Peak John Stockton vs Peak Steve Nash

[1987_Lakers]

http://alltalksports.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/john-stockton-keeping-it-real.jpg
http://www.usaplayers.com/images/news/nash1.jpg

[WeaponX2024]

Stockton was basically like Nash with defense. I'll take Stock.

[Alhazred]

Stockton

[BigTicket]

I'll take Stockton, better passer and much better defender.

[imdaman99]

Gimme Stockton. He could come up with a clutch steal if needed. When was the last time Nash played defense? 1998?

[GiveItToBurrito]

Stockton was a better defender, Nash is a better offensive player (by a little). My head says Stockton, but my heart goes with Nash. His shooting really is ridiculous, and it's easy to forget that he took a team with Marion, Diaw, and Barbosa as the next best players to a 50+ wins and the Western Conference Finals.

[GiveItToBurrito]

Gimme Stockton. He could come up with a clutch steal if needed. When was the last time Nash played defense? 1998?

Nash's defense isn't that horrible, he takes a lot of charges and he's got decent size. He's bad, but he's not, like, Derek Rose or Fisher trying to guard someone quick bad or something.

[BigTicket]

Stockton was a better defender, Nash is a better offensive player (by a little). My head says Stockton, but my heart goes with Nash. His shooting really is ridiculous, and it's easy to forget that he took a team with Marion, Diaw, and Barbosa as the next best players to a 50+ wins and the Western Conference Finals.

I never understood why Nash got all the credit for that, Marion was dropping 22/12 that year, Diaw was playing center will enough to earn the MIP award, and Raja Bell was playing great D while averaging 15ppg.

[InspiredLebowski]

Someone dig up the pace of those Jazz teams. Obviously it'll be slower, I want to know how much.

[BigTicket]

Someone dig up the pace of those Jazz teams. Obviously it'll be slower, I want to know how much.

Actually it wasn't slower, it just seemed that way because the league in general was playing a much higher pace.

[OmniStrife]

Steve Nash is my favourite player of all time.

Stockton.

[Cyclone112]

I never understood why Nash got all the credit for that, Marion was dropping 22/12 that year, Diaw was playing center will enough to earn the MIP award, and Raja Bell was playing great D while averaging 15ppg.

He doesn't get all the credit but the reason Marion and the others had such great success is because Nash created everything for them. Marion can't create his own shot to save his life. Diaw got the MIP because he was now starting for the first time getting way more minutes and thus way more stats. Stoudemire was out and the Suns still got 54 wins all the while Nash was dropping 19/11 on 51/43/92 percentages.

[BigTicket]

He doesn't get all the credit but the reason Marion and the others had such great success is because Nash created everything for them.

Contradict yourself much ?

[steve]

I never understood why Nash got all the credit for that, Marion was dropping 22/12 that year
So it's a coincidence that Marion's field goal percentage, true shooting percentage, effective field goal percentage, and points per attempt all took a dramatic increase once Nash got there?

[BigTicket]

So it's a coincidence that Marion's field goal percentage, true shooting percentage, effective field goal percentage, and points per attempt all took a dramatic increase once Nash got there?

That goes both ways you know. Or maybe you think its a coincidence that Nashs assists, shooting percentage, effective field goal percentage, and points per attempt all went up dramatically once he got guys like Stoudemire and Marion to pass to, and a higher pace team to play on.

[wally_world]

Nash is amazing, and im a huge fan. If im counting for a PG to lead a team of role-players, i'll take Nash. He makes everyone better. If it's a contending team with a superstar, i'll take Stock.

Basically, Nash wins you games. Stock wins you championships (although he has none).

[Cyclone112]

Contradict yourself much ?

Saying Nash created everything for them doesn't mean they still didn't do a great job themselves. Maybe 'everything' is the wrong word choice but if you watch the Suns then or even now you will realize that very few Suns players can/could create for themselves. Marion is definitely one of the guys who relied heavily on Nash to get him easy buckets and open looks otherwise he would generally struggle.

I'm not dissing the team and saying they were crap or anything. I'm just saying they definitely benefited stats wise from Nash and thus making them look better than what most people would consider them to be.

[steve]

That goes both ways you know. Or maybe you think its a coincidence that Nashs assists, shooting percentage, effective field goal percentage, and points per attempt all went up dramatically once he got guys like Stoudemire and Marion to pass to, and a higher pace team to play on.
Even though all of those stats for Nash has stayed primarily the same when both Stoudemire and Marion have been out of the line-up. Whereas neither of them have as effective playing without Nash.

