Decade’s Top 10 NBA Players
The names that claimed an unnamed decade.
Putting it to a democratic vote a la this summer’s SLAMonline Top 50, the order was delivered and the dix were down. Sorry to Melo and Truth, but these cats were the best in show. The final tally proved it wasn’t even close.
Try guessing the Decade’s Top 10 without reading on. You can do that. But putting their accomplishments into words? Good luck.
Here’s our best shot at it….
No. 10: Jason Kidd
by Brad Graham
Understanding why Jason Kidd is one of the decade’s best is easy, especially because his recipe for success is straight out of a Rachael Ray cookbook… you take Hobble’s vision; a master chess player’s decision making; Jedi Knight anticipation; UPS’ delivery system; a drug dealer’s push; Mos Def’s tempo and Bernie Madoff’s thievery. Mix it together, let it cook under the Californian sun and serve it once every generation.
The superlatives rightfully spew out whenever Kidd’s discussed in reference to this decade because the consummate point guard’s dime dropping play is as effective as Kobe Bryant’s scoring, Ray Allen’s jumper, LeBron James’ drive, Dwight Howard’s glass cleaning, well, you get the picture, and have ever since Kidd playmaking prowess was unleashed.
Speaking of making plays like Santa does toys, it was during the ‘08-09 season that Kidd became the fourth player in NBA history to reach the magical 10,000 assist milestone. That mark meant he’s now the only player in NBA history with 15,000 points, 10,000 assists and 7,000 rebounds. Not bad for a player who can’t shoot a basketball.
Equally important, on April 5 ‘08, in a game that saw Kidd hand out a season high 20 assists against, of all teams, the Phoenix Suns (more on them in a minute), he dished out his 10,142 career dime. This helped him surpass Magic Johnson for third on the all time NBA assist list. Of course his placement didn’t last long as Kidd leap frogged Mark Jackson early in the 2009/10 season for 2nd place on the assist list.
Remaining an immeasurable asset, J-Kidd joins Sam Cassell, Ben Wallace and Tim Duncan and as the most under appreciated talents of the decade. Don’t feel too bad for him though, Kidd did collect a staggering $135,822,835 worth of NBA Owner’s dollars this decade to make up for his troubles. So when it’s reported that he averages a triple double once every 10 games or so, just know he’s getting paid for a reason. Don’t worry, it doesn’t help me sleep any better either.
The comparisons to Tim Duncan also extend beyond locker room value as the PG finds himself locked into a similar battle (think Duncan vs. Kevin Garnett) with fellow virtuoso Steve Nash for the title of decade defining playmaker. A battle he’s handed over to Chris Paul and Deron Williams. However, unlike the Spurs’ superstar, Kidd found himself traded (twice) this decade.
In ’01, following charges for spousal abuse (in which he missed 15 games) Kidd was shopped after the Suns suffered another first round playoff exit (this time by the Sacramento Kings). Along with Chris Dudley, Kidd was sent to the New Jersey Nets for Stephon Marbury, Johnny Newman and Soumaila Samake.
Note: This trade would later allow the Suns to land Amar’e Stoudemire via the ’02 Draft, thanks in large to Marbury’s inability to play at Kidd’s level. To say the Jason Kidd for Stephon Marbury deal didn’t work out remains a gross understatement. As a result, the Phoenix Suns missed the playoffs for the first time since ’88, wining just 36 games. Marbury dropped 20.4 ppg but the Suns clearly missed Kidd who instantly turned his Nets from losers to Eastern Conference Champions.
Kidd’s well documented culture changing arrival in Jersey not only had all 176 Nets fans wanting to be seen out at East Rutherford, it had him receiving legit MVP votes. Much like Kevin Garnett’s impression with the ‘07-08 Boston Celtics, Kidd was the League’s real MVP in ‘01-02 but was denied the honor (he finished second in voting to Duncan) because stats and fashion dictated that point guards don’t receive the Maurice Podoloff trophy. That was the thinking at the time.
In fact it was way back in ‘03 (before Nash become a dual MVP and everyone’s second favorite player) that Jason Kidd’s popularity hit the ceiling. The seminal guard not only graced the cover of EA Sports famed NBA Live series, he once again led his New Jersey Nets out of the fog that is the Eastern Conference to their second consecutive Finals appearance, either making him one of the greatest losers of the decade (like Karl Malone in the ‘90s) or a rare generational talent who continually overachieved and carried a mediocre roster / franchise (or both).
It was here in New Jersey that proof of Kidd’s worth became apparent. In a seemingly pedestrian 120-114 overtime regular season win over the Washington Wizards (in which he collected his 86th triple double) Kidd helped himself and former team mate Vince Carter chalk up another appearance in the NBA record books. The duo became the first team mates since Michael Jordan (41 points, 11 assists and 10 rebounds) and Scottie Pippen (15 points, 12 assists and 10 boards) to notched T-D’s in the same game and this was back when Tim Burton’s Batman was tops at the box office.
Vinsanity collected 46 points, added 16 rebounds (becoming only the fourth player in NBA history to record a triple double with at least 46 points / 16 boards, joining Wilt Chamberlain, Elgin Baylor and Alvin Adams) and yes, he even somehow managed to hand out 10 assists. Of course, who set up the majority of VC’s points… you guessed it, Kidd. He nabbed a then career high 16 boards, equaled his ’07 season high with 18 assists and slipped in 10 points (thanks to late free throw). Point to all this? Kidd would tell reporters that “I wish I could have a triple-double like Vince.” Guess he’ll just have to settle for being the active leader. Oh well. Let the record show that LeBron James is second among active players, a mere 80 plus triple doubles behind Kidd.
Following his impressive stint in Jersey, Kidd would later be reunited with his first NBA franchise, the Dallas Mavericks in early ‘08 thanks to a trade that included the two teams swapping starting PG’s. Note: This trade was due in large to the Mav’s embarrassing first round NBA Playoff loss to the Golden State Warriors and their inability to match up with the bruising Baron Davis. Speculation has also been made that Kidd wanted to bolt from Vince Carter but only ESPN’s Bill Simmons believes that. Of course the Mavs (with their superior supporting cast have continued to shine, thanks to Kidd) while the Nets continue their tour towards the Antarctic Circle.
While NBA success is apparent, it’s with his national team that Kidd’s showing is best represented. Collecting two Olympic Gold Medals in Sydney (2000) and Beijing (’08), respectively, Kidd finishes the decade undefeated when wearing the stars and stripes. Winning USA Basketball’s 2007 Male Athlete of the Year, Kidd became the nations definitive point guard, showcasing that no one orchestrates the fast break better. Much like his ’08 Dallas Mavericks’ reprisal, Kidd became Jerry Colangelo’s Team USA anchor.
Now that the naughties are (almost) over, we can sit back and appreciate Jason Kidd. He finishes the decade ranked 2nd in career assists with 10,337 dimes dropped (and given he never ran with a player of Karl Malone’s calibre, his career total impresses this blogger as much as John Stockton’s); 3rd in career and 2nd in Playoff triple doubles, respectively, making him the NBA’s accountant (aka good with numbers); 6th in total steals with 2,200 and counting (making him the decade’s master thief) and last but certainly not least, 29th in SLAM’s revised Top 50 of All Time.
