- 10,884
- 19
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2006
Originally Posted by Stack Bundless
To easy, A.I. by a landslide
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 Stack Bundless
To easy, A.I. by a landslide
Originally Posted by CP1708
Now someone answer me what in the blue hell Nash woulda done with McKie, Hill, Deke, and Bell? What would wonderful Mr Nash do with that squad? Would he carry them to the finals?![]()
![]()
Thought not.
651akathePaul wrote:
I just wanted to throw this in the mix. I said earlier I would take AI in this debate (or lack thereof), but with people saying Nash was surrounded by great players and Iverson wasn't I think is not only a moot point, but not very well thought of.
Iverson, although it is the latter half of his career, has been surrounded by great talent, yet because of his style of play, the teams still aren't that great. Iverson was only successful with Philly because no one else could score and that played right into Iverson's strengths. He is not a passer, and if he had more talent around him he most likely wouldn't have won anyway. He may have had a great name next to him as a sidekick, but the only impact I could see would be someone who puts up decent numbers, but really has no intangible value to the team.
Allow me.
6.8
7.9
7.4
7.2
7.1
Those are the assist numbers for AI who "isn't a passer" as you put it, while Super Nash gets from 10 to 11 as a "great passer" as issaid about him. AI gets his assists with scrubs, up until Melo came into his life, Nash has played with Dirk, Stat, Marion, and in Don Nelson andD'Antoni's style of offense his whole career.
4 assists less, yet he was also averaging 30 points a game while he was gettin 7.5 assists a game. Nash tops out at around 18 or so for a career high.
But, AI "isn't a passer" like Mr Wonderful.![]()
Continue........
Originally Posted by CP1708
651akathePaul wrote:
I just wanted to throw this in the mix. I said earlier I would take AI in this debate (or lack thereof), but with people saying Nash was surrounded by great players and Iverson wasn't I think is not only a moot point, but not very well thought of.
Iverson, although it is the latter half of his career, has been surrounded by great talent, yet because of his style of play, the teams still aren't that great. Iverson was only successful with Philly because no one else could score and that played right into Iverson's strengths. He is not a passer, and if he had more talent around him he most likely wouldn't have won anyway. He may have had a great name next to him as a sidekick, but the only impact I could see would be someone who puts up decent numbers, but really has no intangible value to the team.
Originally Posted by Fede DPT
Wow. People think that Steve Nash is a legitimate HOFer? Seriously?
Originally Posted by CP1708
651akathePaul wrote:
I just wanted to throw this in the mix. I said earlier I would take AI in this debate (or lack thereof), but with people saying Nash was surrounded by great players and Iverson wasn't I think is not only a moot point, but not very well thought of.
Iverson, although it is the latter half of his career, has been surrounded by great talent, yet because of his style of play, the teams still aren't that great. Iverson was only successful with Philly because no one else could score and that played right into Iverson's strengths. He is not a passer, and if he had more talent around him he most likely wouldn't have won anyway. He may have had a great name next to him as a sidekick, but the only impact I could see would be someone who puts up decent numbers, but really has no intangible value to the team.
When has AI not been effective on offense before this season??... Every season up til this season he's top 5 iun scoring every year...if thatsnot being effective i dont know what is...and please don't say it's because he was shooting so much every year bla bla bla because you have to be agreat scorer to get 20+ shots a game...Last year with the Nuggets he averaged 27 pgg on 46% shooting (thats w/o the advantage of dunks like kobe, lebron,etc..)..and he was getting close to 8 assists...and check the Nuggets players shooting %'s from last year...almost all of them are worse this season...thatNuggets team last year was bad at times because of their horrible D...not because their offense wasn't effective with AIOriginally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh
No way un getting that bumped off the page
My Final Argument
The thing that separates Nash and AI from players like Kobe, Duncan, and Nowitski. Is that for them to be effective they have to be in a specific kind of offense and that takes advantage of their own specialized skill sets. In the end I think AI's peek years you could say were statistically better but Nash's added value to the other players on the suns made the gap much closer. In the end due to consistency I think that AI had a better career but to say who was better I think it gets a little more complicated.
For AI to be effective he needs to be the only offensive threat on the team, having other good offensive players doesn't really help an AI centric team because their simply isn't enough shots to go around and they will regress and atrophy. Under Larry Brown, the entire offense is centred around getting AI in open space weather it be through screens or steals. While it's true tthe sixers were not very good and their offense would have been so much better if they had shooters. Aaron McKee was the only really good three point shooter and if they had more it would have given him far more room to operate. The one argument I disagree with is that we should give Allen Iverson credit for making it through one of the weakest eastern conferences in history. Him "carrying" the sixers to the championship had more to do with the quality of his competition that the force of his will. Also I find it annoying that people criticize Eric Snow when he was a necessary evil. People forget how much of a beast Snow was on D. Dude did not play and without him Iverson has no one to run the offense and guard the other teams 2's.
Nash is the same way for him to be really effective you have to give him the keys to the car. Dantoni is a philosophy Nash is the "system" he was the first coach to really let Nash create and make every decision on the fly. They just ran a thousand cuts, screens, and picks and Nash picked where he wanted to drop the ball and how. It was like Nash wrote the music and Dantoni (the conductor) told them what tempo they would play it in. In my opinion I don't think Dallas ever trusted him with that, I will defer to Nowitness because he probably watched them more but because of his status of kid Canada we get allot of his games and though I can't find games of his on youtube I feel pretty confident in my recollection of that Dallas offense. All of you should read the article on 82games.com on Nash's assisting http://www.82games.com/feeders.htmhttp://www.82games.com/feeders.htm or http://www.82games.com/pelton15.htmhttp://www.82games.com/pelton15.htm It shows you that Marion, Staudomire were very dependent on him getting them the ball. And the more and more I think about can anybody think of a got to offensive move that Amare has other than receiving a pass after rolling to the basket? If you isolated Amare gets an average NBA defender do you have that much faith he is going to score? I've gone back and watched some of Amare's best games and he is getting spoon fed the whole time.
Conclusion
Do you honestly believe that if you put AI on any of those Dallas or Phoenix teams they are better? No way, they would have to restructure their entire system around getting AI as many shots as possible making just about 25% of their skill set. And you would have to find some one who can play point guard and guard 2's as well. Viceverca? Same thing you have completely strip down your offense and give Nash full control and no matter how much more they produce under Nash was that worth it when you can have Iverson take those extra shots that Eric Snow is getting.
Finally I believe players like Duncan, Kobe, and Nowitski would be effective no matter would situation you are in, but we are quickly finding out that for AI and Nash to be effective they have to be in very specialized situations for it to fit them to produce hall of fame numbers.
Originally Posted by clkru
Nash... he's accomplished more individually with the 2 MVPs.