Reply With Quote
He made it to the finals, Nash never did.
You seriously have Dave ing DeBusschere rated ahead of Dirk?
He made it to the finals, Nash never did.
And still losing the game.
Tough as nails players don't let Devin Harris drop 47 point career highs, or let Rajon Rondo drop 31 point career highs, or be one of only two players to let Aaron Brooks drop 30+ points.
Most importantly, tough as nails players don't whine about how they want to have more fun and not care as much about winning.
Last edited by DUNCANownsKOBE2; 09-18-2009 at 12:14 PM.
Nash's legacy?
Back-2-Back MVPs:
Bill Russell
Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Moses Malone
Larry Bird
Magic Johnson
Michael Jordan
Tim Duncan
Steve Nash
...It's like out of a page from a cheap 'Where's Waldo' book.
Outside of 2005-2007, Nash has done jack . This isn't the "who was better from 2005-2007" contest, this is who has had the better overall career.
No , Sherlock. And Dirk's career will be defined by his choke jobs in 2006 and 2007 where Nash will be defined by back to back MVPs and being one of the greatest PGs of all time (although a horrible defender).
btw - Outside of 2005-2007, Dirk hasnt done jack either.
Besides, legacy is based off popularity, anyway. And Nash is immensely more popular than Dirk. Most people dont even know who Dirk is.
You seriously need to grow up. Youre one of the most immature posters Ive ever encountered.
Nash said he cares more about "having fun" than "winning"?
REALLY? Show me the quote where he said that, jackass.
Or shut the up. You takes quotes out of contexts, then change them completely. Youre like one of these old folks at the town hall meetings. You dont have the faintest clue what you are talking about. Nash was talking about the malaise of the Suns (WHO WERENT WINNING YOU ING IDIOT) during some very dark days during Terry Porter's short yet way too long tenure as coach. He said they werent having very much fun. YOU spin that into "Nash would rather have fun than win" because youre a ing clueless kid who isnt smart enough to even understand a simple sports article.
You dont read much, do you? I cant imagine you following the plot of even a basic Grisham novel.
No, I don't think people say Dirk is a top 10 PG of all-time. He absolutely is one of the 10 best at the PF position, though. Nash is basically as good as Mark Price was. Price would've put up some eye-popping stats in SSOL too.
Ten years from now nobody will care about either player.Ten years from now what will people remember?
He'll be remembered as the greatest foreign player of all-time (Hakeem is a US citizen). Payton and Kemp's legacy isn't losing to the Nuggets, and Dirk's legacy won't be losing to the Warriors.Dirk will always be remembered as a good shooting PF who choked against lesser teams.
Dirk is a better franchise player than Nash. The Mavs knew it and they let Nash walk. Nash can only be that guy in D'Antoni's system, and those teams were fatally flawed when it came to winning a le.
Dirk took his teams further than Nash did, and the Mavs didn't have as much talent around him as Nash did in Phoenix.
This isn't a popularity contest. This is about who is better in their prime and who had the better career. Dirk on both counts.
Besides, legacy is based off popularity, anyway. And Nash is immensely more popular than Dirk. Most people dont even know who Dirk is
1) Steve Nash from 2005-2007 was far superior than Dirk at any point of his career.
2) Judging a player's "career" is completely subjective unless you add in some parameters. MVP awards, All Star Appearances, Championships etc. You are basing your opinion that Dirk had a better career on the fact that he made it to the finals and lost and Nash never made it that far. Well Chauncey Billups made it to the finals and won. Did he have a better career than Dirk?
3) Legacy is very much associated with popularity. A couple of years ago I was reading an article where they considered if Michael Jordan had surpassed Babe Ruth as the most iconic sports figure of all time. As a test, they used a google search trick to find all web articles that listed someone as "The Babe Ruth of ...." versus "The Michael Jordan of ...".
When we compare Nash to Nowitzki using the same test, its not even close:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c...2&start=0&sa=N
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c...&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
Not only is Steve Nash much more popular, he's more popular for posetive reasons. Look at the first page of references to "The Dirk Nowitzki of" and you'll find references such as this:
Where as Nash references are almost always positive. Thus, I believe Nash will have a much more positive and lasting legacy as a basketball player and compe or.in the last couple shows, he's made mistakes–the pressure seems to be mounting and he seems to be showing some cracks–is he the Dirk Nowitzki of cooks?
You may be right about Nowitski, Fin, but, Nash will always have a place in the annals of NBA. He doesn't deserve it, and I can't even account for it, but, it's real and it ain't goin' away. He's juiced in, and even more acute:::he knows it.
I guess he's the right white man at the right time.
Even that claim doesn't hold water, da. He's incited to mutiny an entire team, he's quit a couple times in the playoffs. He enjoys a coating of Teflon. He ain't it, Media does not wish to cast him down, at least not to this point.
Get real, homer. He put up fancy stats in a gimmick offense. He was a great player from 2005-2007, but Dirk was as well. SSOL was never going to win a le, and it's no surprise that Nash reverted last year to a borderline All Star caliber player, just like he was in Dallas. I wouldn't at all be surprised if Nash returns to something close to his 2005-07 performance now that Gentry has reinstalled SSOL.
Jason Kapono has a ring and Dirk doesn't. That doesn't mean Kapono is a better player than Dirk. Dirk took less talented teams further than Nash did. Those Phoenix teams were tailor-made for Nash's skill-set and they had only one impressive series win in all that time (Dallas in 2005). Nash never could play defense, Dirk worked himself into less of a liability at that end. The Mavs ironically enough faced this decision themselves in 2004 and they chose Dirk. The results speak for themselves and they made the right call.2) Judging a player's "career" is completely subjective unless you add in some parameters. MVP awards, All Star Appearances, Championships etc. You are basing your opinion that Dirk had a better career on the fact that he made it to the finals and lost and Nash never made it that far. Well Chauncey Billups made it to the finals and won. Did he have a better career than Dirk?
This thread is about who was a better player in their prime and who had the better career. That's Dirk on both counts. Dirk will be remembered as the greatest foreign-born player of all-time, Nash will be remembered as one of the better point guards to ever play the game. They will both make the Hall of Fame. 30 out of 30 GMs and 29 out of 30 coaches would take Dirk. Only D'Antoni would take Nash. I can't even imagine the stats Dirk would put up playing for D'Antoni.Not only is Steve Nash much more popular, he's more popular for posetive reasons. Look at the first page of references to "The Dirk Nowitzki of" and you'll find references such as this:
Findog, if you wonder why I hate Nash, it's got a lot to do with re ed Nash fans like DSF.
Birdman Anderson is more popular than Kobe Bryant
Birdman's legacy > Kobe's legacy
At least to Birdy's cocaine supplier.
tee, hee.
Nash made the comments about having fun when the Suns were 11-5.
As a Spurs fan Nash ALWAYS scared the out of me in Dallas or Phoenix. Dirk? If he had Manu's cajones he would have been a winner. This team let Nash go and brought in Kidd for more money---losers make losers decisions.
Right, cause Nash has had so much success against the Spurs over the years.
Last edited by DUNCANownsKOBE2; 09-18-2009 at 08:42 PM.
Well considering Nash hasn't won a series against the Spurs and Dirk has won the last two, I don't see how that makes any sense.
Hmm...no Steve Nash team has ever beaten the Spurs in the playoffs, whereas Dirk sent the Spurs fishing twice. Nash scares the out of you but Dirk doesn't? Are you ing re ed?
I admit, we might've just gotten trolled.
It doesn't.
Before 2004, the Suns were 3-3 in their last 6 playoff matchups with the Spurs. Since signing Nash, they've been 0-3.
Before 2004, the Mavs were 0-2 against the Spurs since their franchise was created. Since Nash left Dallas, they've been 2-0 against the Spurs.
Any Spurs fan "afraid" of Steve Nash is re ed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
