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

[jch3]

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.

Thank you.

 

[CP1708]

 

[yungmatt]

 

[dearwinter219]

Originally Posted by 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 have gotten 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 better offensive 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.

I hear you. I can't say that I agree, but I can respect your opinion on the matter. Kidd has been my definition of PG prowess though. Hedoesn't specialize; he has a TOTAL game package. I always admired that. From rebounding, to passing, to scoring whennecessary, dude is the deal IMO.

 

[lesfamilia]

Originally Posted by justhotkicks

Mark Jackson is 2nd. Is he a HOFer? It's arguable.

So minus the MVPs, Nash is nowhere close to being a HOF player.

I agree... I wouldn't say nowhere near, but he is not as close as many in here make him out to be.

 

[bigmike23]

There are players with lesser stats than that in the HoF and who have won MVP (Wes Unseld).


he played in a different era of bball

try again

 

[hampisaboss]

Originally Posted by yungmatt

Hell no

 

[casperjr]

Originally Posted by 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 shooters in NBA history.

Passing wise? Jason Kidd played in some uptempo offenses and turned the ball over more, and still didn't produce the 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 but Nash 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 produced higher 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 is not 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 on his 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 production dropped 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 for measuring 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.

 

[DYNAMICS]

Hell No.

 

[downtown43]

Originally Posted by Roc Boy Jada

Originally Posted by DOWNTOWN43

we all know he doesn't deserve it.

and everyone who has watched basketball for at least the last 5-10 years will tell you that MANY, MANY, MANY PGs were better than Nash in his generation.


with that said, how does he not get in? he has 2 MVPs. the league already effed up by giving him his fraud MVPs. they are not going to disrespect the title of MVP even further by not allowing a 2-time winner in the Hall. sadly, the damage has already been done. Steve Nash will get in.

Really? MANY PGs better than Nash in his generation?

I'd like to see the names of these PGs.

Nash came into the league in 1996.

this is a list of PGs who played in the NBA sometime between 1996 and 2009. each player on this list either had more impressive career numbers than Steve Nash,or are/were just straight up better players. (no order):

-Kevin Johnson
-Jason Kidd
-John Stockton
-Gary Payton
-Allen Iverson
-Chris Paul
-Deron Williams

Steve Nash is the 8th player i would take if i wanted a PG for my "1996-2009 team".
(actually, probably the 9th, because if i wanted to win a championship i would rather have Tony Parker. he at least pretends to play defense.)


so in the time that Steve Nash has been in the league, we have watched 8 other PGs who clearly outshine Nash as basketball players. EIGHT! not even 8 betterplayers in general. but 8 better players AT HIS POSITION. yet Nash will be in the Hall at the end of the day, becauseof his MVPs. there is something inherently wrong with that.

 

[651akathepaul]

^You say Nash is the 8th PG you would take for a 96-09, and I say you lie, because I think it depends on who else is on the team. I also think that stats,which don't lie, don't tell the whole story, and Nash has provided a lot of intangibles to his teams.

 

[CP1708]

Shaq, Kobe, and Allen Iverson

3 of the greatest to ever play the game, 35 something seasons combined from the 3 of them, they have 3 MVP's.

Nash who as has been said already, is barely a top 10 PG in the last couple decades, has 2 by himself.



Those voters who gave those awards to Nash should be ashamed of themselves and retire from voting for anything, even American Idol.

MVP awards are tainted now because of Nash. People who continue to support him and beleive he deserved the awards are clueless and just like rotting for thelittle Rudy's of the world.

*

 

[daddyrabbit251]

Those voters who gave those awards to Nash should be ashamed of themselves and retire from voting for anything
Cosign
Steve Nash was just a good fit D'Antoni's system.... take away that system in just one season nash is looking like the average PG he is

 

[downtown43]

Originally Posted by 651akathePaul

^You say Nash is the 8th PG you would take for a 96-09, and I say you lie, because I think it depends on who else is on the team. I also think that stats, which don't lie, don't tell the whole story, and Nash has provided a lot of intangibles to his teams.

you're right, i didn't really talk about the intangibles.

lets talk about a certain intangible, it's called... i don't know... DEFENSE

. once we bring that up, it just makes Nash look even worse compared to hispeers.


i stand by what i said, if i wanted a championship i would take any of those 8 PGs over Nash. hands down. i can post my argument for each and every single oneof them if you want.

seriously, can anyone name another player in the Hall who had eight players better than him AT HIS POSITION during his playingcareer?

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by CasperJr

Originally Posted by 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 shooters in NBA history.

Passing wise? Jason Kidd played in some uptempo offenses and turned the ball over more, and still didn't produce the 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 but Nash 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 produced higher 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 is not 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 on his 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 production dropped 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 for measuring 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.

With the removal of illegal defense allowed more complicated zone defenses (JVG, Tom Thibbadeau, Kurt Rambis, Scott Skilles...). The 90's wasall isolation 1 on 1 defense oriented which were relatively easy to attack.

Laker fans are soooooo salty.

 

[CP1708]

^
This has nothing to do with being a Laker fan. Why would we care? Because he beat us two years in the first round when we weren't good? Eh, who cares. He didn't do anything after that now did he?

This has to do with the NBA, and legacies. Obvioulsy baseball has no legacies left to witness as we don't know who is clean anymore. But the NBA is ahistorical game that can't be messed with. (I don't think they use steroids do they?

