Better Floor Manager - John Stockton or Steve Nash?

[Phillip]

This simply means, who is better at running an offense and leading a team offensively. Not who the better shooter, defender, or who had more playoff success. Just who has a better control of their offense and runs it more efficiently.

[AchillesHeel]

I think Stockton benefited from having a better coach/system and an option like Karl Malone. I'd say either pick is good, both were extremely talented and both deserved to win championships based off of how hard they had to work to be that great.

If you talk about which player you'd rather have on offense, I'd pick Nash, if you talk about the whole deal, Stockton is the obvious choice.

[Arnold Toht]

Both 0-timers. Losers. Failures.

[spurraider21]

If you are going strictly by offense, its gotta be Nash. Those Suns offenses were vicious, and Nash was doing well with them even when Stoudemire missed a season. I couldn't imagine Stockton directing that offense to the same extent with Malone sidelined. A lot of Stockton's legacy stems from his defense though.

[JamStone]

Jerry Sloan has stated that John Stockton never called the offensive sets. Stockton simply played how he was told to play and didn't deviate. Because of that, I don't think his decision-making was tested nearly as much. He was told what plays to run, where to employ the pick-and-roll, and who the play was going to (usually Malone). Nash was given much more freedom and creativity in how to run D'Antoni's system. And that also put more of the burden for success or failure of the offense on Nash's shoulders. Because of that, what Nash was able to do does seem more impressive, as it relates to just being a floor general.

[AchillesHeel]

Jerry Sloan has stated that John Stockton never called the offensive sets. Stockton simply played how he was told to play and didn't deviate. Because of that, I don't think his decision-making was tested nearly as much. He was told what plays to run, where to employ the pick-and-roll, and who the play was going to (usually Malone). Nash was given much more freedom and creativity in how to run D'Antoni's system. And that also put more of the burden for success or failure of the offense on Nash's shoulders. Because of that, what Nash was able to do does seem more impressive, as it relates to just being a floor general.

Didn't know that part about Sloan. Thanks.

[ambchang]

Really hard to say, as the two offensive philosophies are quite different.

Nash has more reigns to the Suns offense, and his free-wheeling style was more responsible for the Suns offensive system than Stockton was to the Jazz offensive system.

Stockton ran the same set plays over and over and over again to perfection, and Sloan and his coaching staff was more responsible for the design of that offensive set.

Really depends on which coach you have, with a good coach, Stockton, with a bad coach, Nash.

[Rogue]

Nash only works efficiently in run-and-gun systems while Stockton is compatible with almost any style of game that has ever existed in NBA. you always need a good PF to optimize Stockton's impact though.

[Vash StampedE]

Steve Nash, obviously. Out-MVPed the closest thing to MJ, or should I say, the the trying hard, wanna-be like Mike, with the sticking out of tounge, fadeaway jumpers, chasing of 6th ring and all.

[whitemamba]

In their primes def nash