Better Career: Jason Kidd or Steve Nash

[Findog]

http://thestartingfive.net/2009/12/04/friday-fire-better-careerjason-kidd-or-steve-nash/

Nash had two MVPs. Kidd had two Finals appearances. Nash was the better shooter, Kidd the better all-around player.

[Findog]

Nash:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2511/4158313352_e7fefddc9e_o.jpg

[Findog]

Kidd:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2561/4157551701_783b12a30a_o.jpg

[monosylab1k]

Gotta go with Nash on this one.

[21_Blessings]

Kidd easily after you factor in defense. Although Nash really is one of the greatest shooters ever.

Those MVPs don't do anything for me as they were media voted. Kidd dragging his team to the finals two seasons in the row was more impressive despite the East being terrible.

[Culburn369]

Fine lodgement, Fin.

[Basketballgirl25]

I'm going to say Kidd had the better career. I don't know how Kidd has been when he was with other teams vs Nash, but most times Kidd and the Nets usually lost to Nash and his team.

But, both great players, so hard to say. Want to see a great game with them check this game out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Df_ikYuef-k

[Findog]

Pros for Nash: Phoenix regretting giving him up and gave him a near-max contract to get him back (Kidd despite his talent was given up on by 3 teams). He played at a high level well into his mid-thirties. While SSOL may be fatally flawed when it comes to winning a title, it did a lot to rejuvenate the NBA's popularity and brought about a more aesthetically pleasing style to watch after the Knicks-Heat rugby matches of the late nineties resulted in a lot of ugly basketball. He probably wasn't deserving of 2 back-to-back MVP awards, but he did qualify as a franchise player for his work with the SSOL Suns. Incredibly clutch player.

[21_Blessings]

Also 01/02 where Kidd was 2nd in MVP voting. That Kidd was better than Nash ever was.

[Findog]

Pros for Kidd: Triple-double machine in his prime, rejuvenated the New Jersey franchise to new heights with two Finals appearances, and they promptly fell apart after he left. Unselfish player who made his teammates better and was a tenacious, strong defender in his prime. Reinvented himself as a very good complementary player late in his career on a good Mavs team when most guys have either retired or have seen their skills completely wilt.

[IronMexican]

I'll go with Kidd. He was better for a longer period and dragged his team into the Finals twice.

[Findog]

Cons for Nash: Atrocious defender, and his first four seasons he couldn't stay healthy or crack starter's minutes. Never cracked a Finals because he consistently got outplayed by Mike Bibby and Tony Parker in the playoffs. His stats were most likely inflated by the SSOL style of play. His two MVP awards were pretty dubious. Despite his immense value to his team, he was far from the best player in the league in 2005 and 2006.

[Findog]

Cons for Kidd: Despite his talent, he was nevertheless given up on by Dallas, Phoenix and New Jersey for problems off the court. Never developed a consistently strong mid-range shooting touch that would have taken his game to another level. Earned a rep as a coach-killer.

[Culburn369]

Good to see Nash kicked into the gutter like this.

Keep kickin',,,I'm eating my Cocoa Pebbles.

[Findog]

I think Steve Nash may have been a more important player in league history, because of how important the Webber/Divac Kings, Nash/Finley/Dirk Mavs and Nash's SSOL Suns were in getting the league of the abyss of that late nineties Knick/Heat rugby garbage, even though those teams never even sniffed a Finals appearance. But I think Kidd was a better player in his prime and for longer, and thus had the better career.

Kidd was probably better, but Nash was a more unique player. We'll see another Kidd before we see another Nash. He's not nearly as good, but Rondo's game reminds me of Kidd.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

If not for a 3 year period (2005-2007), this wouldn't even be an argument. Gotta go with Kidd.

[21_Blessings]

Kidd was probably better, but Nash was a more unique player. We'll see another Kidd before we see another Nash. He's not nearly as good, but Rondo's game reminds me of Kidd.

Mark Price??

Nash is pretty much the token good shooting/passing, no defense playing white PG mold.

[Basketballgirl25]

Cons for Kidd: Despite his talent, he was nevertheless given up on by Dallas, Phoenix and New Jersey for problems off the court. Never developed a consistently strong mid-range shooting touch that would have taken his game to another level. Earned a rep as a coach-killer.

Actually New Jersey didn't really give up on him. He demanded a trade and NJ finally just gave in a traded him, because they didn't want drama in the locker room.

[Culburn369]

Fin, you shoulda run this before the Knicks & Cavs debacles...when DUNCAN still had his nose in Nash's shit hole...up on the bandwagon.

[Findog]

Mark Price??

It's a style thing, not a basketball thing - same way we'll never see another Maravich. You can see Nash's soccer background by the way he probes the defense in a half-court set.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Mark Price??

Nash is pretty much the token good shooting/passing, no defense playing white PG mold.

Granted I'm not your side of Kidd vs. Nash, it's not really fair to Nash to compare him to Mark Price. Price was a good shooter, Nash is one of the best shooters ever, price was a good passer, and Nash is one of the best passers ever.

[DBryant88]

Kidd

[21_Blessings]

If not for a 3 year period (2005-2007), this wouldn't even be an argument.

Exactly


It's a style thing, not a basketball thing - same way we'll never see another Maravich. You can see Nash's soccer background by the way he probes the defense in a half-court set.

I dunno, Maravich never needed a specialized offensive system and lax perimeter defensive rules to make him look like a legend.

[21_Blessings]

Granted I'm not your side of Kidd vs. Nash, it's not really fair to Nash to compare him to Mark Price. Price was a good shooter, Nash is one of the best shooters ever, price was a good passer, and Nash is one of the best passers ever.

Nash would have been tossed around like a rag doll in that era though. He would have flared out eariler due to injuries just like Price did. Having said that, NAsh is better. But their games are distinctly similar which was my point.

And Mark Price is one of the greatest shooters ever.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Nash would have been tossed around like a rag doll in that era though. He would have flared out eariler due to injuries just like Price did. Having said that, NAsh is better. But their games are distinctly similar which was my point.

And Mark Price is one of the greatest shooters ever.


In that sense I agree. They are similar players.


Regardless of that, Kidd is better than Nash. Who's to say Kidd doesn't win 1-2 MVPs from 2005-2007 if he played in a stat inflating system like Nash did?

[Findog]

Neither one won a title, so I guess it comes down to, would you rather be the most important member of the SSOL Suns with two mvp trophies on your mantle, along with getting slurped and knobslobbed by every media outlet over a 3 year period for "saving basketball" or some shit...or the better all-around player who made two Finals appearances and resurrected a dead franchise in New Jersey?

[Bob Lanier]

brought about a more aesthetically pleasing style to watch after the Knicks-Heat rugby matches of the late nineties resulted in a lot of ugly basketball.
Bullshit on both counts.

[nkdlunch]

neither won or will win a ring. so WGAF

[Findog]

neither won or will win a ring. so WGAF

Solid take. Thanks for weighing in and wasting everyone's time.

[Findog]

Better career: Matt Bonner or Jason Kapono? They both won rings.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Better career: Matt Bonner or Jason Kapono? They both won rings.


This is obviously a way better argument than Kidd vs. Nash since they both won rings.

Someone should create a who's better post-injuries Ron Harper or Derek Fisher thread since they have 9 rings combined!

[Findog]

This is obviously a way better argument than Kidd vs. Nash since they both won rings.

Someone should create a who's better post-injuries Ron Harper or Derek Fisher thread since they have 9 rings combined!

Robert Horry > Karl Malone

7 > 0

[Leetonidas]

Going by careers, it's Nash. Because neither of them have rings, you have to look at individual accomplishments, and Nash is one of only like, what, 8 or 9 players in history with b2b MVPs.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Robert Horry > Karl Malone

7 > 0

The starting lineup of Stockton, Michael Jordan, Lebron James, Karl Malone and Patrick Ewing would get slaughtered by Robert Horry in a 1 on 5 game simply cause one team has 6 championships while the other has 7.

[resistanze]

Going by careers, it's Nash. Because neither of them have rings, you have to look at individual accomplishments, and Nash is one of only like, what, 8 or 9 players in history with b2b MVPs.

But the only one that hasn't won a ring (or make a finals).

For me, it's Kidd.

[21_Blessings]

Going by careers, it's Nash. Because neither of them have rings, you have to look at individual accomplishments, and Nash is one of only like, what, 8 or 9 players in history with b2b MVPs.

Those MVPs are fucking meaningless media jerk off material.

Kidd's number of triple-doubles are much more impressive.

Besides, how can we seriously give Nash the edge here when he's been one the worst defenders in the league? There are two ends in a basketball game. Both equal in importance.

[Findog]

Nash's MVP awards are pretty dubious. I don't think it was a racial thing, so much as sportswriters were enchanted with making an unconventional "outside the box" pick. Thing is, it was stupid. The MVP award tends to go to the guy who is the best player on the team with the best-regular season record. In 2005, that was Nash, although his former team improved their record by 6 wins, and the Lakers cratered without Shaq. Then in 2006 it was a total copout, simply because the Suns were able to stay afloat without the highly overrated Amar'''''''''e.

[Findog]

Those MVPs are fucking meaningless media jerk off material.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Neither Jason Kidd nor Steve Nash have a championship. Just thought I'd let everyone know.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200904050DAL.html

[jacobdrj]

Bullshit on both counts.

+1

I loved those Heat-Knicks series. Some of the best basketball I have had the privilege of watching.

Kidd came oh-so-close to an MVP himself, while playing basketball on both sides (o and d).

The East did suck in 2001, I'll give some of you that. But 2002 was a different story.

[Findog]

Who the hell wants to watch teams beat the shit out of each other in a bunch of 77-70 games? It's about as fun to watch as a pickup game. I know the other end of the spectrum is 160-150 layup lines, but bitch please.

[jacobdrj]

The ratings, IIRC were pretty good back then.
They were playing hard. They were intense. The made shots despite the good defense. That was impressive.
Layup lines... not so much.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Bullshit on both counts.



+1

I loved those Heat-Knicks series. Some of the best basketball I have had the privilege of watching.


Leave it to Pistonfan to come gay up a thread talking about how games where each team shoots below 40% are fun to watch.

(Can't wait for the "HAHAHA of course a Suns fan hates defense" response to this)

[Findog]

The difference between say the SSOL Suns and a team like the Warriors is good ball movement and spacing, execution and passing, whereas the Dubs just like to jack up shots with 20 seconds on the shot clock and stand around on defense. The Suns were defensively challenged for sure, but they did have good defensive players like Marion and Raja Bell and they actually were middle of the pack according to defensive efficiency ratings, meaning that they actually tried on that side of the court.

[jacobdrj]

Leave it to Pistonfan to come gay up a thread talking about how games where each team shoots below 40% are fun to watch.

(Can't wait for the "HAHAHA of course a Suns fan hates defense" response to this)

If the teams couldn't make shots because they were crappy shooters, I would agree. But if they couldn't make the shots because they were defended by the monster block, or the great steal, or the good foul, than it is very enjoyable.

IIRC, one of the most memorable plays of that era was LJ's 4 pt play. Apparently, they were good enough shooters. Just better defenders.

[21_Blessings]

Scoring was fine most of the 80s. The 90s were just an abomination.

The problem I have with he league now are touch flagrents and 95% of NBA players literally moving out of the way when Lebron James goes to the rim.

He would have been put in the hospital back in the day.

[Findog]

There was too much isolation play in the nineties. Nineties ball involved way too many clearouts where 8 guys were watching 2 guys go 1-on-1. I agree with 21 that they call too many touch fouls now, but I happen to prefer better ball movement.

Go back and look at some of the scores from the 80's during the NBA's "Golden Age." 125-120 games were pretty routine.

[Findog]

Intensity and execution are not limited to 75-70 rugby matches. There's a difference between say a 135-130 Memphis-Sacramento game and this:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200703140DAL.html

[pauls931]

Actually a tough one. Kidd made it to the finals I think, but that was in the east when the 8th seed in the west could have made the finals there. I'd have to call a tie because Kidd made the finals, but Nash consistently faced a tougher conference.

[jacobdrj]

The occasional high scoring game is expected to happen. But when a team consistently puts up 130 and gives up around 130 it usually points to a team that is not playing intensely for half the game (when they are on defense.) And that is aggravating to watch and gets boring pretty fast.

That Dallas team played defense. Not the best defense in the world, but they played hard on both sides of the ball far more often than not.

[Culburn369]

There was too much isolation play in the nineties. Nineties ball involved way too many clearouts where 8 guys were watching 2 guys go 1-on-1.

It was fine by me. Watching Jason Williams walk up and throw it in low to CWEBB (10 times in-a-row) and then walk away to let Webber do his work was a thing of beauty.

Or, listening to Magic come up the left side & command Worthy to "get out." so he could work alone.

[jacobdrj]

Actually a tough one. Kidd made it to the finals I think, but that was in the east when the 8th seed in the west could have made the finals there. I'd have to call a tie because Kidd made the finals, but Nash consistently faced a tougher conference.

He played in a conference that had more regular season wins, but a conference that consistently played less defense.

