Reply With Quote
He's a terrible defender. Bottom tier worst in the league at his position bad. It wouldn't matter what era Steve Nash played in. His defense is horrendous.
No you didn't. Just look at the words your posting.
He wasn't a defensive liability in the late 80s. Maybe you're confusing him with the 95 version. Proof enough you never watched those Lakers teams.
Late 80s was his prime.
No he wasn't. I already explained this to you. A player that can defend every position on the court and gets you 2 steals a game is not a defensive liability. You would be a re to think otherwise.
What does Nash do on defense besides get beat and flop? Exactly. Next time don't directly compare Magic to Nash you stupid ing . Implying that Magic had to be hidden is funny enough.
He's a terrible defender. Bottom tier worst in the league at his position bad. It wouldn't matter what era Steve Nash played in. His defense is horrendous.
You might want to time this rinse repeat post better from here on out, it's probably not smart to give a "Nash's defense is criticized more than it should be" sermon right after Aaron Brooks drops a career high scoring night on him.
I've been watching basketball longer than you have.
No, he was already showing signs of slippage because of teh AIDS. He had trouble keeping quick guards in front of him.Late 80s was his prime.
No he wasn't. I already explained this to you. A player that can defend every position on the court and gets you 2 steals a game is not a defensive liability. You would be a re to think otherwise.
You're a re if you think he played the same level of defense from 88-90 that he did earlier in his career. The Lakers won 5 les with him and he's one of the ten best players of all time, so you don't have to get your Victoria's Secret undercarriage tied up in knots when somebody suggests he was less than perfect.
What does Nash have to do with Magic?What does Nash do on defense besides get beat and flop? Exactly.
Nobody in this thread did any such thing, dumpster. If you can't grasp the point I was trying to make about how strong defensive frontlines can mask inadequate perimeter defense, then it's not my problem your presence here is a waste of bandwidth.Next time don't directly compare Magic to Nash you stupid ing
No you haven't. You continually prove that you know about basketball. For an example see below.
Slippage? Are you re ed? He won back to back MVPs in the late 80s you moronic creature. Like I said, he couldn't keep Isiah in front of him but no one else in the league could either. Including Michael Cooper and MJ.
So now you're backtracking and resort to strawmans. The Findog way! Makes sense given your post count. Magic was an elite team defender and above average overall defender in the late 80s. The fact the Lakers could switch on almost any pick roll due to Magic's defensive versatility is evidence of alone that he wasn't a liablity. You never watched Showtime. Only read about it on the Sports Guy's blog.
This is about you saying stupid like Magic was a liability on defense during his prime and that Nash could be hidden just like him! Haha. Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to Magic Johnson.
You brought it up first.
I grasped your point just fine. But your point did not make any sense whatsoever after you brought up Magic. You didn't have to mask Magic's defense because it was versatile. You can't mask Nash's defense when it sucks on every possible level.
If you actually watched Showtime you would have known Kareem in his late 30's was a bigger problem on D than Magic ever was. Which again, makes your point about Magic in the late 80s rather dumb. Maybe you're trying to sound edgy talking about the old school. But you obviously were just parroting some other dumb shmuck's opinion because you know jack about Magic Johnson late 80s Lakers.
I'll take that as a compliment coming from you, considering all of your takes are purple and gold tery.
That doesn't mean he was the best on the ball defender at his position. Steve Nash won an MVP award despite being a much worse defender. I remember Kevin Johnson carving him up in 1990 when the Lakers were sent home early.Slippage? Are you re ed? He won back to back MVPs in the late 80s you moronic creature.
No, just spoon feeding it extra slow in the hopes that maybe you can understand.So now you're backtracking and resort to strawmans. The Findog way!
Watched just about every minute of the 88 Conference Finals. Shows what you know, which is...not much.You never watched Showtime.
Never said that. Said Nash never had a defensive frontline that could cover for him like Magic had when he had trouble keeping guys in front of him.This is about you saying stupid like Magic was a liability on defense during his prime and that Nash could be hidden just like him
And you have no idea how to process words into something forming coherent reading comprehension. If we don't slob purple and gold knob nonstop, we're idiots that don't know anything about basketball.Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to Magic Johnson.
I never claimed he was the best on ball defender at his position. But he was 10 times more effective than Nash defensively and was by no means a liability. Kevin Johnson carved up Gary Payton too. So I'm not sure how that point makes your argument less re ed.
You're spoon feeding us re ed takes about you know nothing about it.
Says the basketball re that called prime Magic a defensive liability in the same vain as Steve Nash. And that Magic's D was masked by a 40 year old Kareem. Jesus Christ are you dumb.
He had Kurt Thomas and Marion a couple years ago. Both good defensive players. Why are you acting like Kareem pushing 40 was a defensive force? Thomas D was as good as AC Green's. Marion was a better defender than Worthy. Amare's d sucks but he could give as many blocks as old Kareem and show on pick/rolls quicker.
You said something completely re ed and untrue. You should be prepared to be called on it for your ignorance. Stop acting like you know anything about Magic Johnson or those Lakers teams when you obviously don't.
I'm not sure how claiming Kevin Johnson in his prime in the early nineties carving up a young Gary Payton helps yours.
It's vein. And if you could read and not lazily resort to strawmen, we wouldn't be having this conversation.Says the basketball re that called prime Magic a defensive liability in the same vain as Steve Nash
Translation: "I won't respond to the points you make, but the points I wish you had made so I can knock them out of the park."And that Magic's D was masked by a 40 year old Kareem. Jesus Christ are you dumb.
So the Lakers didn't have Mychal Thompson, AC Green, Elden Campbell and Sam Perkins behind Magic after they won their last Showtime le in 88?