[purple32gold]

weren't they winnin somethin lik 25 or so games before nash came and cleaned em up?that being said this is obviously john stockton and no one should say anything but. the only pg i would ever personally say played at or higher than magics level during the 80's

[Cyclone112]

That goes both ways you know. Or maybe you think its a coincidence that Nashs assists, shooting percentage, effective field goal percentage, and points per attempt all went up dramatically once he got guys like Stoudemire and Marion to pass to, and a higher pace team to play on.

Higher paced team yes, those specific players definitely not. That's just reaching.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Stockton was basically like Nash with defense. I'll take Stock.
Ummm, beyond the color of their skin ... they play NOTHING alike.

:oldlol:

[GiveItToBurrito]

I never understood why Nash got all the credit for that, Marion was dropping 22/12 that year, Diaw was playing center will enough to earn the MIP award, and Raja Bell was playing great D while averaging 15ppg.

Marion was an elite player back then and criminally underrated, but no one else on that team was really all that special. Diaw was great, no doubt about it, but he wasn't really that good at scoring or rebounding, especially compared to Amare.

[EricForman]

I never understood why Nash got all the credit for that, Marion was dropping 22/12 that year, Diaw was playing center will enough to earn the MIP award, and Raja Bell was playing great D while averaging 15ppg.

Marion averaged those numbers every year. Yes he can put up numbers but does Marion win? It's been proven that Nash+the system is what makes the Suns win. Nash has now led Suns to pretty strong seasons without Amare and without Marion. The entire run and gun Suns team have changed from 05 except for Nash. So the whole ISH excuse that it's "not really Nash but his teammates" doesn't really work anymore. Marion never had the game or attitude to be aything more than a second fiddle, at best.


BTW, can't your argument be made for EVERY great player? Kobes playing great but I don't see why he gets so much credit when Pau is double double, Bynum is manning the middle and Odom is so versatile. I don't see why Bird gets so much credit when McHale is automatic two points and DJ plays such strong D. I don't see why Lebron gets so much credit when he has like three teammates that can hit 40% of threes and two legit centers. :confusedshrug:


Stop underrating Nash. He's a top fifty player all time. His MVPs aren't flukes. It's been proven.

[G.O.A.T]

His MVPs aren't flukes. It's been proven.

I don't disagree with anything else you said except this. If anything it's been proven he didn't deserve those MVP's. He still has no rings and no finals appearances. He is one of two MVP's ever not to at least make it to the finals as his teams best player.

[chocolatethunder]

Ummm, beyond the color of their skin ... they play NOTHING alike.

:oldlol:

+1

[Samurai Swoosh]

I don't disagree with anything else you said except this. If anything it's been proven he didn't deserve those MVP's. He still has no rings and no finals appearances. He is one of two MVP's ever not to at least make it to the finals as his teams best player.
That isn't directly contributed to him is it? It's a combonation of unfortunate things. Style of play doesn't translate well to Playoff basketball, coaching changes, injuries, etc

In 2006 they didn't have Amare ... he made Boris Diaw look like an All Star for christ sakes

[G.O.A.T]

Ummm, beyond the color of their skin ... they play NOTHING alike.

:oldlol:

There are a lot of similarities in how they play actually...they both are excellent shooters who still think pass first, they are high volume assist guys, both are great in the pick and roll, both like to push the tempo, both played at prime level into their thirties etc etc etc.


That isn't directly contributed to him is it? It's a combonation of unfortunate things. Style of play doesn't translate well to Playoff basketball, coaching changes, injuries, etc

In 2006 they didn't have Amare ... he made Boris Diaw look like an All Star for christ sakes

So his team mates and the style of play are responsible for his lack of success in the postseason, but he is responsible for Diaw having a career year, not the other team mates and the style?

In my opinion if the team doesn't win against another team that is as good or slightly better or worse, either the coach or the superstar are most responsible. Usually the star player.

[Kblaze8855]

He doesn't get all the credit but the reason Marion and the others had such great success is because Nash created everything for them. Marion can't create his own shot to save his life.

Marion put up 21/10, 19/10, and 19/9 before Nash got there. He played with Marbury and Kidd yes...but in the time after marbury left and before Nash got there he put up...

20/10
18/11
22/13
17/12

In 4 months.

Who was creating his shots then? barbosa? Joe Johnson?

Did Nash decide to stop making him better the last couple years he was on the Suns?

Shawn Marion was an all star 2 years before he played with Nash. Hard to say Nash made him considering that.


Diaw got the MIP because he was now starting for the first time getting way more minutes and thus way more stats.

He got the MIP because he was playing much better. Which is usually the reason guys get more minutes. Suns system suited him. Nash missed back to back games in which Diaw had bad to back triple doubles with 16 assists one game and 12 the next.


Stoudemire was out and the Suns still got 54 wins all the while Nash was dropping 19/11 on 51/43/92 percentages.