[stretch]

Going by careers, it's Nash. Because neither of them have rings, you have to look at individual accomplishments, and Nash is one of only like, what, 8 or 9 players in history with b2b MVPs.

Rings are a team accomplishment, so how can you factor rings into evaluating individuals?

I hate it when people think that rings should be the first thing looked at. It's one of the LAST things that should be looked at when evaluating an individual.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Scoring was fine most of the 80s. The 90s were just an abomination.

The problem I have with he league now are touch flagrents and 95% of NBA players literally moving out of the way when Lebron James goes to the rim.

He would have been put in the hospital back in the day.


Some of the flagrants called today are bullshit, just cause a player is injured, doesn't mean it was a flagrant foul. Lebron's shit is annoying cause he just recklessly runs at the hoop and barrels over people. No real signature move or anything. It's like the game went from being too physical, and too defensive minded to having too many fouls called and having high scoring games that take 3 hours and 30 minutes because of all the fouls.

[Findog]

The occasional high scoring game is expected to happen. But when a team consistently puts up 130 and gives up around 130 it usually points to a team that is not playing intensely for half the game (when they are on defense.) And that is aggravating to watch and gets boring pretty fast.

That Dallas team played defense. Not the best defense in the world, but they played hard on both sides of the ball far more often than not.

I think there's a difference between a team like Phoenix and Golden State. Phoenix is trying to increase the # of possessions per game and turn it into a game of offensive efficiency. And despite their rep as a no D team, at their peak they finished 12th in the league in defensive efficiency ratings in 2007, which means they put some emphasis on D. I would agree that a team like the Warriors more fits the description of what you're talking about.

I like watching a team like Phoenix, but a team like the Warriors bores me.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Rings are a team accomplishment, so how can you factor rings into evaluating individuals?

I hate it when people think that rings should be the first thing looked at. It's one of the LAST things that should be looked at when evaluating an individual.


Did you know neither Steve Nash nor Jason Kidd won a ring, while the San Antonio Spurs have won 4 rings?

[pauls931]

He played in a conference that had more regular season wins, but a conference that consistently played less defense.

true, but there were a few years where the east was a complete disaster and those are the years kid, Iverson, and Lebron made the finals.

[Culburn369]

Rings are a team accomplishment, so how can you factor rings into evaluating individuals?

I hate it when people think that rings should be the first thing looked at. It's one of the LAST things that should be looked at when evaluating an individual.

...that 3 years span after Daddy had rung/sans Kobe in a vacuum.

[stretch]

Leave it to Pistonfan to come gay up a thread talking about how games where each team shoots below 40% are fun to watch.

i think what he meant was the level of competitiveness. i will admit, i can enjoy a low scoring game of football or basketball quite a bit as long as both teams are playing very competitively and clearly giving it their all. sometimes shots just dont fall as easily, or defense just prevails.

[Findog]

Some of the flagrants called today are bullshit, just cause a player is injured, doesn't mean it was a flagrant foul. Lebron's shit is annoying cause he just recklessly runs at the hoop and barrels over people. No real signature move or anything. It's like the game went from being too physical, and too defensive minded to having too many fouls called and having high scoring games that take 3 hours and 30 minutes because of all the fouls.

I would love to see the refs start calling charges when he pulls that Brandon Jacobs plowing through the goal line crap. "I'm The King! You gots to call a foul!"

[Findog]

i think what he meant was the level of competitiveness. i will admit, i can enjoy a low scoring game of football or basketball quite a bit as long as both teams are playing very competitively and clearly giving it their all. sometimes shots just dont fall as easily, or defense just prevails.

As long as execution and competitiveness are there, then you can't fault a high-scoring game as back and forth layup lines. The PHX-Dallas playoff series come to mind. As do the high-scoring games during the Spurs-Mavs series in 2006.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

i think what he meant was the level of competitiveness. i will admit, i can enjoy a low scoring game of football or basketball quite a bit as long as both teams are playing very competitively and clearly giving it their all. sometimes shots just dont fall as easily, or defense just prevails.


My bad then

[stretch]

As long as execution and competitiveness are there, then you can't fault a high-scoring game as back and forth layup lines. The PHX-Dallas playoff series come to mind. As do the high-scoring games during the Spurs-Mavs series in 2006.

i agree.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I would love to see the refs start calling charges when he pulls that Brandon Jacobs plowing through the goal line crap. "I'm The King! You gots to call a foul!"


It'd be, "That wasn't a charge, that was my whale plow. I've used it my entire career."

[jacobdrj]

true, but there were a few years where the east was a complete disaster and those are the years kid, Iverson, and Lebron made the finals.

I agree for the most part, but IMHO 2002, the East wasn't nearly as bad as it was portrayed. The East wasn't bad when LeBron made the Finals so much as the East imploded health wise during the playoffs.

[Findog]

It'd be, "That wasn't a charge, that was my whale plow. I've used it my entire career."

LeBron is fun to watch for the most part and he seems like a good guy off the court, but his sense of entitlement on it is pretty goddamn irritating.

[Bob Lanier]

Who the hell wants to watch teams beat the shit out of each other in a bunch of 77-70 games?
I do. It's an actual athletic competition, as opposed to some and-1 style everyone's-a-winner-and-can-dunk-whenever-they-want-to nonsense d'Antoni and Don Nelson and you appreciate.

It's about as fun to watch as a pickup game.
You mean a game where neither team pretends to play defense or has any sort of effective halfcourt offense?

Oh.

[Findog]

I do. It's an actual athletic competition, as opposed to some and-1 style everyone's-a-winner-and-can-dunk-whenever-they-want-to nonsense d'Antoni and Don Nelson and you appreciate.


U mad?



You mean a game where neither team pretends to play defense or has any sort of effective halfcourt offense?

Oh.

No, I mean brickfests with lots of hacking and grabbing, and a score on 1 out of every 6 or 7 possessions.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

LeBron is fun to watch for the most part and he seems like a good guy off the court, but his sense of entitlement on it is pretty goddamn irritating.

His ego/sense of entitlement/attention whore act gets worse and worse every year and overshadows the fact he's fun to watch.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I do. It's an actual athletic competition, as opposed to some and-1 style everyone's-a-winner-and-can-dunk-whenever-they-want-to nonsense d'Antoni and Don Nelson and you appreciate.


Funny how Findog has specifically said Don Nelson's Warriors are horrible to watch.

[Findog]

His ego/sense of entitlement/attention whore act gets worse and worse every year and overshadows the fact he's fun to watch.

