Reply With Quote
Please tell me this means you won't care about the Suns in a few years when Nash is gone! Pretty please!
son, speaking like a true fan
so if your team suck, you don't follow them?
Please tell me this means you won't care about the Suns in a few years when Nash is gone! Pretty please!
Show me where I said that. Nash isn't the reason the Suns are no longer a contender, but the culture Nash brings as the leader has EVERYTHING to do with why they aren't a good defensive team.
Whatever Nash's deficiencies are, theyre small in comparison to Stoudemire's. And where as Nash just doesnt have the foot speed, Amare's stem from laziness and a lack of discipline.
Youre hating the wrong guy, IMO, DoK.
The only reason I don't talk about Amare is we all agree on his defense. Talking about how bad his defense is is like talking about how blue the sky is, there's really nothing to talk about, it's just something we've acknowledged, it's an opinion that is almost fact because of how consensus it is.
Nash is never going to be a 1st all NBA defender, or 2nd NBA defender for that matter. My problem is the amount of roaming he does going for steals and trying to draw charges. He makes so many gambles on D that sometimes force a turnover but most of the time result in an easy shot or a teammate left out of position. It's not a popular opinion, but it's my opinion that if he merely guarded his man to the best of his ability and stopped making "act now, think later" gambles on D, his teammates would be able to focus more on their man and worry less about helping on the guy Nash is supposed to be guarding. I've seen Nash play very disciplined defense when he didn't shut his guy down but made his man work for everything, and when he's doing that, it seems like Richardson and Amare look a lot more comfortable and do less dumb things on D.
It's weird to constantly bag on Nash for his limitations on D, and never deign to criticize Amare, whose faults are laziness and lack of discipline, like DSF says. Nash's sins on D, such as gambling for steals and hawking the passing lanes, pale in comparison to Amare just not giving a .
Doesn't mean it's OK. The difference is Nash is supposed to a be a veteran, high Bball IQ leader who knows better than taking those types of gambles on defense. When the player who all the players look up to as the leader, captain, and player they should model themselves after does things like that, what impact is it going to have on the team?
So you're giving Amare a pass because he's dumb? Amare has been in the league long enough to know what his weaknesses are and where he needs to improve. He is the classic "DOESNT GET IT" kind of guy. I'm so glad he's not a Mav, because he would be infuriating to watch with his kind of potential. Nash's sins, on the other hand, are pretty minor when you consider what he gives your team.
hi
Alright, that 2007 Spurs team would beat the 2009 Lakers. If you're going to call that team weak 21_Blessings then you better not look back at your run to the 2009 Championship playing teams that were injured and beat up. That 2007 Suns team might have beaten the 2009 Lakers too. That Suns team was very good.
Last edited by Ice009; 01-08-2010 at 12:58 AM.
Even if he gambles too much on D, at least hes TRYING. Maybe you disagree with his tactics, but Amare is all talk and no bite. Im so sick of him not boxing out, not covering his man cuz he's barking at the ref for not calling a foul on the other end etc.
Im to the point where Im about to say "good riddance" if he leaves. He's not a max contract player and I dont want to have to watch him for the next 5 years.
Why does critizing Nash's D automatically mean I'm excusing Amare? Is there no possibility I could be pissed at both of them?
He gave you guys a trip to the finals by leaving and giving your team the ability to get better defensively. It's pretty ironic whenever you tell me to appreciate Nash when the best thing Nash ever did for Dallas was leave.
Because you probably criticize Nash 100 X more than you do Amare.
Notice how every single Suns fan on this site (or the few that are left anyway) other than me talks about how bad Amare's defense is and rip him for it, yet all of them get extremely defensive when Nash's defense gets brought up? We all know Amare sucks at defense, there's no point in repeating something everyone agrees on. I talk about Nash's defense because people seem incapable of realizing no team with Steve Nash will ever be a good defensive team. If every other Suns fan thought Nash's D was as big a problem as I thought, I wouldn't talk about it. Idk if you remember when I first came to ST around a year ago but I and moaned constantly about Amare's D when people made excuses for him and said he's only bad at D because of Shaq. Since then, Shaq got traded and the AZ media needed a new scapegoat to pin the Suns' bad defense on giving Nash a skirt to hide behind. That scapegoat happened to be Amare, there's no need for me to talk about his bad D when everyone seems to think the Suns would be a defensive powerhouse with anyone other than Amare.
Why is it your opinion of Nash has changed so much since these quotes from a few years ago:
Sorry, but Nash has received a ton of criticism for poor defense on this site. And when has Nash ever tried to hid the fact that he isn't good defensively? He has often mentioned that he isn't known for defense. I don't think you understand that defense isn't just effort. Its a team skill which requires quickness, speed and anticipation by the five players on the floor. While you pile on Nash, it has been very clear the last six seasons that the Suns never had enough good team defenders. One defensive area where you can't blame Nash is rebounding. Year after year the Suns are brutal at getting rebounds which means the frontline isn't good enough.
Agree on this. If there should be any championship team that should have an asterisk, it should be the 2009 Lakers. I really think that the 2007 Suns team had what it takes to take down the Spurs during that year.
mother ing cosigned
I don't see an contradiction there. He's a great player. He didn't deserve his MVP awards, the Mavs got better on defense, but it's not as if you can't win a le with Nash as your PG. You need a strong defensive big man behind him, and the Mavs didn't have the salary slot to get both Dampier and resign Nash. It was one or the other. I would've preferred Dampier at a much cheaper price so we could've had both. Or Nash if the Suns hadn't given him the contract that he did.
Suns probably would have had a trip to the finals if Amare and Diaw stayed on the bench and the suns coaching staff didn't have their heads up their asses being aware of the situation and do their job.
I don't see how criticizing Nash's defense has anything to do with the perceived lack of criticism of Amare's laziness and stupidity.
Nash gets more bashing because he's been so highly regarded, has two MVPs, consistently mentioned among the best point guards in the league since re-joining the Suns, gets all-NBA honors. His defense gets mentioned because he's constantly honored and praised as a player.
With Amare, pretty much everyone agrees he's a lazy, no defense playing, waste of talent. No one puts him above Duncan. No reasonable person would put him above KG (prior to the last few seasons with KG's decline) or Dirk. It's pretty much consensus that he's a notch below. He's not in the middle of League MVP discussions.
There's a reason why Nash gets bashed more so than Amare, by Suns fans or whoever. It's because there have been plenty of people, fans, analysts that will praise Nash while simply ignoring or neglecting his deficiencies on defense. While Amare generally won't get praise without mention of his laziness or stupidity.
You're arguing against things I've never said. When you actually want to create a counterpoint for something I said, let me know.
PS - Which Suns fan on this site, other than me, has ever criticized Nash's defense?
It's a catch 22. If you have a strong defensive big man behind Nash clogging the paint, Nash's defense isn't as big a problem, but his offense suddenly gets compromised a ton because having a real center on the floor completely kills his production.
It doesn't. Since Nash is white and does save the planet commercials (even though he doesn't give a cent of his money to charity) while Amare is black and doesn't make a huge effort to give off a good image, you need to say at least ten negative things about Amare before you can say one negative thing about Nash.
Here's the thing though: Nash's problems are physical limitations. And say whatever you want about his team defense...he's trying to help his team. It may not be the best way to spend his time on that end of the floor, but he's trying. With Amare, he deserves to be criticized repeatedly because the only thing holding him back is his laziness and bb IQ. I think you can criticize lack of effort, with Nash the only thing you can criticize is his physical limitations and how he plays teams defense.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions