- 832
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2000
why are people making a big deal out of Scottie Pippen getting votes? He WAS the point guard for the Bulls during their 6 championship seasons and initiatedthe offense. So he definitely deserved votes.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Originally Posted by solefob
why are people making a big deal out of Scottie Pippen getting votes? He WAS the point guard for the Bulls during their 6 championship seasons and initiated the offense. So he definitely deserved votes.
Originally Posted by The Game is a Foot
Originally Posted by solefob
why are people making a big deal out of Scottie Pippen getting votes? He WAS the point guard for the Bulls during their 6 championship seasons and initiated
the offense. So he definitely deserved votes.
In an offense that 1-3 featured TWO shooting guards and ONE small forward (Pippen), how "WAS" he a point guard?
Originally Posted by Do Be Doo
Originally Posted by The Game is a Foot
What's so funny? Seriously, putting the career wins and his internet stuff to the side, Marbury is one of the best point guards of all-time.
I only have a couple of beefs with this list...
1) Wasn't Big O a shooting guard??
2) If Big O makes the list, then how come Iverson doesn't?
3) Excluding the Big O, the order should have been Magic > John Stockton > Isiah Thomas> Walt Frazier> Jason Kidd = Gary Payton > Tiny Archibald > Bob Cousy
4) Point Guards that were all better than Steve Nash:
Originally Posted by PRETTYPLAYA
Do Be Doo wrote:
The Game is a Foot wrote:
Osh Kosh Bosh wrote:
Kevin Johnson, Chauncey Buillips, Tony Parker and Steve Nash
One of these has never been in an NBA Finals.
2 of them were actually MVP of an NBA Finals
One of them doesn't belong.
It isn't KJ.........
Osh Kosh Bosh wrote:
TEAMS get to NBA Finals not a player and considering the amount of backlash the award voters for making stupid votes I'm not sure how valid that argument is.
Like I said depends on the type of team I have which point guard is better
If I had a team where I had a strong infrastructure where I didn't need my point guard to control the offense, make a lot decisions or have any sort of passing vision the I would take Tony Parker.
If I had a team with a slow offense, without an elite offensive player and needed a floor general to run the offenses as efficiently to squeeze the most out of a weak offense the I would take Chauncey.
But If I have an offense thats blazing fast with million without set plays but lots of decisions that have to made on the fly, there is no one better than Steve Nash.
That's all a load of crap. And if we goin that route, then as I said, Derek Fisher > Steve Nash.
For a title contending team, I would want Derek Fisher rather then Steve Nash. Right?
I don't know if you remember this, but as sad as it sounds, it's true, when the Lakers hit rock bottom and were starting Smush Parker at PG, he playedhis best games against Steve Nash. And this was while Nash was the "MVP".......if Smush Parker is having his best games against you, and you are theMVP of the league, you should walk away from the game right now.
It's the equivalent of Luke Walton having his best games against LeBron is it not?
Nash never was, and never will be a better player then all the PG's I listed. His only burn is because he plays in such a ridiculous fast offense thatallows him to put up meaningless numbers and then when it matters in the playoffs his teams always wimper out like a bunch of @#$%^$#. Always has been thecase, always will be. The dude is overrated and to be listed in the top 10 PG's of all time is a JOKE. Of epic proportions.
A FLAT OUT JOKE.
He couldn't beat any of these guys in a game of one on one. He has ZERO postseason resume that matters, at least better then what TMac has accomplished,but not chip level. Every other PG we're talking about does, minus CP3, and that's coming eventually. Nash is a fraud and hides behind pumped upstats like a hitter at Coors field.
Originally Posted by airmaxpenny1
A lot of the hate is because he is white. Yea I said it.
airmaxpenny1 wrote:
A lot of the hate is because he is white. Yea I said it.
What color am I?
Originally Posted by CP1708
Osh Kosh Bosh wrote:
TEAMS get to NBA Finals not a player and considering the amount of backlash the award voters for making stupid votes I'm not sure how valid that argument is.
Like I said depends on the type of team I have which point guard is better
If I had a team where I had a strong infrastructure where I didn't need my point guard to control the offense, make a lot decisions or have any sort of passing vision the I would take Tony Parker.
If I had a team with a slow offense, without an elite offensive player and needed a floor general to run the offenses as efficiently to squeeze the most out of a weak offense the I would take Chauncey.
But If I have an offense thats blazing fast with million without set plays but lots of decisions that have to made on the fly, there is no one better than Steve Nash.
No Lebron?!
Couple questions.Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh
Originally Posted by CP1708
Osh Kosh Bosh wrote:
TEAMS get to NBA Finals not a player and considering the amount of backlash the award voters for making stupid votes I'm not sure how valid that argument is.
Like I said depends on the type of team I have which point guard is better
If I had a team where I had a strong infrastructure where I didn't need my point guard to control the offense, make a lot decisions or have any sort of passing vision the I would take Tony Parker.
If I had a team with a slow offense, without an elite offensive player and needed a floor general to run the offenses as efficiently to squeeze the most out of a weak offense the I would take Chauncey.
But If I have an offense thats blazing fast with million without set plays but lots of decisions that have to made on the fly, there is no one better than Steve Nash.
That's all a load of crap. And if we goin that route, then as I said, Derek Fisher > Steve Nash.
For a title contending team, I would want Derek Fisher rather then Steve Nash. Right?
I don't know if you remember this, but as sad as it sounds, it's true, when the Lakers hit rock bottom and were starting Smush Parker at PG, he played his best games against Steve Nash. And this was while Nash was the "MVP".......if Smush Parker is having his best games against you, and you are the MVP of the league, you should walk away from the game right now.
It's the equivalent of Luke Walton having his best games against LeBron is it not?
Nash never was, and never will be a better player then all the PG's I listed. His only burn is because he plays in such a ridiculous fast offense that allows him to put up meaningless numbers and then when it matters in the playoffs his teams always wimper out like a bunch of @#$%^$#. Always has been the case, always will be. The dude is overrated and to be listed in the top 10 PG's of all time is a JOKE. Of epic proportions.
A FLAT OUT JOKE.
He couldn't beat any of these guys in a game of one on one. He has ZERO postseason resume that matters, at least better then what TMac has accomplished, but not chip level. Every other PG we're talking about does, minus CP3, and that's coming eventually. Nash is a fraud and hides behind pumped up stats like a hitter at Coors field.
Oh I agree, not CP of course, but a lot of lesser informed basketball fans are influenced by that.Originally Posted by Xtapolapacetl
Originally Posted by airmaxpenny1
A lot of the hate is because he is white. Yea I said it.
As are the comments that say Stockton is better than Isiah. Yea I said it.
Originally Posted by JapanAir21
Originally Posted by Clutchshooter
stockton >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone not named magic.
it's not even close.
and he might even be better than magic too.
6) He never won a chip (I hate that argument, some of the greatest of all time never win rings), but I'd like to see how Isiah would have done against the Jordan teams that they had to play, or against the powerhouse Rockets.
And this whole Nash makes guys better is BS. Tell me, when Billups passes to Wallace down low, what stat shows any benefit for Billups? We all know that Wallace can't do anything offensively. So let's look at it this way. If I switched Billups onto the Suns run and gun squad, as they still elite? Do they make a finals? Do his stats increase? Bet they do.
His conventional stats will but his pace adjust stats will be the same, FYI Bullips stats actually dropped when he went to the fast paced nuggets,indicating he is a more efficient player in a half court system.
The slower the offense the more effective Chauncey is, he led the league in points per 100 possessions when Detroit had the 29th slowest offense in the leagueNash is the opposite the faster the offense and the more control he has over it the more efficient he becomes.
Any great players mere presence can make there teammates "better" or just give easier shots to make, for example, a *$!*%$ point guard gets Wallacethe ball at the top of the key where he has no chance in hell of scoring, but Chauncey becuase of his penetration is able to draw the defense to him and throwa lob pass too Big Ben improving big bens chances of scoring? \\
So how does the reflect in the numbers?
[h3][size=-1]
[/size] [size=-1][size=+2]Chauncey Billups (Nuggets)
[/size][/size][/h3][size=-1]Many stats are shown on a 'per 48minute' basis
[/size][table][tr][td][size=-1]Stat[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]ON Court[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]OFF Court[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Net[/size][/td] [/tr][tr][td][size=-1]Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]114.4[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]106.0[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]+8.4[/size][/td] [/tr][tr][td][size=-1]Effective FG%[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]51.6%[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]50.2%[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]+1.5%[/size][/td] [/tr][/table]
8 point improvement when Chauncey is controlling the ball, nice.nowlets compare that too MVP Nash.
[size=-1][size=+2]Steve Nash (1st MVP)[/size][/size]
Many stats are shown on a 'per 48 minute' basis
[table][tr][td][size=-1]Stat[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]ON Court[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]OFF Court[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Net[/size][/td] [/tr][tr][td][size=-1]Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]121.7[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]104.1[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]+17.6[/size][/td] [/tr][tr][td][size=-1]Effective FG%[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]55.5%[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]49.4%[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]+6.2%[/size][/td] [/tr][/table]
The Suns gain 17 POINTS on offense when Nash gets on the court.
There field goal percentage rises 6% too.
Now how about CLUTCH PLAY? These are there stats with 4th quarter or overtime with less than 4 minutes to play with less than a 5 point lead.
Nash(sdsMVP 1)
[table][tr][td][size=-1]Min[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Net Pts[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Off[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Def[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Net48[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]W[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]L[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Win%[/size][/td] [/tr][tr][td][size=-1] 82%[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]+51[/size][/td] [td][size=-1] 122.1[/size][/td] [td][size=-1] 99.2[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]22.9[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]25[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]8[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]75.8%[/size][/td] [/tr][/table]
[color= rgb(255, 255, 255)]Chauncey (05-06)[/color]
[table][tr][td][size=-1]Min[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Net Pts[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Off[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Def[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Net48[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]W[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]L[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]Win%[/size][/td] [/tr][tr][td][size=-1] 94%[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]+72[/size][/td] [td][size=-1] 108.4[/size][/td] [td][size=-1] 85.7[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]22.6[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]24[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]13[/size][/td] [td][size=-1]64.9%[/size][/td] [/tr][/table]xx
As you would expect Nash's offense is better and Chauncey defense is better but Nash has a higher winning percentage in close games.