And the 2007 Suns came pretty close to winning a le that season, since they would've beaten Utah and Cleveland. That was the best battle they ever gave the Spurs. Which pretty much helps my argument. The Suns were 12th in defensive efficiency that year, meaning they were better than average, and Nash didn't contribute to that. The one time in his career where he actually had good defensive players behind him in the frontcourt, they came pretty close to winning a championship. Funny you would bring that up, since it helps my thesis.He had Kurt Thomas and Marion a couple years ago. Both good defensive players.
Why don't you go and find the post where I said that he was? You're pathetic.Why are you acting like Kareem pushing 40 was a defensive force?
Stop reacting like a when we don't toss Purple and Gold salad.Stop acting like you know anything about Magic Johnson or those Lakers teams when you obviously don't.
Because you're dense. KJ carved up everybody.
You haven't made any credible basketball related points. You made an inaccurate claim with zero supporting evidence.
Strawman.
They were 13th in defensive rating which is fairly average and pretty bad for a contending team. 2nd round exit is not 'close to winning championship'. The Spurs were the better team had superior defense and a much better superstar.
I'm not reacting. I'm just laughing about how little knowledge you have regarding this subject. Your entire claim is laughable to begin with and have not provided a credible basketball related point to back it up.
lmfao how is all those good defensive players backing magic "strawman?" do you even know what that is?
"haven't provided a credible basketball related point to back it up"
are you serious? he's owned your ass up and down dude! this is enjoyable
He hasn't provided any proof at all on his claim that Magic was a liability in the late 80's. That most definitely was a strawman as I was referring to Findog's re ed, "Magic was a liability in 8
Comes down to this. You could surround Nash with the best defenders in the league and his defense will still be completely terrible and will hurt the team badly on other end. You may get by on talent but you still have a glaring weakness.
If Magic ran into a bad matchup for him get by using his length o rhe could switch or take a bigger guy and do a very good job on him. He was part of the reason those Lakers defenses were as good as they were late in his career. With Nash, the other team has a mismatch regardless. You play zone and hope for the best.
Thirteen out of 30 is slightly better than average. Considering SSOL was about forcing teams to match them in terms of offensive efficiency, it was more than sufficient most of the time. The Spurs-Suns second round series decided a le, it was the stiffest test San Antonio got, and who knows what would've happened if Amare and Diaw hadn't been stupid enough to leave the bench. The Suns would've gone on to beat Utah and Cleveland. I'd say Phoenix came closer to winning a le that year than Cleveland did.They were 13th in defensive rating which is fairly average and pretty bad for a contending team. 2nd round exit is not 'close to winning championship'. The Spurs were the better team had superior defense and a much better superstar.
It had nothing to do with what I was talking about. Findog said Magic was a D liability on the Showtime championship teams. I was referring to those two
Learn how to read.
Still hasn't.
Look at this pathetic cheerleader.are you serious? he's owned your ass up and down dude! this is enjoyable
Funny how everytime you argue you contradict something you've said in the past:
Magic wasn't terrible defensively but was very average during the time period Findog is referring to IMHO. He looked like he had lost a step. Great players can continue to be great offensively even after losing a step because of basketball IQ. (See Kobe Bryant)
13th is ing terrible for a contender. They didn't win a le because of their defense.
Doesn't work that way. The Suns D was bad and could have been easily exploited by a Lebron or Dwill in a playoff environment. Lebron all over the Pistons and they were 7th in D rating that year. les are not won in the 2nd round.
But I guess you're using Ghazi logic. Where if A didn't happen, B would totally happen the exact way I want it to happen!
I don't disagree with the premise that Nash needs to be masked defensively. But he's going to need alot more help on than that is usual. Likening to him Magic's situation just never made any sense.
Which one is it?
People actually read anything that 21 Blessings writes anymore?
Exactly. All I ever said was that Nash rarely if ever had good defensive bigs behind him to cover his weaknesses, and if he had, we'd hear much less about his "defense." If Magic had played in front of porous front lines, you'd hear more about how less than stellar his defense was during the time period. Also, scoring was way up in the eighties. Most teams routinely broke 100 every night. Defenses weren't nearly as sophisticated and it mainly came down to which team shot better.
Bottom one is me trolling Spurs fan.
Magic was a very versatile defender. He was closer to present day Lamar Odom towards the end of his career than he was Nash. Thing about Magic is what he lacked in quickness he made it for with his length on D. Nash has nothing to give you on that end other than a well timed flop.
Comparing Nash and Magic in that sense doesn't really work. Not if you actually sat down watched Magic play.
"Pay me no heed because at any one time my sincerity cannot be determined."
His point totally sailed right over your head. No one is saying that Nash = Magic defensively. He just was a very average defender during the timeperiod Fin referenced, not a Scottie Pippen clone.
They're not being compared, genius. It's more of a general comment about how the relationship between perimeter and frontcourt defense affects our perceptions of certain players. If Nash played in front of Dwight Howard or Tim Duncan in his prime, we'd hear much less about his lack of d, because it wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue. Find anybody here who posted that Magic's D, even in the time period of 88-90, was as bad as Nash. You can't, because you want to argue against an easier strawman. There are no bumpers in this bowling alley, fella.
My point totally sailed right over your head. I understood what Findog was saying. But by inserting Magic into the argument is where it does not add up.
Magic was a way above average team defender and contributed to the Lakers success on that end. He wasn't without flaws but his strengths overshadowed them as he could put them to use elsewhere on the court. Nash is not an average defender. He's completely and utterly worthless on that end.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions