton
Archibald
Kevin Johnson
Lenny Wilkens

I think Nash fits on the bottom of that list so yes he's a Hall of Famer

but is the basketball Hall of Fame a big deal, Is there a big televised ceremony for it?

 

[yungmatt]

Hell no

 

[casperjr]

this dude couldnt stop a ant from pushin the rock

dudes not touching any top ten all time, a few big years in that "system" isnt enough to put him in the top ten all time

but good try

 

[osh kosh bosh]

I don't think you can really question that Nash offensively was a better player than Kidd and I don't think you can really question that Kidd was abetter DEFENSIVE player than Nash.

Are they really that far apart? It seems like they cancel one another out.

 

[yungmatt]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

I don't think you can really question that Nash offensively was a better player than Kidd and I don't think you can really question that Kidd was a better player than Nash.

Are they really that far apart? It seems like they cancel one another out.

I agree with the first part...

But NO to whats in bold

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by yungmatt

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

I don't think you can really question that Nash offensively was a better player than Kidd and I don't think you can really question that Kidd was a better player than Nash.

Are they really that far apart? It seems like they cancel one another out.

I agree with the first part...

But NO to whats in bold

Typo, Kidd is a better defensive player.

O: Nash>>>Kidd
D: Kidd>>>Nash

How come Kidd is a hall of fame lock but Nash isn't?

 

[jstar25]

Who cares... don't deduct accomplishments and start up what ifs... the dude won 2 MVPs and is going to the Hall.


[/thread]

 

[yungmatt]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

Originally Posted by yungmatt

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

I don't think you can really question that Nash offensively was a better player than Kidd and I don't think you can really question that Kidd was a better player than Nash.

Are they really that far apart? It seems like they cancel one another out.

I agree with the first part...

But NO to whats in bold

Typo, Kidd is a better defensive player.

O: Nash>>>Kidd
D: Kidd>>>Nash

How come Kidd is a hall of fame lock but Nash isn't?

Nash IS a lock... The thread is a WHAT IF thread.

WHAT IF nash didnt have 2 mvps under his belt, why isnt he a lock but JKidd is?

101 Career Triple Doubles. Thats the answer to your question

 

[dearwinter219]

Kid is seriously much better at all aspects of the game EXCEPT shooting. Since we're talking WHAT IFs, I believe the suns could have chipped with Kid..


And I forgot about Clype AND Big O AND Nste... no way is Nash top ten

. NO WAY. Iveron has played enough PGand produced ennough 30 and 8 nights for me to say he's a more productive PG than Nash. Better facilitator? Hardly. Took a team full of bums on his back tothe Finals? Check. And Tony has WINS under his belt. He's led the best team n the league to Chips. Paul is just better. No qualifications have been metjust yet, but dude is just better. all he has to do is continue to be nearly as good as he can be and I'm sure 14 and 8 will be a breeze.

.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

I've gone through this before.

Kidd is a horrible shooter, god awful, he's gotten better in his old age but in his prime he was damn near worthless. Nash is one of the greatest shootersin NBA history.

Passing wise? Jason Kidd played in some uptempo offenses and turned the ball over more, and still didn't producethe same assists numbers as Nash did in his phoenix days. There assist percentage (The percentage of field goals the player assists ) is about the same butNash led the league in that category twice. His ridiculous 50% assist percentage is top 10 in NBA history, only John Stockton and Chris Paul have producedhigher numbers. Also Nash has been the engine of 3 of the best offenses in NBA history.

Team        Year    ORtg  League  Diff--------------------------------------Dallas    2003-04  114.1   104.2   9.9Phoenix   2004-05  116.6   107.4   9.2Dallas    2001-02  114.0   105.8   8.2Denver    1981-82  116.3   108.5   7.8Chicago   1996-97  115.8   108.0   7.8Dallas    2002-03  112.7   104.9   7.8

Not to mention that defenses are more complicated now then they were in the 90's I think Nash is certainly a better passer than Kidd.


Now as far as ball handling goes? Kidd got by defenders based on athleticism, and quickness. Nash while being quick isnot exceptionally fast. To me it's the difference between a good route runner getting by CB's and a elite level athlete running by them. Nash relies onhis quick dribble and ball handling to get by defenders, this is why Nash is still an effective perpetrator in his old age and Kidd can offensive productiondropped drastically as he got older.


Also before people start claiming that Nash stats are effected by the uptempo offense we can use PER (adjusts it's self for uptempo teams) a valid stat formeasuring offensive efficiency and see that Nash's career PER is higher than Kidds PER 19.9, 18.6, Kidds per is juiced by the fact he gets more steals,rebounds and blocks and we are only measuring offense. Nash gets very little of those and his PER is still higher.

Offensively Nash>>Kidd.

 

[dearwinter219]

You're s statistician for sure, granted. And you come through with stats that support your claim. I gotta give that to you. But to me, basketball is waymore than numbers. Kid would have LED Joe Johnson, Amare, and Matrix to the Finals, for starters. That's WAY too many offensive options. I don'texactly care what the numbers would be. Neither did the Nets. Kidd is mentally the better floor general of the two, though Nash is a better shooter.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

If Amare and Boris don't come the bench maybe Nash has a ring right now. Their is no reason to assume Kidd is a better leader when he is ringless too.

You're right number don't always tell the whole story especially when it comes to things like defense, ball handling and leadership but they havegotten to the point where we can measure offensive performance pretty well and aside from intangibles their is no reason to believe that Kidd is a betteroffensive player than Nash.

I think things like leadership at who's a better floor general have more to do with NT and mainstream basketball fans thinks is macho and cool. (defense,toughness, athleticism) Finesse and skill is general frowned upon.

 

[RyGuy45]

The Nash bashing continues....

Take away his MVPs (but keep the stats and seasons) would he still end up in the HOF at some point?

Probably.

But that's hard for many to take because they WANT to dislike Nash and see him fail....which is fine. Kobe gets it too and so do others. Ive come torealize majority of NT didnt play much organized ball and don't really have a grasp on what good basketball is unless it's dudes flying over guys orbreaking ankles. That's okay too.

In Nash's case he is no Magic, he's no Oscar, he's no Isiah. He doesn't have the chips. We know that. But he's in another group that stillare HOFers.

Nash's biggest negatives with some of the public are that he's not dunking on Sportscenter Top 10, he's white and looks like he could be yourscience teacher, and he doesnt play much defense....although the "defense" argument is conveniently overlooked whenever we talk about anything elseinvolving the NBA.

If you followed Nash's career and really watched the games he played (I'm talking watched him.....like 20-30 times or more per year and not just boxscores or fantasy basketball or Sportscenter) you would get a better understanding of what he brings to the table.....and why countless NBA people and formerNBA players have said how good a floor general he really is and how they would have killed to play with him.

And lastly regardless of what anyone thinks, or regardless of his negatives (and every player has his negatives) Nash still has a few years left to play butalready has 2 MVPs, 6 All Star games, 6 All NBA teams, 3 Assist titles, and after 13 seasons is still a career .485 FG, .431 3PT, .900 FT. That's no jokeeither. His teams never stunk up the joint either which is what good PGs are responsible for and which is what most the top NBA assist leaders all have astraits. We can compare Nash's individual stats to a guy like HOF guard Calvin Murphy....yes this is the basketball HOF that takes everything in your careerinto account. However compare Nash's NBA accolades above with Calvin Murphy's: One All Star appearance, Zero All NBA teams, Zero Assist Titles, Zerorings.

Murphy is in the Hall of Fame.

 

[bigmike23]

Originally Posted by jville819

Dude has career averages of 14 ppg and 8 apg is that a HOF career?

why are people even posting after that comment?

 

[airjordan jb23]

No, but the 2 MVP's are what gets him in.

 

[jch3]

You guys can argue until you are blue in the face but it does not matter. What if, what if, what if.

 

[gko2408]

Originally Posted by RyGuy45

The Nash bashing continues....

Take away his MVPs (but keep the stats and seasons) would he still end up in the HOF at some point?

Probably.

But that's hard for many to take because they WANT to dislike Nash and see him fail....which is fine. Kobe gets it too and so do others. Ive come to realize majority of NT didnt play much organized ball and don't really have a grasp on what good basketball is unless it's dudes flying over guys or breaking ankles. That's okay too.

In Nash's case he is no Magic, he's no Oscar, he's no Isiah. He doesn't have the chips. We know that. But he's in another group that still are HOFers.

Nash's biggest negatives with some of the public are that he's not dunking on Sportscenter Top 10, he's white and looks like he could be your science teacher, and he doesnt play much defense....although the "defense" argument is conveniently overlooked whenever we talk about anything else involving the NBA.

If you followed Nash's career and really watched the games he played (I'm talking watched him.....like 20-30 times or more per year and not just box scores or fantasy basketball or Sportscenter) you would get a better understanding of what he brings to the table.....and why countless NBA people and former NBA players have said how good a floor general he really is and how they would have killed to play with him.

And lastly regardless of what anyone thinks, or regardless of his negatives (and every player has his negatives) Nash still has a few years left to play but already has 2 MVPs, 6 All Star games, 6 All NBA teams, 3 Assist titles, and after 13 seasons is still a career .485 FG, .431 3PT, .900 FT. That's no joke either. His teams never stunk up the joint either which is what good PGs are responsible for and which is what most the top NBA assist leaders all have as traits. We can compare Nash's individual stats to a guy like HOF guard Calvin Murphy....yes this is the basketball HOF that takes everything in your career into account. However compare Nash's NBA accolades above with Calvin Murphy's: One All Star appearance, Zero All NBA teams, Zero Assist Titles, Zero rings.

Murphy is in the Hall of Fame.

That's pretty much how I feel everytime I see a Nash Bash thread.

Originally Posted by jville819

Dude has career averages of 14 ppg and 8 apg is that a HOF career?

why are people even posting after that comment?
There are players with lesser stats than that in the HoF and who have won MVP (Wes Unseld).