) Anyhoo, this bum is going to sit at the table next to LEGENDS and all because of 70 year old white dudes who miss the good ol days voted for himwithout even watching any games. What does that have to do with "Laker fans"?

People use this #@%#++# Laker fan thing for everything, like we don't even watch basketball or something. It's #@%#++# stupid and annoying.

 

[RyGuy45]

Shaq, Kobe, and Allen Iverson

3 of the greatest to ever play the game, 35 something seasons combined from the 3 of them, they have 3 MVP's.

Nash who as has been said already, is barely a top 10 PG in the last couple decades, has 2 by himself.



Those voters who gave those awards to Nash should be ashamed of themselves and retire from voting for anything, even American Idol.

MVP awards are tainted now because of Nash. People who continue to support him and beleive he deserved the awards are clueless and just like rotting for the little Rudy's of the world.

Nash playing in 1990's = zero MVP awards.
Nashin playing in mid-2000's = 2 MVP awards, close to 3.

He came on at the right time and those individual seasons were noteworthy. Blame the state of the L and the other candidates. Blame the system that has been inplace for decades (top players on top 3-4 teams get MVP award). Blame the fact that voters narrowed it down to 2-3 players each of those year (2-3 players 95%of NBA followers over the age of 17 would have agreed on) and decided to give majority vote to Nash in the end. Not 100%. Majority.

Old news.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by RyGuy45

Shaq, Kobe, and Allen Iverson

3 of the greatest to ever play the game, 35 something seasons combined from the 3 of them, they have 3 MVP's.

Nash who as has been said already, is barely a top 10 PG in the last couple decades, has 2 by himself.



Those voters who gave those awards to Nash should be ashamed of themselves and retire from voting for anything, even American Idol.

MVP awards are tainted now because of Nash. People who continue to support him and beleive he deserved the awards are clueless and just like rotting for the little Rudy's of the world.

Nash playing in 1990's = zero MVP awards.
Nashin playing in mid-2000's = 2 MVP awards, close to 3.

He came on at the right time and those individual seasons were noteworthy. Blame the state of the L and the other candidates. Blame the system that has been in place for decades (top players on top 3-4 teams get MVP award). Blame the fact that voters narrowed it down to 2-3 players each of those year (2-3 players 95% of NBA followers over the age of 17 would have agreed on) and decided to give majority vote to Nash in the end. Not 100%. Majority.

Old news.
/Thread


You can make a case for Shaq winning one of them but Kobe winning would have been unprecedented. If your team is elite you DON'T win MVP's it'sreally that simple.

 

[mister friendly]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

Originally Posted by RyGuy45

Shaq, Kobe, and Allen Iverson

3 of the greatest to ever play the game, 35 something seasons combined from the 3 of them, they have 3 MVP's.

Nash who as has been said already, is barely a top 10 PG in the last couple decades, has 2 by himself.



Those voters who gave those awards to Nash should be ashamed of themselves and retire from voting for anything, even American Idol.

MVP awards are tainted now because of Nash. People who continue to support him and beleive he deserved the awards are clueless and just like rotting for the little Rudy's of the world.

Nash playing in 1990's = zero MVP awards.
Nashin playing in mid-2000's = 2 MVP awards, close to 3.

He came on at the right time and those individual seasons were noteworthy. Blame the state of the L and the other candidates. Blame the system that has been in place for decades (top players on top 3-4 teams get MVP award). Blame the fact that voters narrowed it down to 2-3 players each of those year (2-3 players 95% of NBA followers over the age of 17 would have agreed on) and decided to give majority vote to Nash in the end. Not 100%. Majority.

Old news.

/Thread


You can make a case for Shaq winning one of them but Kobe winning would have been unprecedented. If your team is elite you DON'T win MVP's it's really that simple.



Yep there were no real candidates the years he won the MVP.

 

[clutchshooter]

what if mj didnt win 5 mvp's?

what if kareem didnt win 6 mvp's?

what if bill didnt win 11 rings?

what if santa claus did have a sleigh? would he make it around the world in time?

what if lemonade was blue? would it still taste the same?

what if tennis raquets didnt have strings? would people still be able to hit the ball back?

what if tv's never existed? would you still watch them?

what if snow was itchy? would you still make snowmen?

what if the cloud's rained urine? would you still stand in the rain with your mouth open?

what if banana peels were money? would you still use a wallet?

what if???!! WHAT IF?????!!! WHAT IF????!!!!!!

 

[trelvis tha thrilla]

In my opinion, Steve Nash is one of the most overrated point guards ever.

 

[chewtoy112]

Nash haters be salty. What he does with his lack of athleticism is ridiculous. Skill/basketball IQ gets more appreciation than athleticism IMO.

 

[dearwinter219]

^Hold up fam. Nash is one of THEE most athletic players in the league. He just doesn't jump high. People don't know the difference these days.His conditioning, body control, and footwork (ON OFFENSE ONLY

) are all outstanding.

 

[chewtoy112]

Yeah, his conditioning and body control and footwork is great, but I'm talking about raw athleticism. Power, jumping, speed. He's quick, but he'snot raw-athletic. And I would argue body control and footwork is more skill than athleticism. His body control is good because his skill level is high so hedoesn't get off balance when he makes his moves. And footwork is a learned skill.

 

[651akathepaul]

Originally Posted by DearWinter219

^Hold up fam. Nash is one of THEE most athletic players in the league. He just doesn't jump high. People don't know the difference these days. His conditioning, body control, and footwork (ON OFFENSE ONLY

) are all outstanding.

I agree with that.