Above all that, the subject of Jason Kidd has never really been about the seven All Star berths (2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2007, 2008); the four All NBA First Team selections (2000, 2001, 2002, 2004) or the eight All Defensive Team nods (First team: 2001, 2002, 2006. Second Team: 2000, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007) simply because his impact and play has never been based on individual glory. Kidd’s legacy and ability to deliver a bouquet of highlights is one of elevated team play (both on the NBA timber and for Team USA) but if you really want to make it about the numbers, a complete list of Kidd’s first 100 NBA triple doubles can be found here.
No. 9: Dwyane Wade
by Chris Deaton
Dwyane Wade is the champion of his class.
The finest hours of the deities are revealed under the brightest spotlights on the biggest stages. And although LeBron has his MVP and a defining game, Wade has his ring—something borne of defining games (3, 4, 5, 6).
At 27, his accolades project a legendary career: a Finals MVP, a superlative Olympic performance that keyed his country’s gold medal and five-consecutive All-Star appearances from 2005-09. He was honored as SI’s “Sportsman of the Year” in 2006, joining the likes of Russell, Kareem, Michael, Duncan and Robinson. Last season, he posted a career best 30 points and 7.5 assists a night en route to his first appearance on the All-NBA First Team.
And his résumé would be fuller were it not for a reckless abandon that has sidelined him 20 games or more in three of his six full seasons.
His play has frequently captured Jordan’s flavor, with exceptional finishing ability, a dangerous turnaround and coolness in the clutch. One of his game’s biggest knocks is his lack of range—but consider that MJ failed to crack 30 percent from three until his sixth season, and even then, it wasn’t an integral part of his game, nor did it need to be. Perhaps much is and will continue to be the same for D-Wade.
With Kobe in his 14th season, it’s possible that Wade, a player with less mileage, stands to inherit the mantle of the game’s best shooting guard during the 2010s. He is one of two men on this “Decade’s Best” list whose greatest years likely lie ahead. If that’s the case, in Dwyane Wade, the sporting world may be witnessing the evolution of one of the greatest players in NBA history.
No. 8: Steve Nash
by DeMarco Williams
Stephen John Nash is so good he’s actually underrated. Yeah, he’s been toasted with the two MVPs (‘04-‘05 and ‘05-‘06; only the third guard to ever accomplish the back-to-back) and six All-Star Game appearances, but there’s just so much more to the cool Canadian’s game than that.
Take, for instance, the man’s durability. Nash, 6-3 and 175 pounds if you weighed him right after the Christmas feast, averaged 77 games per season over the 00s. And then there’s his grossly overlooked shooting. Last year Nash became the only player in League history to shoot 50 percent from the field, 40 percent from beyond the arc and 90 percent from the free-throw line over three straight campaigns. Of the three achievements, Stevie’s long-distance dialing is probably the most overlooked. The ’03-’04 was the only season this decade the one-time Mav/full-time Sun didn’t finish in the top 10 in three-point percentage.
Still, when most folks think of the gritty guard, they immediately hark memories of him leading a fast break and delivering a crisp Spalding to Dirk, Amar’e or J-Rich over the years. And while the magical dishes are nice (The 35-year-old currently leads the NBA in dimes and is already in the top 10 for career assists), Nash is kinda like Michael Vick. See, the actual passing is only part of the fun.
Stevie has already amassed three 30+ scoring nights this year. Hell, Deron Williams, Tony Parker and Baron Davis have that many combined! He totaled over 20 in seven straight contests last year. He’s even had a couple of 40-point explosions over his hall of fame career.
Wait, did somebody say underrated?
So, yeah, call Stephen John Nash a great floor leader and assist machine all you want. He is most definitely that. Just don’t say we didn’t warn you the next time the decade’s finest pure point guard torches your squad for 30 of his own.
No. 7: Allen Iverson
by Mike Middlehurst-Schwartz
Say what you will about Allen Iverson – just remember who you’re talking about.
There are players on this list who had more successful a more decorated decade than “The Answer,” but few were more iconic. The imagery of Iverson is almost endless. Conjuring his name brings up memories of crossing over Michael Jordan (a little bit of a cheat since this moment went down back in the archaic 20th century), stepping over Tyronn Lue in the NBA Finals and the infamous practice rant which will go down in YouTube lore.
Iverson both lived and played at a speed that prevented almost anyone from keeping stride with him. And though his approach and style were polarizing, his results were undeniable – an MVP season in ‘00-01 and a litany of games taken over by the League’s favorite mighty mite. Toughness became his calling card after he proved time and again his willingness to play through a seemingly endless series of injuries.
Watching Iverson mature in the latter half of the decade has at times been an uncomfortable and awkward task. A short stay in Detroit was unsuccessful and an even shorter stay in Memphis was downright cringeworthy. But even though Iverson has been forced to reinvent himself – or at least his role – during his second stint with the Sixers, at least one of the decade’s best will get a chance to step aside on his own terms. Hey, it’s always sunny in Philadelphia, right?
No. 6: Dirk Nowitzki
by Ben Collins
Do you recognize him now? He has these big shoulders now — big, bounding arms swinging on refined hinges. They collect teeth now. As of about three weeks ago, this is true.
No homo. I mean, no no homo? Is that statement itself homohobic? Dirk, would you know? No, no comment?
No, he would know, probably, but he wouldn’t say. Just like his Twitter does. He’s found a way to say nothing by saying a lot about the only topic he knows everything about. And he can do this in two languages!
But reporters scoff. Boring! And we yawn and jot slowly, then walk away angrily.
Then some woman appears over the summer — someone who appeared to be cheating on him with his own cash — and we wanted to be angry so badly, we wanted to turn on him and punch him in his big, dumb, suddenly really-developed shoulders. But we couldn’t. We just felt bad for the guy.
Does that guy even speak English? People will yell this in sports bars. Even now. It will piss us off. It’s been 10 years. Yes, we will tell them, he’s perfect at it, just like he’s perfect at basketball, but we can’t write that. You can’t turn around one day and say, “Hey, listen, there’s a guy who’s been almost perfect at something for the past decade, we just haven’t been doing our jobs very well.”
But how can this person have not seen him before? Is he really that different of a player? In the late-90s and early-’00s he was this quirky, seven-foot, point-center with a jumpshot. Is he really this bruising, solemn, menacing, elbow-wielding, teeth-collecting, dare-we-say-it power forward?
It’s not like if you put Dirk Nowitzki and Karl Malone’s career paths next to one another you couldn’t tell them apart.
Wait.
Do you recognize him now?
No. 5: LeBron James
by Sandy Dover
The manchild has now grown into a man, the myth has become a bonafide fact, and his legend continues to grow with each step and shot. LeBron Ramone James is arguably the most anticipated and storied player to play the game of basketball. That he came out of high school to be a No. 1 pick is merely a footnote for the player who may be the most skilled big perimeter player to ever play basketball (when his career is summed up).
Starting as a professional point guard, then playing shooting guard, then the “3″ spot and now a legitimate threat to teams when playing power forward, LeBron James is the epitome of an all-world player. Dominating with his Jason Kidd-like vision and passing, shooting fadeaway jumpers from the three-point line with relative ease, attacking the basket like a bull from Barcelona and leading the break in the manner of Magic, it’s no wonder he’s feared. Standing (and possibly still growing?) at 6-9-1/2 and weighing between 260-275 pounds (depending on the day), even Michael Jordan wasn’t as physically imposing.
But it’s not the stats that makes Le Cavalier so special–that he has career points/rebounds/assists of 27-7-7, or that he literally can do just about anything in a real-life game that you can think of (he ain’t called “Video Game James” for nothin’)–no, what sets The King apart from his brethren is that for all of his skills, for all of his physical and mental advantages as a basketball player, he continually seeks to uplift his teammates. He’s the new Pippen, he’s the new Magic, he’s the new swingman, he’s the new point guard, but more than anything, he’s the new standard. He has been set apart, and for all of his gifts, LeBron James is going to be the player of the next decade as well.
No. 4: Kevin Garnett
by Myles Brown
In practically any argument of “Who’s better?” someone will inevitably exclaim “Well if Player X was traded for Player Y, he could’ve done that…”. On behalf of reasonable people everywhere, I beseech you. Please, stop that shit. Things are hard enough to quantify and evaluate without needlessly complicating matters even further with improbable scenarios. The case for any player should be stated based on the facts at hand and nothing more.
Except for K.G. Why? Because of the Blazers, Spurs, Mavericks, and Lakers. Instead of marveling at his ability to drag a sub par team into the playoffs every year, Garnett’s critics chose to chastise him for his inability to single-handedly upset a title contender. It’s bullshit.
With all due apologies to the King, Kevin Garnett is the most unique player in NBA history. He’s a 7-0 forward with a guard’s skill set who can play and defend any position on the floor. He’s the only player ever to average 20 points, 10 rebounds and 5 assists for six consecutive seasons. He’s also the only player ever to average 20 points, 10 rebounds and 4 assists for nine consecutive seasons. And he’s the only player ever to have his prime wasted on a roster that boasted “All Star” Wally Szczerbiak as the second option.
Upon escaping to Boston, Garnett immediately removed all doubts concerning his elite status by spearheading one of the most formidable defensive units of all time. His versatility, selflessness and infectious desire completely transformed a lottery team into a champion. Had he not been injured last spring the Celtics could arguably be looking to three peat this year. The critics have been silenced and there is only one remaining question about Kevin Garnett.
What would have happened if he spent his prime as a Spur?
No. 3: Shaquille O’Neal
by Sean Ceglinsky
A good debate is good for the soul, although anyone arguing that Shaquille O’Neal should not be mentioned among the top three ballers in the business over the course of the last 10 years needs to have his head examined.
Let’s keep it real people, Shaq changed the game. His resume speaks for itself.
For starters, he’s won four NBA titles (2000, 2001, 2002, 2006), taking home The Finals most valuable player honor on three occasions (2000, 2001, 2002).
A 15-time All-Star, O’Neal made the team nine different times during the decade (2000-07 and 2009), earning the MVP award three times (2000, 2004, 2009).
Need more proof that his No.3 ranking on this who‘s who list is worthy? We can go on and on, trust us. In fact, a case can be made that Shaq should be higher.
For example, Kobe Bryant would have had an extremely tough time winning the first three of his four championships in Los Angeles without O’Neal, who averaged more than 20 points and 10 rebounds per game in each of his eight seasons with the Lakers.
Same goes for Dwyane Wade in Miami. A step slower, Shaq’s numbers were down a bit in 2006, but that didn’t prevent him from guiding Wade & Co. to a title.
O’Neal is hoping to duplicate the feat this season, with LeBron James in Cleveland, of course. Best believe that if Shaq is successful this time around, he’ll cement his name as one of the NBA’s best ever, regardless of the decade, or the century, for that matter.
Whether he wins another championship remains to be seen. One thing is certain: His trophy case at home is full of hardware, no doubt about it. Perhaps equally impressive is the collection of nicknames he’s managed to compile the last 10-plus years.
Some of his more mainstream monikers are: Shaq Fu, Superman, The Diesel, The Big Aristotle and The Big Shaqtus. Here’s a couple you might’ve missed: The Big Baryshnikov, Wilt Chamberneezy, and the most recent edition to the stable, Shaqovic.
Call Shaquille Rashaun O’Neal what you want, just make sure it’s one of the decade’s best.
No. 2: Tim Duncan
by Todd Spehr
Sure thing. That’s what Tim Duncan is – a sure thing.
In a decade that reeked of hype, praising guys before they’re worthy of praise, in some instances underachievement, perhaps the explanation as to why we the consumer isn’t enamored with Duncan is for one simple reason: We can count on him.
Duncan is the only player that automatically made his team a contender every year of this period. He is the only one to be the best player on four title teams in this post-Jordan era. And he has this Russellonian quality in that his greatness isn’t confined to something like an individual per game statistic; his career numbers certainly are not of the gaudy variety, but his title count is.
We hardly know a thing about him yet Duncan reveals himself in all his glory each time he plays, and therefore tells us more about himself than we realize. In a decade where our stars wanted to be bigger than the game itself, by staying within in it and concentrating on its basic premise – to win – Duncan became the rock in a forever-altering NBA landscape.
How will we remember the Tim Duncan of the 2000s? We won’t remember him for one moment, one game, or even one transcendent season. Instead, we’ll remember him for being there, for being great in some way, for all of it.
No. 1: Kobe Bryant
by Vincent Thomas
During the 2001 Playoffs Kobe averaged 29 ppg, 7 rpg and 6 apg. The Lakers would go on a 15-1 tear, razing their opponents on their way to back-to-back championships. The championship run included classic performances from Kobe, like his 48 and 15 in a Game 4 closeout of Sacramento.
He followed that up with 45 and 10 in the conference championship opener against the Spurs. He did all this while taking the mantle from Scottie Pippen and playing some of the most deranged and chaotic perimeter defense we’ve ever seen.
One of his most indelible images of a career full of them probably came in that Game 4 against the Kings. Shaq had fouled out with a good chunk of the fourth quarter remaining. What now? Even though Kobe averaged 28.5 to Shaq’s 28.7 that season, Shaq was still clearly the Lakers MVP and the League’s Top Dog. So, with Shaq out for the rest of a game against bigs like Chris Webber and Vlade Divac, the thinking was that the series might go on. But Kobe Just took over and then, after nailing a 10-foot floater to quiet the Arco nutbags, ran down the court with his arms by his side and palms parallel to floor making the “chill out, I got this” motion. In a lot of ways, he became Shaq’s equal at that moment. It was during this playoff run that the League’s best player, Shaquille O’Neal, began calling Kobe “the best player in the world.”
By the next season, as L.A. was on its way to a three-pea, folks were forced to start making distinctions. Shaq was the most dominant, Tim Duncan was the most valuable, but Kobe was the best…or whatever all the meant. By 2003, when Kobe averaged 30 ppg for the first time in his career, the arguments kinda stopped. Some folks tried to bring Tracy McGrady or Vince Carter into the discussion, but no sane person really disputed that Kobe was the best all-around player in the NBA. Again, Duncan and Kevin Garnett might have been more valuable and Shaq was still the most dominant force in the League, but nobody played the game of basketball with the brilliance, virtuosity, skill and brio that Kobe played it every game.
What he did in the ‘05-06 season was downright preposterous. Not only did he average 35 ppg for the season — something that, other than Wilt, only Jordan (’87) and Rick Barry (’67) accomplished — but he averaged 43 effing points per effing game for ALL of January. To do that in the modern NBA is astounding. And, yeah, that’s the month he pulled off that 81-point game against Toronto that should go down as the greatest single game feat — considering all the factors — in the history of sport. That’s like rushing for 500 yards in an NFL game or hitting six grand slams in one baseball game.
There’s something really sad about the 2004-2007 Kobe, though, because it was during these seasons that his skill and athleticism met at a peak and it was also those three seasons when he dragged around a young, talentless Lakers squad that were relevant and compelling only because a martian played for them. Imagine if he could have spent those seasons on a contender. Before you blame him for forcing Shaq out of L.A. and making his own bed, you should check the terms on which Shaq has left Miami and Phoenix (and he most likely won’t leave Cleveland like Dr. J left the Sixers, either).
Kobe ended the decade playing with more savvy and wisdom than force and dynamism. More importantly, he ended the decade with an MVP in ‘08 and a Finals MVP in ‘09. So his 10-year resume looks like this: two-time scoring champ, 10-time All Star, three-time All Star MVP, league MVP (should have won in ‘06, too), Finals MVP, four championships and consensus pick for “best player on the planet” title from ‘03-’08 and arguable in 2002 and 2009, too.
Shaq may have been the NBA Kingmaker for the first half of the decade and Duncan may have been the most valuable player of the decade; but Kobe Bryant was the best.
***
For more Decade Awards, check out the archive.
- Heat Sell-Out Season; Fire Sales Staff
- Blazers Willing to Trade Rudy for Taj Gibson?
- On Top Again
- Knicks Offering Shannon Brown $4M Per Year?
- NBA To Reveal Marquee Games Tuesday
- Video: Tyreke Evans Reckless Driving 130 MPH
- Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf Going Strong in Japan
- Jordan Retro II
- Von Wafer Talks About Joining Celtics
- The WNBA and Diversity
- Subscribe to Slamonline »
-
Photos: Hard to Get
Josh Selby is B-More’s latest, greatest baller.
- Wallpaper: SLAM First Team All-Americans
Kyrie, Brandon, Harrison, Jared and Perry are 2010’s best.
31 and giving us some of the basketball ever. Kobe is old school and keeps the game beautiful. He makes the game look easy… great video.
I agree that it’s stupid to say that any other wing could have played as well as Kobe did with Shaq. But, I don’t think it’s stupid to say another wing could have won three rings with Shaq on their team. We all realize that as much as Kobe played the good soldier initially on that Lakers team, he was ultimately the catalyst for its demise, not Shaq’s penchant for getting fat in the offseason. If Kobe would have checked his ego just a little bit, who knows how many MORE championships that Lakers team could have captured. He refused to back down, and probably ended a run that could have ended up at six rings.
Allen: I completely disagree with this. By 2004, Shaq was slowing down and it was the logical fashion to give the keys to Kobe… and Shaq refused. I’m a bit surprised anyone feels differently.
the answer has dominated from 2000 up till last season thats 9 seasons worth
“king” james joined the league in 03 and didnt rack up the stats till his 2nd season, thats 6 seasons worth
….Paul Pierce, not likely. Just face it, it was the perfect marriage of talent. Now with shaq out of the way he blossomed to his true potential of being the man of the lak show.
When did lebron grow to be 6′9 and a half?
I thought his official measurements were 6′7 3/4?
I have nothing against Nash. I just don’t like reading this crap everywhere. Sports Illusrtated had Nash above Kidd too. WTF.
Why do you want to put Kidd’s Nets in the West? A better comparison would be to put Kidd himself on Nash’s Suns and Mavs. I mean, hell, the Mavs only reached the Finals after Nash left. You think a young Kidd and Dirk couldn’t have reached the Finals? Plus, Kidd would have KILLED on these 7-seconds-or-less Suns. Nash hasn’t won jack sh*t, and he isn’t better than Chauncey “7 Conference Finals and Counting + 2 Finals + Finals MVP” Billups, nevermind Jason muthafuc*in Kidd.
And another thing, you say that the East was weak in 2001/2002, which it pretty much was, but if Nash were on a squad with Kerry Kittles and Kenyon Martin, he’d get knocked out in the first round. 2nd round max.
.#12 PIERCE
.#13 VINCE
.#14 BIG BEN
.#15 RAY RAY
Fact of the matter is, when SLAM’s Top 50 came out, people who actually know the game (including a few SLAM writers) were flabbergasted that Nash was even on that list at #50. Guys like Tiny Archibald, for starters, are far more deserving than Nash and his phony MVPs. Kidd who has ranked at #28, however, HAS to be included on ANY Top 50 list, or else said Top 50 list lacks credibility.
Now, the ONLY reason that Nash is in ANY of these discussions is because he won an award he didn’t deserve TWICE. If those sportswriters had given Shaq and Kobe those awards, and Nash had come in SECOND both years, his legacy would be very different. His actual accomplishments would not be glossed over by a fake award that catapults him over superior players. Nash better than Kidd?! Imagine if Nash ever won something… they’d say he’s better than Magic!
Nash and the Nets would NOT get past the Pistons. Trust.
The top 3 pick themselves and are easily interchangeable no qualms whatsoever, KG is legit at 4. I’d personally have DWade at 5. It’s safe to say Bron’s got the next decade but from 2000 onwards DWade takes it for me without a doubt.
Tariq: you sound like a hater. Don’t start of saying you like Nash then spout out that crap. I was feeling you on the first post, but damn you got off track.
First off, this is a ranking of players IN THIS DECADE. -THIS DECADE.-
You can spin it all you want, but Jason Kidd had seven years in the 90s that he was playing at a high, if not higher level, than he played in this decade. More assists, more steals, he just looked good. Sure, Kidd was great for the former half of the decade, but he digressed the latter half. Nash has been better for longer in this decade. So whine as much as you want, make OUTRAGEOUS statements such as Billups was better than Nash… but remember: this is for the DECADE.
Man, I’m with Bryan on the school of thought around Nash and Kidd… yeah, Kidd is better, but people make it seem like the gap is SO INCREDIBLY LARGE. Kidd wins out because his defense is so much better, and yeah he’s got the rebounding, but as a scorer and passer, Nash is straight up better.