Case in point: The All-Star game is at Cowboys Stadium this year and there are rumors he'll participate in it. The Mavs were in Cleveland last week and the Dallas beat writers asked him straight up if he would participate, and he did the whole "I don't know, it's too early to say, it's just gonna depend on a lot of things." Dude, either do the dunk contest or not. STFU with this Will I or Won't I? act.

[Findog]

Funny how Findog has specifically said Don Nelson's Warriors are horrible to watch.

The Suns are like a hamburger from In-n-Out. The Warriors are like a McDonald's 99 cent hamburger. Same thing, but one is much better.

[LOL@MavsFan]

http://thestartingfive.net/2009/12/04/friday-fire-better-careerjason-kidd-or-steve-nash/

Nash had two MVPs. Kidd had two Finals appearances. Nash was the better shooter, Kidd the better all-around player.

Neither...I say Mark Aguirre

LOL @ Mark Aguirre

[LOL@MavsFan]

The Suns are like a hamburger from In-n-Out. The Warriors are like a McDonald's 99 cent hamburger. Same thing, but one is much better.


Yep...that 99 cent hamburger owns you and Mark Aguirre

LOL @ Mark Aguirre:lmao

[pauls931]

His ego/sense of entitlement/attention whore act gets worse and worse every year and overshadows the fact he's fun to watch.

He could be a likeable guy, but since Jr High, people have been telling him his farts smell like flowers.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

He could be a likeable guy, but since Jr High, people have been telling him his farts smell like flowers.

:lmao great way to put it.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Yep...that 99 cent hamburger owns you and Mark Aguirre

LOL @ Mark Aguirre:lmao

I didn't know you were a Warrior fan.

[Findog]

He could be a likeable guy, but since Jr High, people have been telling him his farts smell like flowers.

I like his interviews in non-basketball settings, like when he's on the Daily Show or 60 Minutes, he comes across as real likeable and actually humble. I think he's just really media-savvy, he wants to sell sneakers and soda, and knows how he's supposed to come across.

[sonic21]

kidd has had more overall sucess

[Findog]

kidd has had more overall sucess

But is it better to make 2 Finals or get knobslobbed by the New York Times, Slate, The Daily Show, Pitchfork and The Daily Worker (and other assorted non-sports media outlets) for having "saved basketball?"

[Findog]

I'm not making this shit up:

http://www.slate.com/id/2119404/



The Good Suns
How Phoenix saved the NBA.
By Neal Pollack

If I had said last October that the San Antonio Spurs were going to win Game 1 of the Western Conference Finals, the prediction would have been met with the shrug reserved for other even-money bets, as if I'd guessed that the Patriots were going to the Super Bowl or that Barry Bonds would blame his problems on the media. But what if I'd said that the Spurs were going to need 121 points—43 of them in the fourth quarter—to win that game? Or that they'd have to do it on the road, in Phoenix? I suddenly would have been the most popular man in Nevada. Such are the transfigurative powers of this year's Phoenix Suns. In every one of their games, something miraculous happens, even when they lose. The Suns have saved the NBA.



Because I had the immense bad fortune of growing up in Phoenix, I've been a Suns fan my entire life, a claim that, until this year, had about as much force as saying "I like cheese," or "I take my tea black." The Suns have always been one of those teams that rarely inspire great misery in their fans, but also never deliver the final championship goods. There was that one year, 1992-93, when Sir Charles took the team to the brink of Hollywood, but they quickly fell back to playing the role of Hakeem Olajuwon's bridesmaid, just as they'd bowed to the Los Angeles Lakers in the 1980s and would serve the needs of the Spurs in the late 1990s.



From the first minute of the last Suns pre-season game this year, in which they shattered Sacramento by 28 points, I sensed a change. First, these Suns were fast. Second, they jumped very high, at impossible angles. They also made a lot of three-pointers and didn't seem to make a whole lot of mistakes. In fact, they so dismantled the Kings that I found myself disturbed. Who were these guys, and what had they done with my team?




The regular season began, and NBA Jam never stopped. The Suns won their first four games by something like 90 points. Then they lost in overtime to Cleveland after being up by 19 in the fourth quarter, setting a pattern for the year: They'd lose, occasionally, but only if the other team played the game of its life. They won a bunch more, and lost maybe one, and then they kept on winning, until they were 31-4 and I started to carve out my television-watching schedule for June.




I began to idolize the Suns. These guys were cool. Steve Nash, the league's MVP, is a longhaired Canadian who spoke out against the war in Iraq and reads The Communist Manifesto. Quentin Richardson declared after a game-winning shot that it "was like Hamlet. It was a suspense thriller, and I killed them at the end." Amare Stoudemire, when asked to comment on a 22-point third quarter against the Kings, said, "I've got a tendency to jump over some guys' heads and throw it down."



The coach, Mike D'Antoni, doesn't get out-cooled by his team. Though American by birth, he's arguably the greatest player in the history of Italian basketball. He's married to a model and hangs out with the Benetton and Versace families. TNT recently showed vintage footage of a shirtless D'Antoni, wearing the same crisp 'stache he still has today, holding aloft a trophy while a crowd of Italian revelers dumped champagne on his head. The Italians call him Arsenio Lupin, after a movie about a cat burglar. That's not a reference that means anything to me. I call him Coach Pornstache.




Coach Pornstache might be the greatest basketball innovator since Tex Winter drew up the triangle. He's certainly the first coach to bring the true European game to the United States. D'Antoni's philosophy revolves around ball movement, speed, defense in short spurts, and sense of humor. In one regular-season game, the Suns fell short after a furious comeback when reserve center Steven Hunter missed a dunk at the buzzer. Nash and Stoudemire came over, doubled up laughing, and dragged him back to the locker room. I've never seen players less affected by losing. If it's possible for a basketball team to be run by wit, then the Suns, with their intellectual point guard and their Continental coach, are that team.




For the first three quarters Sunday, the Suns played true to playoff form. At halftime, they were down by six. Just like in Dallas two nights before, they roared ahead with one of those unstoppable above-the-rim-Steve-Nash-falling-out-of-bounds-finding-the-open-guy-at-the-top-of-the-three-point-key runs, the NBA equivalent of getting hit on the head by a board from behind. The Spurs suddenly looked like the last vestige of the Old Ways. Tim Duncan fronting the post and banking the ball off the glass with two seconds left on the shot clock? Boring. Soon, I thought, the rest of the world would come around to meet my point of view.



Then there were four minutes left in the fourth quarter, the Suns were down by eight, and I was trapped watching the game in a hotel bar in Utah with an old lady who asked the bartender pertinent questions like, "What was that Admiral's name with San Antonio? He was a good Christian …"



It didn't disturb me that we lost—I never doubted that the Spurs would drive the Suns to the brink—it was the way we lost. If Duncan had buried us with his typically efficient but uninspiring heroics, I wouldn't have been forced to down an extra Bloody Mary. But unlike the Memphis Grizzlies, Dallas Mavericks, and just about every other team in the league, the Suns didn't leave San Antonio dazzled, befuddled, or heaving for breath. The Spurs took our bet, raised it, and they weren't bluffing.



The Spurs hit more three-pointers than possibly the best three-point-shooting team in NBA history. They looked just a little faster, just a little sharper, just a little more freewheeling. Their shooting guard, Manu Ginobili, is an improvisational genius from Argentina who drives the lane wildly but effectively and with little regard for his health. Our regular shooting guard, Joe Johnson, had equivalent skills—until he fell and broke his face.



Next year, a lot of NBA teams will copy the Suns, minus the incredible athleticism and the sense of humor. The Spurs, though, don't need to plagiarize. They're like one of those cartoon supervillains that absorb the powers of whomever they're fighting. They can plod in the post and they can run with the ponies. The Suns may be the best team in the NBA, but the Spurs are the hardest to beat. In a couple of weeks, I hope I'm looking back at the Western Conference Finals as Coach Pornstache's, and Steve Nash's, finest hour. I just hope there's something in The Communist Manifesto about transition defense.

[picc84]

I cant give it in good concience to someone who despite playing with nearly a dozen allstars across his career has never sniffed the finals. MVP's and all.

Jason Kidd for the better career, though Nash will likely get the nod in any publications.

[Culburn369]

Kidd.

Nash quit on his team & coach and conspired his team to mutiny.

[resistanze]

Kidd.

Nash quit on his team & coach and conspired his team to mutiny.

Well I wouldn't call that the most compelling reason to vote for Kidd, considering how he gave Byron Scott the rusty pipe treatment.

[Findog]

Kidd.

Nash quit on his team & coach and conspired his team to mutiny.

Well, if you're gonna use this line of reasoning, Kidd is a coach-killer and bitched his way out of NJ.

[Culburn369]

Well, if you're gonna use this line of reasoning, Kidd is a coach-killer and bitched his way out of NJ.

But, he never quit 20 games in like Nash did.

[Findog]

But, he never quit 20 games in like Nash did.

He had a monster game against the Mavs right before they traded for him, playing like it was G7 of the Finals. Basically an audition. Otherwise, I don't think he was giving that kind of effort on a nightly basis.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Don Nelson's been doing the same bullshit for longer than you've been alive.


Here comes the "I'm an old man posting on the internets" superiority complex.

[Culburn369]

He had a monster game against the Mavs right before they traded for him, playing like it was G7 of the Finals. Basically an audition. Otherwise, I don't think he was giving that kind of effort on a nightly basis.

Did they find Frank hangin' from a tree like they found Porter?

[Findog]

Did they find Frank hangin' from a tree like they found Porter?

They weren't going to a win a title Porter's way or Nash's way, so what's the problem? It's on Kerr for bringing in a coach like Porter with an emphasis on defense and giving him D'Antoni's personnel.

[ginobili's bald spot]

Rings are a team accomplishment, so how can you factor rings into evaluating individuals?



Because you play to win the game. Winning is the object of the game, not statistics. Individual statistics exist to provide more information as to who may have helped more in winning. If things are relatively equal statistically, and one person is winning more, then the person who is winning more has the better career. Since that's actually the object of the game. Winning is the granddaddy of all stats.

[Culburn369]

They weren't going to a win a title Porter's way or Nash's way, so what's the problem? It's on Kerr for bringing in a coach like Porter with an emphasis on defense and giving him D'Antoni's personnel.

How would we know, Nash quit and dragged Bell with him 20 games in.

Hey, listen, I'm only citing it because everybody hung Bryant up by his Buster Brown's for quitting in that Suns/Lakers series. Now I got Nash doin' likewise and I'm gettin' payback.

[Findog]

How would we know, Nash quit and dragged Bell with him 20 games in.

Hey, listen, I'm only citing it because everybody hung Bryant up by his Buster Brown's for quitting in that Suns/Lakers series. Now I got Nash doin' likewise and I'm gettin' payback.

I don't think he quit, he just led a palace coup. There's a difference.

[Findog]

What was even more retarded about bringing in Porter with his marching orders for defense was trading away Bell and Diaw for Richardson. That's their two most accomplished defenders for a guy who doesn't play any. Make up your mind Kerr on what you want.

[21_Blessings]

I don't think he quit, he just led a palace coup. There's a difference.

That's basically what Kobe did. Demonstrated how terrible the team was in game 7 and then preceded to force the owner's hand to make a drastic trade or risk losing Kobe.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

What was even more retarded about bringing in Porter with his marching orders for defense was trading away Bell and Diaw for Richardson.


Bell's reign as a good defender ended sometime during the 2007-2008 season. When he was still in Phoenix during 2008-2009, his defense was atrocious. Diaw was also never a good defender, I never understood how he became their 2nd best defender once he was traded.

[Culburn369]

I don't think he quit, he just led a palace coup. There's a difference.

My ass. He quit. I saw it, Fin. He quit tryin'. He sabotaged Porter to get back to his way.

[Höfner]

Nash definitely had more fun.

[vicphoenix13]

Why does Nash's defense get scrutinized more than any other star player in the NBA? If you checked out the numbers this season, opposing point guards have been very ordinary against Nash. But you won't hear that from the Nash hate club.

As far as the Kidd vs. Nash argument goes, there is one statistic that really glaring. Kidd is a career 40 percent shooter while Nash is a career 49 percent shooter. The majority of elite NBA point guards could atleast shoot over 45 percent for their career.

There's also an argument to be made that Nash is the greatest shooter in NBA history. He's the only player ever to shoot over 50 percent from the field, 40 percent from three and 90 percent from the free throw line in three different seasons.

[kamikazi_player]

That's basically what Kobe did. Demonstrated how terrible the team was in game 7 and then preceded to force the owner's hand to make a drastic trade or risk losing Kobe.
Yeah, Kobe's a bitch, even Garnett didn't do that.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

He's the only player ever to shoot over 50 percent from the field, 40 percent from three and 90 percent from the free throw line in three different seasons.


You might as well make this stat your sig since you manage to include it in every single post.

[Culburn369]

That's basically what Kobe did. Demonstrated how terrible the team was in game 7 and then preceded to force the owner's hand to make a drastic trade or risk losing Kobe.

& Kobe was a shit to do that, and a bigger shit not to take responsibility and accountability. We've had to eat shit because of that act since then. Don't you know, its indefensible.

Never quit. Anything could have happened.

[Findog]

Why does Nash's defense get scrutinized more than any other star player in the NBA? If you checked out the numbers this season, opposing point guards have been very ordinary against Nash. But you won't hear that from the Nash hate club.



One thing you can say for Nash is that he never played in front of a dominant defensive big that could mask his defensive shortcomings. Magic was a defensive liability towards the end of his career; don't let any Faker fan tell you otherwise. He just had a better defensive frontline behind him.

[Findog]

That's basically what Kobe did. Demonstrated how terrible the team was in game 7 and then preceded to force the owner's hand to make a drastic trade or risk losing Kobe.

Dude, I love Kobe's game, but that's just apologia.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

One thing you can say for Nash is that he never played in front of a dominant defensive big that could mask his defensive shortcomings.


No big man could ever cover for Nash defensively as well as Marion could.

[Culburn369]

It was a despicable act by Bryant and a taint upon his resume.

Now Nash carries the same taint.

[vicphoenix13]

You might as well make this stat your sig since you manage to include it in every single post.


Why shouldn't I? Somebody has to use facts to counteract the nonsense you spout about Nash all the time.

[Findog]

No big man could ever cover for Nash defensively as well as Marion could.

If Nash had played with Duncan, we'd be hearing a lot less about his lack of defense. A team like the Spurs could mask his shortcomings a lot easier than just crossmatching Marion's man for Nash's man.

[vicphoenix13]

No big man could ever cover for Nash defensively as well as Marion could.

Speaking of Marion, what happened to him? He was a allstar with the Suns and now he's been reduced to role player status. His whining and complaining in Phoenix backfired.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

If Nash had played with Duncan, we'd be hearing a lot less about his lack of defense. A team like the Spurs could mask his shortcomings a lot easier than just crossmatching Marion's man for Nash's man.


It goes beyond team help. The team can't do anything about it when Nash decides to ball hawk and leave someone wide open.

[Findog]

Speaking of Marion, what happened to him? He was a allstar with the Suns and now he's been reduced to role player status. His whining and complaining in Phoenix backfired.

Marion put up similar numbers with Marbury and Kidd. He's on a really good team again, so I'd say everything worked out just fine for him.

[Findog]

It goes beyond team help. The team can't do anything about it when Nash decides to ball hawk and leave someone wide open.

He wouldn't do that under Popovich.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

He wouldn't do that under Popovich.


The team's leader shouldn't need a coach to tell him to stay on his man.

[21_Blessings]

Dude, I love Kobe's game, but that's just apologia.

Claiming Kobe 'quit' in Suns series is nothing but gross hyperbole and exaggeration. Even more hilarious when you realize Kobe was the only guy on the team that showed up in game 7.

[urunobili]

2 Finals appearances > 2 MVP's

[hater]

I can't beleive ppl are comparing them careerwise.

This is like comparing Dirk to Sheed. Dirk is way, way better shooter but when you are really in the mood for a championship you pick a young Sheed over any Dirk.

same applies here. you always pick a young Kidd over any Nash.

[Findog]

The team's leader shouldn't need a coach to tell him to stay on his man.

Guys like Popovich and Phil Jackson more respect and attention than Alvin Gentry and Mike D'Antoni. It may be in Phoenix that they like him playing the passing lanes and playing safety. I'm just saying that his defensive shortcomings could be mitigated on a team like the Spurs or the 2004 Pistons.

[Findog]

This is like comparing Dirk to Sheed. Dirk is way, way better shooter but when you are really in the mood for a championship you pick a young Sheed over Dirk.



I can't fathom taking Sheed in his prime over Dirk in his prime. Sheed's a classic 2, Dirk is a 1.5

[hater]

I can't fathom taking Sheed in his prime over Dirk in his prime.

let me put it this way. Put Dirk on that Pistons team and they don't beat the Lakers. And they don't take Spurs to 7 games. And that was not even a young Sheed. Young Sheed was beast.

he was just wasted in that Portland team full of potsmokers.

[Darrin]

Kidd has been to the Finals, but you have to remember how bad the Eastern Conference was when he was dominating with the Nets. Both players couldn't beat the Spurs. Nash has won more games. He has led the league's best passer in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2009. Kidd has been more consistent, but Nash is more explosive.

I got to go with Nash.

[Findog]

let me put it this way. Put Dirk on that Pistons team and they don't beat the Lakers. And they don't take Spurs to 7 games. And that was not even a young Sheed. Young Sheed was beast.

he was just wasted in that Portland team full of potsmokers.

Dirk in his prime (which is to say this year, since he's playing the best ball of his career, even better than his MVP year) is better than Sheed in his prime. I'd take "Young Sheed" over "Young Dirk" too, for what that's worth, since Sheed was a two-way player and Dirk was not. But Dirk's defense is not a liability anymore. He is always in the right spot now, his rotations are good, he can challenge shots, he takes good fouls at the basket and he can make a play or two now and then. He should never be confused with Kevin Garnett or Ben Wallace in his prime, but the Pistons would easily cruise to the title in 2004 and smoke the Spurs the next year with this version of Dirk.

[vicphoenix13]

2 Finals appearances > 2 MVP's


Put those Finals appearances in the proper context. Kidd played in the pathetic Eastern Conference when his team reached the Finals. I am willing to bet the 8th seed in the West could have won the East during that time. If Nash had played in the East during his career, I am sure he would have gotten to the Finals. Getting to the Finals doesn't mean a thing unless you win the championship.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Guys like Popovich and Phil Jackson more respect and attention than Alvin Gentry and Mike D'Antoni. It may be in Phoenix that they like him playing the passing lanes and playing safety.


It still says something about Nash's leadership ability if he needed a coach to tell him to stay on his man.

[hater]

Dirk in his prime (which is to say this year, since he's playing the best ball of his career, even better than his MVP year) is better than Sheed in his prime. I'd take "Young Sheed" over "Young Dirk" too, for what that's worth, since Sheed was a two-way player and Dirk was not. But Dirk's defense is not a liability anymore. He is always in the right spot now, his rotations are good, he can challenge shots, he takes good fouls at the basket and he can make a play or two now and then. He should never be confused with Kevin Garnett or Ben Wallace in his prime, but the Pistons would easily cruise to the title in 2004 and smoke the Spurs the next year with this version of Dirk.

I mostly agree. I guess it just depends how you define better careerwise. To some it's probably about scoring titles, mvps, and numbers. To me it's about who was a better weapon to win a championship. And in this case it's Sheed and Kidd.

[Findog]

It still says something about Nash's leadership ability if he needed a coach to tell him to stay on his man.

You just really want to hate on Nash, don't you?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Put Dirk on that Pistons team and they don't beat the Lakers.


Spot on. Who would have locked down Slava Medvedenko if Sheed wasn't there?

[Findog]

I mostly agree. I guess it just depends how you define better careerwise. To some it's probably about scoring titles, mvps, and numbers. To me it's about who was a better weapon to win a championship. And in this case it's Sheed and Kidd.

Well, I agree that 8 years ago, Sheed was a better fit for a team trying to win a title. But at their peak, Dirk easily.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

You just really want to hate on Nash, don't you?


Not at all. This is a Kidd vs. Nash argument. The fact one was a leader on defense and one is out in his own world is relevant.

[JamStone]

I'd take Dirk in his prime over Rasheed in his prime, and I'm a Rasheed fan. But, I do agree that no version of Dirk Nowitzki would have allowed the 2004 Pistons win a title the way Rasheed did. Rasheed was just the right fit on the right team. But, in the majority of situations and on the majority of teams, I'd take Dirk over Rasheed.

[mavs>spurs2]

I'd take Dirk in his prime over Rasheed in his prime, and I'm a Rasheed fan. But, I do agree that no version of Dirk Nowitzki would have allowed the 2004 Pistons win a title the way Rasheed did. Rasheed was just the right fit on the right team. But, in the majority of situations and on the majority of teams, I'd take Dirk over Rasheed.

this

[Findog]

I'd take Dirk in his prime over Rasheed in his prime, and I'm a Rasheed fan. But, I do agree that no version of Dirk Nowitzki would have allowed the 2004 Pistons win a title the way Rasheed did. Rasheed was just the right fit on the right team. But, in the majority of situations and on the majority of teams, I'd take Dirk over Rasheed.

I agree mostly with what you say. But as for the 2004 Pistons, if you put prime Dirk on that team, they still win a title. Not the same way they did with Sheed, but they win a title with a slightly different identity. Dirk was definitely a liability on D earlier in his career, but now? He's pretty solid. The Pistons wouldn't have missed a beat defensively with him, and on offense he's a fucking matchup nightmare. You'd have Billups, Hamilton, Dirk, Prince all able to score. And Wallace to clean up shit around the rim with putbacks and tip-ins.

[Darrin]

I think the Pistons would've been a different team, and I doubt they would've contended in 2003-04, if it were a mid-season trade. The Pistons had offense from that position. They had Mehmet Okur. They had Corliss Williamson.

The Pistons were looking for a great on-ball defender in the post to take care of Jermaine O'Neal. The Pacers man-handled the Pistons before Rasheed got there. Elden Campbell was the starter the first 1/4 of the season. He couldn't defend without fouling. Okur wasn't a great defender and he was playing out of position because Ben Wallace, up to the time Rasheed got here, was the starting power forward, not center.

So it's about their style of play--what they bring to the team--not who was the better or more consistent player. Dirk has always been more consistent at dominating offensively.

[vicphoenix13]

The people who hate on Nash don't know what hurdles he had to jump over to make the NBA. He grew up in my hometown of Victoria, Canada where there is no elite basketball talent. Even after dominating in the Provincial Championships, Nash got no scholarship offers from American universities. He actually had to send out a tape to Santa Clara for them to even consider offering a scholarship. When he got to Santa Clara, there weren't a whole lot of expectations. But he led that team to two NCAA appearances and two first round upsets over Maryland and Arizona. When he got drafted into the NBA, even his own father figured he would be a scrub his whole career. Fourteen years later and Nash has surpassed what anyone thought was possible for his career.

[angelbelow]

Jason Kidd.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

The people who hate on Nash don't know what hurdles he had to jump over to make the NBA. He grew up in my hometown of Victoria, Canada where there is no elite basketball talent. Even after dominating in the Provincial Championships, Nash got no scholarship offers from American universities. He actually had to send out a tape to Santa Clara for them to even consider offering a scholarship. When he got to Santa Clara, there weren't a whole lot of expectations. But he led that team to two NCAA appearances and two first round upsets over Maryland and Arizona. When he got drafted into the NBA, even his own father figured he would be a scrub his whole career. Fourteen years later and Nash has surpassed what anyone thought was possible for his career.


The fact he's a better story than Kidd has nothing to do with who's had the better career.

[Basketballgirl25]

I mostly agree. I guess it just depends how you define better careerwise. To some it's probably about scoring titles, mvps, and numbers. To me it's about who was a better weapon to win a championship. And in this case it's Sheed and Kidd.

I agree with this

[JamStone]

I agree mostly with what you say. But as for the 2004 Pistons, if you put prime Dirk on that team, they still win a title. Not the same way they did with Sheed, but they win a title with a slightly different identity. Dirk was definitely a liability on D earlier in his career, but now? He's pretty solid. The Pistons wouldn't have missed a beat defensively with him, and on offense he's a fucking matchup nightmare. You'd have Billups, Hamilton, Dirk, Prince all able to score. And Wallace to clean up shit around the rim with putbacks and tip-ins.

Dirk being adequate on defense would not be sufficient. Rasheed came in and immediately stepped in as the main low post defender to allow Ben Wallace to play help side defender almost exclusively. That is something even a better defending Dirk could not take on. The Pistons were already good defensively, but Rasheed took them to a different level precisely because of that. Suggesting that Pistons team wouldn't miss a beat with Dirk defensively is greatly underrating what Rasheed was able to bring to that team at the defensive end. The Pistons don't beat the Indiana Pacers in the ECF with any version of Dirk replacing Rasheed.

[dirk4mvp]

Any version of Rasheed doesn't even come close to taking a team with JET and Josh Howard as his backup to the Finals either. They probably struggle to get past Memphis, if they even do.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Any version of Rasheed doesn't even come close to taking a team with JET and Josh Howard as his backup to the Finals either. They probably struggle to get past Memphis, if they even do.


I think Jamstone already implied that.

[Findog]

Dirk being adequate on defense would not be sufficient. Rasheed came in and immediately stepped in as the main low post defender to allow Ben Wallace to play help side defender almost exclusively. That is something even a better defending Dirk could not take on. The Pistons were already good defensively, but Rasheed took them to a different level precisely because of that. Suggesting that Pistons team wouldn't miss a beat with Dirk defensively is greatly underrating what Rasheed was able to bring to that team at the defensive end. The Pistons don't beat the Indiana Pacers in the ECF with any version of Dirk replacing Rasheed.

I stand by what I said in the previous post. You put 2009 Dirk on that team and they cruise to the title. The obviously have a different kind of team than the one they won a title with, but Dirk is a transcendent talent, and they were coached by Larry Brown. He could adapt to a different roster with different strengths and weaknesses. It's like the Spurs fans who argue that trading Dirk for Manu straight up in their primes wouldn't make San Antonio better, because Manu is a better complement to Duncan.

[vicphoenix13]

Unlike Jason Kidd, Steve Nash is still oblivious to the term "defense".

Unlike Steve Nash, Jason Kidd is still oblivious to the term "consistent jumpshot". There's plenty of good point guards who have trouble defensively, but there's not many who shoot 40 percent for their career.

[vicphoenix13]

The fact he's a better story than Kidd has nothing to do with who's had the better career.

Actually, many expected Kidd to have an even better career than he has had. No doubt Kidd's a hall of famer, but he has disappointed some with his poor shooting and scoring numbers.

[BRHornet45]

sons LMAO is this a joke? .... Nash HANDS DOWN.

[Chieflion]

Steve Nash had a better career, if you ignore all the controversy about the MVPs he won.

[Findog]

sons LMAO is this a joke? .... Nash HANDS DOWN.

It makes me wonder if this guy is a troll after all. His takes are Palinesque.

[Findog]

Offensive side of the ball: About even in their prime. Defensive side of the ball: Kidd wins easily.

More playoff wins: Kidd

More playoff rebounds, blocks, three pointers, assists: Kidd

13 consecutive seasons leading his team (three different franchises) to the playoffs: Kidd

More All-NBA First Team selections: Kidd

More all-NBA Defensive selections: Kidd

Nash is a great distributor but he will never catch Kidd in assists (and about 6 other categories).

Nash better shooter. Thats it.

[vicphoenix13]

Offensive side of the ball: About even in their prime. Defensive side of the ball: Kidd wins easily.

More playoff wins: Kidd

More playoff rebounds, blocks, three pointers, assists: Kidd

13 consecutive seasons leading his team (three different franchises) to the playoffs: Kidd

More All-NBA First Team selections: Kidd

More all-NBA Defensive selections: Kidd

Nash is a great distributor but he will never catch Kidd in assists (and about 6 other categories).

Nash better shooter. Thats it.

More playoff wins? That's easy to do when you play a big chunk of a career in the Eastern Conference. Nash never had the luxury of playing some pathetic teams in the playoffs.

I'd also like to add some categories

Nash is a better three point shooter

Nash is a better free throw shooter

Nash is a better jump shooter

Nash is a better scorer

Nash has a higher efficiency rating

[Findog]

More playoff wins? That's easy to do when you play a big chunk of a career in the Eastern Conference. Nash never had the luxury of playing some pathetic teams in the playoffs.

I'd also like to add some categories

Nash is a better three point shooter

Nash is a better free throw shooter

Nash is a better jump shooter

Nash is a better scorer

Nash has a higher efficiency rating

Game's played on both ends of the court. Also, Nash played on 8 straight 52+ win teams. His teams went fishing in large part because he couldn't guard Mike Bibby or Tony Parker.

[BRHornet45]

It makes me wonder if this guy is a troll after all. His takes are Palinesque.

son wake up and stop being such a homer

[Findog]

son wake up and stop being such a homer

Homer? I like both. They have both been beloved boys in blue at one point or another. Kidd had a better career.

[vicphoenix13]

Game's played on both ends of the court.


Yeah, and how many great defenders can you name in the NBA? Defense doesn't have the same value as offense because star players are going to have a bigger impact on offense than on defense. In fact, defense is a team attribute where you need five guys helping each other out. Even though Nash isn't a good defender, he has never played on a great defensive team.

As great a career as Kidd has had, it is embarrassing to have shot 40 percent for a career. Its a tribute to him that he's so good at other aspects of the game or he wouldn't be a hall of famer. Whether you like it or not, shooting and scoring are the most important skills in the NBA.

[Findog]

Yeah, and how many great defenders can you name in the NBA? Defense doesn't have the same value as offense because star players are going to have a bigger impact on offense than on defense. In fact, defense is a team attribute where you need five guys helping each other out. Even though Nash isn't a good defender, he has never played on a great defensive team.

As great a career as Kidd has had, it is embarrassing to have shot 40 percent for a career. Its a tribute to him that he's so good at other aspects of the game or he wouldn't be a hall of famer. Whether you like it or not, shooting and scoring are the most important skills in the NBA.

We can go round and round on this, but Kidd is a better all-around player, and I would take 2001-2002 Jason Kidd over 2005-07 Steve Nash. Nash was a borderline All Star in Dallas, his production dropped off under Terry Porter, and now he's back to putting up eye-popping stats under Gentry. He's only been this kind of impact player in the SSOL system. The Nets don't come anywhere near the Finals in 2001 or 2002 with Nash running the Princeton offense, but I guarantee the Suns do equally as well in 2005-07 with Kidd running SSOL.

[vicphoenix13]

Game's played on both ends of the court. Also, Nash played on 8 straight 52+ win teams. His teams went fishing in large part because he couldn't guard Mike Bibby or Tony Parker.


Okay, Bibby played better than Nash in one playoff round back in 2004. That's back when Bibby was one of the better guards in the NBA. As for Parker, the Suns didn't try to have Nash defend him very often in the playoffs. Besides, Parker played great regardless. It wasn't like Nash was the only guard that Parker played better than in the 2006 playoffs.

As for Kidd, wasn't he exposed by Chris Paul two years ago in the playoffs? Or how about what Chauncey Billups did against him last year? You Mavs fans hold Nash to a higher playoff standard than your own point guard.

[vicphoenix13]

We can go round and round on this, but Kidd is a better all-around player, and I would take 2001-2002 Jason Kidd over 2005-07 Steve Nash. Nash was a borderline All Star in Dallas, his production dropped off under Terry Porter, and now he's back to putting up eye-popping stats under Gentry. He's only been this kind of impact player in the SSOL system. The Nets don't come anywhere near the Finals in 2001 or 2002 with Nash running the Princeton offense, but I guarantee the Suns do equally as well in 2005-07 with Kidd running SSOL.

I don't think you've been watching the Suns all that closely this year. They aren't playing the same way they did under D'Antoni. This version of the Suns is more comfortable with setting up in the half court. They are now middle of the pack in fast break points. It is a complete myth that Nash can't work in a half court offense.

As for Kidd running SSOL just as well as Nash, don't be so sure of that. One of the things required in SSOL is that the point guard be an excellent shooter. If the point guard is a weak shooter like Kidd, the defense can drop off and cover the other shooters. Just look at how Mike D'Antoni has faired in New York. His SSOL system isn't working to well with the Knicks because Chris Duhon is a pathetic shooter.