As much as an in-his-prime Kidd would have been way better for the Dirk/Finley Mavericks, Nash would have been awesome on the early 2000 Nets days, those dudes were made to run and Nash would have orchestrated that beautifully.
I do agree though that Archibald is a beast.
You probably should check into how good Archibald was before he blew his Achilles.
Kidd was drafted in 94. Nash was drafted in 96. How does the THIS DECADE argument make a difference?!
And call me a hater all you want, but the proof is in the pudding. Chauncey Billups is better than Steve Nash. He went to a Denver Nuggets squad that got swept out of the first round last season, and presto– a #2 seed and a Western Conference Finals berth, which matches Nash’s BEST-EVER finish. Steve Nash has never, ever won anything in the playoffs, and yet I STILL regard him as a great player, but you call me a hater. I’m just saying that great players who have actually WON IN THE PLAYOFFS (And can play defense) are better than those who haven’t and can’t. What’s so outrageous about that? Don’t get it twisted: Steve Nash is a great player, but don’t get fooled by the hype and rate him as he deserves to be rated.
The NBA is a team game. Teams win in the playoffs. Is Bernard King and Pete Maravich scrubs? Is Robert Horry the second best player next to Bill Russell? Your arguments are are hair pullingly black and white. Nash had played 102 playoff games, he’s gotten into the postseason with a MASS amount of different players almost every year. Yet, because he hasn’t played in an NBA Finals game, he’s worse than Chauncy friggin Billups? Who is FAR worse than Nash in just about every single aspect of the game outside of defense, where he’s probably overrated? Getoutofhere. Put down that haterade. Watch some basketball.
And yeah, I won’t even gotten into the 2006 mob/suspension fiasco.
Jason Kidd’s best years were arguably throughout the 90s and the first three/four years of the 2000s. Kid played at a high level for five to six years in the 1990s. Nash played ZERO years at a high level in the 90s. This is why Kidd is a superior player when compared to Steve Nash: he’s played at a super high level for a longer time.
But Kidd started to digress when he hit 32-33… scoring dropped, percentages still stayed around 40%, and his defense really took a hit. Steve Nash, to my knowledge, has yet to fade… he’s actually been incredible for six years straight! That’s why he’s the better player OF THIS DECADE.
So, in essence, Kidd > Nash of all time… Nash > Kidd of this decade.
Of course, if you believe silly things like Chauncy is better than Nash and clouds are angels passing gas, then yeah, my logic is unbelievable.
How in the world did Dave Cowens win MVP that year with 20.5 ppg and 16.2 rpg shooting 45.2% from the field to Tiny’s 48.8%?!?!?
It must have been because the Celtics posted the best record in NBA history at that time, which explains a lot. I didn’t know this before, and now its more rational. Okay.
But still. Come on!!
I’ve been addressing you in a respectful manner and I’d appreciate the same courtesy. The fact that we disagree on the merits on a couple of basketball players is no reason to start making fun of each other. If you aren’t capable of having intelligent discussion, I can ignore you. In any case, back to the discussion:
You say Nash’s skills haven’t eroded at all. OK, who is the best point guard in the NBA today? Are you seriously saying that Nash is better than Chris Paul? If you are, than I’m not the one who has blinders on.
And as for the beginning-middle part of the decade, up until Kidd’s microfracture surgery, it was agreed upon that Kidd was the best point guard in the NBA.
Also, when you say “Are Bernard King and Pete Maravich scrubs?” and when you bring up Robert Horry, a few points:
1- Bernard King suffered a horrible knee injury which affected his career, but that’s neither here nor there.
2- I’m not saying that Nash is a scrub. Nash is a great player. All I’m saying is that he’s overrated. And he’s overrated because of those two MVPs he never should have won. Those two awards skew people’s perceptions of him. Go back and read Lang’s entry in the Top 50. For every other NBA great, there’s a sh*tload of accomplishments to write about. What is there to write about in Nash’s case? What the hell has he ever accomplished? And thank you for bringing up Bernard King and Pete Mavarich, because those players are definitely not scrubs, but those are the class of players that Nash should be mentioned among. Those are his ilk. Jason Kidd is leagues beyond him.
Nah bro, no need to apologize. You bring up valid points. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, and I’m open to changing my mind. I’m not an expert. I just don’t appreciate Jukai talking to me like I’m an idiot.
As to your points:
1- re: Kidd’s MVP: Yeah, maybe Kidd shouldn’t have been MVP that year, but my whole thing is this: look at what Graham wrote “[Kidd] was denied the honor (he finished second in voting to Duncan) because stats and fashion dictated that point guards don’t receive the Maurice Podoloff trophy. That was the thinking at the time.” WOW. So a paradigm shift occurred between 2001 and 2004?! Why wasn’t it OK for a PG to get the MVP in 2001, but all of a sudden the “thinking” changed in 2004? What’s so “special” about Nash? Oh, I know: he loves soccer. I mean, if it was a 15-year gap, then I could swallow that “thinking” line. In any case, Shaq should have been MVP in 2004 and you know it.
2- I never said that Nash’s production in Dallas was bullsh*t. It was pretty good.
3- What is Parker better at than Nash? How about scoring in the paint? Has there ever been a PG who does that better than TP? Also, while Parker will never be confused with Payton on the defensive end, he is not as glaring a liability as Nash. But my biggest issue with Nash is his lack of postseason success. Look, I don’t rank Billups and Parker above Nash because they have rings. Kidd doesn’t have a ring and he’s better than all of them. Basketball is a team game and all that. But at some point, if you’re a truly great player, you have to have SOME KIND OF PLAYOFF SUCCESS. And Nash isn’t Kevin Garnett, who played his entire career with the L-Wolves. He played on some STACKED teams. And what does he have to show for it? THREE trips to the CONFERENCE finals. the CONFERENCE finals. And one of those three times, he got there with the Mavs only because they benefitted from Webber going down with an injury, otherwise the Kings would have eliminated them. But give him three. THREE conference finals appearances. I remember him going on Letterman and even Letterman made fun of him for that. And yet, still, I’m not saying that Nash is a scrub. He’s a HOF player. But you know what? So are Billups and Parker. I’m not saying that Baron Davis is better than Nash. I’m saying that truly great players are better than Nash. And if he hadn’t won those two media awards, if he had somehow come in second in the voting, a lot more people would agree with me. But two shiny (regular season) trophies cover up a lot.
And as for Billups, I’ll tell you what, numbers don’t even begin to tell his influence on a team.
Was Nash have as effective as Parker was when he was 28?
You increased the harshness level of the dialogue. I continued to increase it. If I began to get insulting, I apologize, but you don’t seem to understand the points I’m making, and whether that is my fault or yours, it does make me a bit trigger fingering to start flinging insults. Let me rectify a few things, and answer a few questions:
1) My mention of Bernard King, Pete Maravich, and Robert Horry were about playoff victories, which you’ve taken a FOCUS on when bashing Nash. King and Maravich were all-legendary talents who never made any headway in the playoffs.. I’m asking if you think they are worse than Tony Parker and Chauncy Billups. I’m also asking if you think Robert Horry was better than Chauncy and Parker, because of all the rings he has earned. And don’t give me no Finals MVP garbage, Horry was JUST AS DESERVING of a Finals MVP in 2004 as Duncan was, but he was robbed.
You managed to address this later, so you don’t have to answer this.
I guess the problem is, you view success different than me (or as many of the people who ranked Nash over Kidd)
Kidd made it to the Finals twice… in a drastically weakened eastern conference where THE WORSE team EVER to get to the Finals (Iverson’s 76ers) had just partaken in a spanking of the western conference. Nash made it to the MUCH, MUCH HARDER Wester Conference Finals three times, the second and third time mostly due to Nash’s heroics, taking over games scoring wise, passing 20+ assists, etc. etc… then losing to superior teams!
And no, Tony Parker averaging 16.4-5.8 on 49% shooting is not better than Steve Nash averaging 18.4-11.2 on 53% shooting. Hell, I haven’t even been as impressed with Tony Parker as I have been in previous years. Teams have been giving him the Rondo treatment and forcing him to take jump shots, and when he does drive, he has to extend twice as much energy on it (since more double teams are coming to him with Duncan’s decline). This has caused a noticeable decline in drives that TP does.
You think, if Steve Nash had Duncan on his team, he couldn’t easily get 20 points a game with the amount of double teams that Duncan needs? (his assists would go down, obviously, but never to 5.8).
I mean, it’s just ridiculous for me to hear Billups and Parker are better than Nash. They’re not at his level. Not nearly. It’s fine to consider Jason Kidd leagues beyond Steve Nash, I know the Nets had that underdog role that captured a lot of hearts, but man, Billups and Parker? Point guards who are far worse shooters and passers than Nash? It sounds like a joke.
I guess here is a question which will explain a lot about you: has Iverson had more success in the playoffs with just ONE finals appearance and no other noticeable playoff runs compared to Nash who has had three western conference finals runs in a much harder conference?
1) I am a huge Chris Paul fan. CP3, in my opinion, is far and beyond better than any point guard in the game right now. If he continues to play the way he is playing, he will go down as one of the top 5-10 point guards to ever lace up shoes. After him, I think DWill and Nash are in a fight for point guard supremacy (DWill may have it since Nash has lost a step).
Yet, does ANYONE get PO’d that Kobe Bryant stole Chris Paul’s MVP that CP3 RIGHTFULLY deserved? No? No one? Well if no one is angry at Kobe, WHY IS EVERYONE ANGRY AT NASH?
2) Everyone thinks Nash did such a disservice by stealing the MVP from Bryant (whom rightfully deserved it) and Shaq (who didn’t deserve it in the slightest, hell Wade was the MVP of that team) and people seem to continue to harp on that no matter how long time goes by… but no one seems to even remember 2007 when any chance of playoff success the Suns were going to have were STOLEN from them. People even justify it. It’s sickening and aggravating and makes debating these points seem like a broken record.
Thank you.
I’m not only saying that Nash’s skill set doesn’t translate to CHAMPIONSHIP success; it doesn’t translate to any type of POSTSEASON success. Yeah, it looks pretty, but it doesn’t get you very far, even on 62-win teams.
To answer your Iverson question, if you reach the NBA Finals, ESPECIALLY in the manner in which Iverson reached the Finals, then any questions about having postseason success would never come up. If Nash EVER did anything comparable to that I would have shut the hell up about him a long time ago. But there is a HUGE difference between reaching the Finals and the conference finals. And I don’t care if you play in the Antarctic Conference: A Finals appearance is a Finals appearance. There were some pretty good Eastern teams who never made the Finals, like the Bucks of Ray/Big Dog/Cassell. OK, so the East wasn’t as strong as the West but it’s not like Iverson’s Sixers beat the Wichita Rough Riders in the ECFs. Plus, the West was stronger, but Nash was always on loaded teams and top seeds. But his style of play just isn’t conducive to winning in the playoffs. Other teams slow down the tempo and boom–they lose. So yeah, maybe he is better than Parker…Bryan is beginning to convince me of that one. But no way is Nash better than Billups. Billups is BUILT for the playoffs.
Let’s not forget that the Amare you’re so quick to lambast averaged close to 40 ppg against the Spurs in the WCF, while Marion is a very good wing defender.
I just don’t understand how you can just ignore postseason success. Like, take Tracy McGrady. He’s won scoring titles and been on all-star teams. In terms of skill set, there’s not much that separates TMac from Kobe. However, if someone were to say that TMac should be #11 on this list, I would VEHEMENTLY disagree. A guy like Paul Pierce should be ahead of TMac, and not just because he won a title in 2008, but also because he single-handedly led his team to the ECFs in 2002 (OK so Antoine Walker helped). That beats not ever winning a playoff series.
2- You keep talking about how the East was weak and the West was strong. That only comes into play in the Finals. Because if you’re in the East, chances are, your team sucks too. And if you’re in the West, and you’re a high seed, it should mean that you’re competitive as well. But Phoenix never even get to a seventh game. San Anton brush them aside in five like they’re prom queens. And Dallas? Were they ever true contenders when Nash was there? Why didn’t they beat the Spurs until he left?
3- Paul Pierce was on some awful teams that didn’t even make the playoffs and broke records for losing in Boston. He was all alone for a number of years. By the way I hate Paul Pierce.
You know what, I’m done.
1- I can’t believe you’re comparing an NBA FINALS appearance to three conference appearances.
2- You call the Sixers’ competition “D-league” squads, and yet you fail to recognize that the Sixers were themselves a “D-league” squad. I guess you think Steve Nash could have dragged Aaron McKie and Tyrone Hill to the Finals.
1- Yes, I am comparing three conference finals appearances to one finals appearance and NOTHING ELSE. I don’t see the big freaking difference. It’s one thing to say they never had playoff success, but three conference finals appearances is major, especially in an incredibly difficult conference.
This is actually quite weird, because we both seem to think each other’s thinking is outrageous.
You’re talking -one- more round. Like it’s some incredible difference. I honestly think be able to compete at a high level again and again and again is more important than getting to one level higher ONCE. That makes no sense to me. To me— and I’m sure you’re not, because I respect you as an intelligent and reasonable poster— it seems like you’re twisting things here to make Nash look like a loser. But bringing the ‘NBA Finals” to a higher level to make dudes like Kidd and Iverson (and guys like Stockton, Malone, Barkley, Baylor) to a higher level… I don’t know, it just seems like ridiculous logic.
2- No, I don’t think Steve Nash could have dragged Aaron McKie and Tyrone Hill to the Finals. I do think Nash could have taken the 200-2002 Nets teams to the Finals and had as much success as Kidd because those teams were built for a dude like Nash.
You do realize basketball is played with twelve man teams with five guys at a time, right?
Billups and Parker can’t even touch Nash’s shoes.
Tariq, out of curiosity, who do you consider your top ten most skilled point guards that ever laced up their shoes? If the question is too time confusing (it’s an annoying one), then don’t worry about it. Just trying to get an understanding of why you think the way you do.
I think Anfernee Hardaway was “more skilled” than, say, Kevin Johnson. But he didn’t maximize those skills due to injury. I want to make sure I understand Jukai’s question.
A preliminary list:
1- Oscar Robertson
2- Magic Johnson
3- Jerry West
4- Isiah Thomas
5- John Stockton
6- Jason Kidd
7- Walt Frazier
8- Bob Cousy
9- Gary Payton
10- Tiny Archibald
But Steve Nash is NOT that overrated. He’s a great player.
I mean, if we’re talking about playoff success, Frazier was AMAZING in both finals, and really the only reason he didn’t win Finals MVP in 1970 was because of Willis Reed’s spirited four points in the beginning. Frazier played out of this world in that series.
To everyone: I find it very odd Dirk made it above Iverson, since they both pretty much have the same accolades (a loss in the finals, an MVP) but Iverson has the stats and the greater cultural impact so… I don’t know, it just seems like an odd choice.
I don’t think Wade should be over Dirk though. This is about a decade of accomplishments, not a year. Despite Wade’s singlehandedly beating Dirk’s entire team, Wade only came into the L in 2003, and was injured for several years. Dirk pretty much played the entire decade with playoff success injury free. Along with an MVP, I’d say he had a greater decade of success.
Good to see you’re still around.
Wow………….
take this from an avid Suns fan since the KJ/Barkley days: Stoudemire is a better player NOW than he was pre-injury. Amare could not create offense for beans before he began working on that midrange jumper and improving his dribbling. STAT, for lack of a better word, was purely a finisher. There is NO WAY he would have given even one more win to that atrocious Phili team.
Secondly,
I know you don’t watch a lot of Suns games due to your hatred for all things Nash related, but your breakdown of Nash’s passing is atrocious. You think he only passes to cutters from under the basket? What? Pick and rolls, bounce passes from the key, lob passes from 3/4ths of the court, picking up cutters from the baseline, –he may be the best EVER at kicking out to three point shooters–, there are things Nash can do with the ball that Jason Kidd couldn’t even dream of doing. What you are saying is simply fabrication: you are not describing what happens in reality.
Thirdly…
48-7… on 71% shooting… 5/15/05… W
39-12 on 58% shooting… 5/20/05… W
32-13 on 64% shooting… 5/04/06… W
31-12 on 66% shooting… 5/8/06… W
24-15 on 66% shooting… 5/14/07… W
Don’t worry, you didn’t waste my time (too much) finding all that. You know, because I only looked at his playoff numbers, which you claim he never did anything in….
So, how many players have gotten forty points and twenty assists? Seems like a pretty common occurrence, so, you know, tell me.
Fourth,
you are the only dude here who is putting Nash on a pedestal. The second coming? Who in the world has said Nash was the second coming? No one claims he was on par with Magic, Oscar, Stockton, Thomas, or Frazier. Not even the guys who voted him as an MVP twice. What they saw is an incredibly valuable player who took a horrendous team and transformed it into a contender, and they saw there WERE no Magics and Oscars… and they made Nash the MVP. Sure, the oversight on what Kobe was doing at the time was horrendous, but Kobe legitimately stole an MVP from Chris Paul… where is the outrage against Kobe? Where are people shaming Kobe for taking Chris Paul’s MVP? I certainly don’t hear it from you. You see things that don’t exist, you see the media heralding Nash as Magic’s apprentice. That’s insulting to even ESPN. It’s not reality.
And finally, it’s insulting to SLAM and Nash himself that you suggest that he wouldn’t even be on this list if not for his two MVPs. If Nash had not won any MVPs at all, sports writers would be talking about how a man who averaged 50/40/90 while getting over eleven assists a game and taking his team to 60 wins never won an MVP! That would be mind blowing. Of course, I don’t know this for a fact, but you don’t know that Nash wouldn’t be on the same place on this list MVPs or not. What’s crazy to me is that because people think Nash is overrated, people will honestly bring up Chauncy Billups and Mark friggin Price and say that these cats even compare to Nash. Rubbish.
As for my Stockton comment, I have to apologize… I did hear this from someone from thestartingfive, I thought it was you but it must have been someone else. It was in a similar discussion.
One more thing: If Nash has only been transcendent in one system, and that makes him a system player, why does Iverson not share such a title when he has only been transcendent with a team full of offensively limited, high-rebounding defensive role players? I’m not saying Iverson is worse than Nash in any way… I’m just asking that question.
You on some BS saying Iverson has never improved his game. A lot of what you said is true, but that’s hyperbole.
Iverson’s midrange game is greatly improved, he’s much better attackign off screens with the ball and without it. His court vision is better, and he is capable of playing within a team concept without as much freelancing.
He has improved his use of change of pace, he’ improved his free throw shooting, he’s improved his pull up game in the lane.
The NBA took away Allen Iverson’s favorite basketball move after his second year in the league and he never missed a beat as far as scoring. Who else can say that?
And, he used to be absolutely deadly in the passing lanes, the definition of a ball hawk, if he did struggle in man to man defense. I don’t think Iverson is overrated in general, or on this list. I think SLAM did a good job with the list actually. Jason Kidd has had a better career and had a better early part of the decade than Nash, but I think if you look at the totality of their play, Nash played better for the entire decade. I mean, he was no bum in Dallas, he was a regular All-Star.
I agree with everybody who says that the MVPs have skewed Nash’s legacies, but hey, I’m over it now. I don’t like media slurping, but what you gonna do?
• 2-time NBA Most Valuable Player: 2005, 2006
• 6-time NBA All-Star: 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
• 6-time All-NBA selection:
• First team: 2005, 2006, 2007
• Second team: 2008
• Third team: 2002, 2003
• 3-time NBA regular season leader for assists per game: 2005 (11.5), 2006 (10.5), 2007 (11.6)[10]
• 3-time NBA regular season leader for total assists: 2005 (861), 2006 (826), 2007 (884)[10]
• NBA regular season leader for free-throw percentage: 2006 (.921)[10]
Came in the league in 1996 on went to All star game 6 times. First team only 3 times, This is Nash resume, because I hear folks all the time he belongs in the Hall of Fame. This is his Rap Sheet. Only two things stand out on his major accomplishments and he was just a good point guard.
It would depend on the team I was building. Obviously, Nash plays a great style of point guard that work in more situations. But, have we seen him play with a big man who parks int he post and demands the rock? Have we seen him thrive in slower tempo styles? From what I can tell, Nash is intent on playing a particular style of basketball. The difference is that people LIKE his style of basketball, while they typically find Iverson’s style ugly. I don’t agree with this, but I understand the sentiment.
Honestly, I’m not comfortable with a point guard who can’t play as well in a halfcourt game and who struggles on defense as much as Nash. Yes he’s a lights out shooter. Yes he’s a deft passer and very clutch. But, he can only play a style of basketball that has not been shown to be very effective at winning championships in this decade. Plus, I feel that Nash’s dominance, likes Iverson’s, depends an awful lot on him having the ball for most of the shot clock. I like Nash, but if I was building a lottery team from scratch, I would still take Iverson over him because Iverson can do more with less, in my opinion.
Honestly, Iverson style of play has changed tremendously over the years. It really has. The shots he takes now are so different from what he was doing his first five years in the league. The dribble moves he does are vastly different. Now, he hasn’t made the sort of improvements and additions to his game that Kobe has, but NO other player has. In fact, most players in the league today are doing the same things they did when they came in, except the do the better. Very few players have remade their games, with Kobe, McGrady and KG the only players I can think of with huge changes, and that’s mainly because McGrady and KG had some gaping holes in their games early on. If the standard is Kobe, everybody, EVERYBODY falls short as far as improving. But, if the standard is anybody else, then I think Iverson compares pretty favorably. Remember, this cat could barely shoot when he first came in the league, relied heavily on that crossover, and played at exactly one speed–hyper. His change is so different right now, but it’s only evident if you’ve watched him for a while, and aren’t just going off his percentages.
“I think SLAM did a good job with the list actually. Jason Kidd has had a better career and had a better early part of the decade than Nash, but I think if you look at the totality of their play, Nash played better for the entire decade. I mean, he was no bum in Dallas, he was a regular All-Star.”
This is the truth. There should be no argument here. Jason Kidd is a superior point, but Nash had played better this decade.
The only issue was, he did everything a bit worse than Jordan.
If he played in an era where Jordan wasn’t playing, then I really think people would view Drexler in a totally different light.
You know, so a Kidd/Nash comparison using Jordan/Drexler to me isn’t that insulting to any party.
Please go back and show me where I said that Nash wasn’t good. I never ever said that he wasn’t good. In fact, I think he’s great. However, he is OVERRATED in the sports media. For example, Bill Simmons ranks Nash in the thirties in his list of all-time great players. That is way too f*cking high. That’s all I’m saying. And Simmons is just one example. There is a MASSIVE media lovefest for a guy who is very, very good, who does plenty of things very well, who does things very few people can do, but who is also VERY LIMITED in a LOT of ways. In ways that hinder postseason success. People here have dinigrated Iverson and Dirk, and while both of them deserve some criticism for different reasons, at least they’ve proven that they can carry a team to an NBA Finals. Nash will retire without having COME CLOSE to playing in a Finals. And it’s not because Don Nelson or Michael Finley or Antwan Jamison or Amare Stoudemire or Shawn Marion or Stu Jackson or David Stern or Jack Ruby or the Opus Dei or geography or geometry or trigonometry. It’s because a- For all his undeniable brilliance, Nash only operates in a fast-paced, run n gun system which is easy to gameplan for in the playoffs. He would be rendered obsolete in a half-court set; and b- he gets eaten alive not only by Chris Paul (which is everyone’s fate) but also by the likes of Bobby Jackson.
So, what I’m saying is, it if FOUL to compare someone like Nash with Kidd. Yeah, Nash is good, but Kidd is something else. Even in this decade. Recognize. And Kidd isn’t even one of my favorite players or anything, but truth is truth.
P.S.
You keep trying to compare Kobe’s 2008 MVP with Nash’s MVPs. Please stop. Chris Paul didn’t “get robbed.” It was a close MVP race, and CP3 definitely had a good case. If he had won it, he would have deserved it. But to suggest that Kobe didn’t deserve it as well is just absurd. Stop.
LeBron James hasn’t won anything either. But I consider him to have enjoyed postseason success. Reaching the Finals is an accomplishment. That’s why they call it a Conference Championchip. It’s not the same as a ring, but it’s something. It’s a highlight in your career. What’s the highlight of Nash’s career?
First off, I know it’s all opinion, but Kobe got his MVP as a lifetime achievement award. It wasn’t close.
Kobe: 26.2, 5.8, 5.0, 1.7 on 46% shooting
Paul: 20.2, 3.8, 11.1, 2.6 on 49% shooting
It wasn’t ‘close.’ Paul was one of the few people ever to score over 20 points on BETTER shooting than Kobe while also averaging over 11 assists, on an absolutely ABYSMAL team. While having worst stats and better talent surrounding him, Bryant won the MVP award because people said he had the better record… BY ONE WIN. A superior team with Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom… compared to Tyson Chandler and David West!!! Yet Kobe gets the MVP? That is downright criminal to me. Finally, I’ll reiterate that your definition of ’success’ is vastly different than anyone else on SLAM.
What does it matter that Iverson and Kidd got to the finals in a terrible, terrible, terrible conference… How is that better than Nash getting to the conference finals three times in one of the hardest conferences in basketball history? Would you view him differently if things went differently in 2007 and they advanced to the NBA Finals, even though NOTHING would be different about Nash? Is Kobe less of a player if he played on the 2006 Lakers for all his career?
Nash has proven he can lead his team. Had he been in the eastern conference, he may have been in the nba finals three times. It shouldn’t make a difference. You should be able to tell a players abilities with or without player success.
Not sure if you can.
It was good debating you.
Look, Kobe is an MVP candidate EVERY year. That year, the Lakers were the #1 seed in the air-tight West…and I mean AIR-TIGHT. And the Lakers beat the Hornets in the 80th game of the season. I think that if the Hornets had won that game, CP3 would have been voted MVP. It was that close of a race. But the Lakers won. That was the ONE game that decided the conference. I think that also decided the MVP race. To equate that with Nash’s 15 and 11 MVP is laughable. And don’t tell me that no one had broken double digit assists in a while before Nash did it because Andre Miller did it in 2001.
Yes, I would view Nash differently if he had reached the Finals in 2007.
Would you view McGrady differently if he had gotten out of the first round?
If Kobe had played for the 2006 Lakers all his career, we wouldn’t have expected him to do much with Smush and Kwame.
But if he played with Dirk and Amare and Michael Finley and Joe Johnson and Shawn Marion for eight or nine or ten years and all he could muster was three measly trips to the CONFERENCE finals, then yeah, of course I’d think less of him as a player.
Your last comment is the truth, along with your Nugget about KJ. But, Jukai ain’t gonna hear that.
It’s not even worth arguing about anymore, since “overrated” is totally subjective.
I will say this, I’m tired of people pretending that MIke D’s failures in New York are proving that Nash was the real reason the Suns won and not Mike D’s system. That’s basically ignoring the fact that Nash slummed when Mike D’s system was removed from Phoenix, and basically pouted until he got his coach fired in the middle of the season, then proceeded to fail to make the playoffs despite having the system he preferred re-installed. The Suns still run Mike D’s system, they just have another dude sitting on the bench. They run the only system Nash is comfortable running these days. And everybody who has watched b-ball understands that the Suns inability to still shine when the game slows down is what causes them problems in the playoffs.
Two of the three times Nash made it to Conference Finals, his team got shellacked. He’s lost several times in the first round despite having a really talented squad. Let’s be honest about what’s happened here.
Shaq
Duncan
Iverson
Kidd
Garnett
Nash
Nowitzki
McGrady
Comments