By eff. Shawn Marion was the 3rd most productive player in the NBA behind KG and Lebron that year. One month he put up 24 points...14 rebounds...3 steals...2blocks...shot 54%...42% from 3...and 91% from the line. To get them to the WCF? Vs the Clippers he had games with 32/19 4 steals and a block, 30/9, 34/9 with 6 steals, and 36 and 20. He had off games as well(14/10 13/6) but really he beasted.

Nash sure had something to do with it...but Marion was one of the best defenders, rebounders, and overall players period and Nash did not make him that.

Cant give anyone that much credit for someone elses success. Especially when they are all stars before they play with eachother.

[BigTicket]

Marion averaged those numbers every year. Yes he can put up numbers but does Marion win? It's been proven that Nash+the system is what makes the Suns win. Nash has now led Suns to pretty strong seasons without Amare and without Marion. The entire run and gun Suns team have changed from 05 except for Nash. So the whole ISH excuse that it's not really Nash but his teammates is really getting old. Marion never had the game or attitude to be aything more than a second fiddle, AT BEST.

BTW, can't your argument be made for EVERY great player? Kobes playing great but I don't see why he gets so much credit when Pau is double double, Bynum is manning the middle and Odom is so versatile. I don't see why Bird gets so much credit when McHale is automatic two points and DJ plays such strong D. I don't see why Lebron gets so much credit when he has like three teammates that can hit 40% of threes and two legit centers. :confusedshrug:


Stop underrating Nash. He's a top fifty player all time. His MVPs aren't flukes. It's been proven.

The difference is Nash was the first player ever to get credit not just for what he was doing, but for all his teammates did as well.

Noone said Worthy only got his points because of Magic, or McHale wouldn't have any post moves if not for Bird, or Malone couldn't score without Stockton. People did say all the improvement on the Suns was because of Nash though, that Marion couldn't do anything without him etc.

Not saying Nash isn't a great player, or that he isn't top 50 alltime, but it just annoys me how people talk about that 54 win season, as if we're supposed to be awed that an all-nba pg + an all-nba PF + solid roleplayers + great coach = 54 wins. I never understood why that was supposed to be surprising ?

[DC Zephyrs]

If we're just going by peak play, you could definately make a case for Nash. He's just as good a passer, and he is one of the best shooters of all time. He's arguably a better offensive player than Stockton, although he's obviously not as good a defender. I'll go with Stock, but it's close.

[GP_20]

Nash is the better scorer and can take over games, while Stockton is the better passer/playmaker and defender.

Toss-Up.

[EricForman]

I don't disagree with anything else you said except this. If anything it's been proven he didn't deserve those MVP's. He still has no rings and no finals appearances. He is one of two MVP's ever not to at least make it to the finals as his teams best player.

He faced some really strong teams though. It's not like he stunked it up and lost to an inferior team. I mean 05 and 07 Spurs (and we all remember how close 07 was) were strong. We talking about a top ten player all time in his prime. 06 the Suns just had bad luck--Amare and Kurt Thomas was out. WIth just one of those guys they probably beat the Mavs.

MVP is a regular season award, you can't hold the fact he's ran into strong teams in the playoffs against him.

I was originally one of those guys who thought Nash was a fluke too. Nash beating Shaq for MVP was absolutely the craziest thing ever in my eyes in 2005. But really look at Nash now. He has proven that he can win with that system with ANYONE. Remember when detractors said it was only cause he has a freak of nature in Amare? Or remember how people say it's cause Marion is so versatile? Nash has done it without both. He's running with Channing Frye and getting similar results out of him.

As long as you dont put scrubs around Nash he gets something out of them and they win. Really, all Nash needs is one or two lanky forwards and a shooter and a slasher and he'll get wins. Team him with say, Ty Thomas, Tyson Chandler, JJ Reddick and like, Jamario Moon and he leads that team to 48 wins probably.

He's also quite possibly the best over 35 point guard ever right now. So really, Nash has proven he belongs in the conversation with other greats. Maybe back to back MVPs is a bit much. But he deserves at least one.

[Samurai Swoosh]

There are a lot of similarities in how they play actually...they both are excellent shooters who still think pass first, they are high volume assist guys, both are great in the pick and roll, both like to push the tempo, both played at prime level into their thirties etc etc etc.
You just named similar albeit universal basketball skills. Nash / Stockton are great in the pick and role. Would anyone sare say Chris Paul plays like Nash / Stockton. No ... the comparison is made via race. Nash plays NOTHING like John Stockton. Nash handles the ball way more, creates off the dribble better, has more flash and pizzaz to his game than Stockton ever did ... Nash potentially is the better passer via superior passing skills / court vision. Nash plays better with either hand. Nash is just as good of a shooter as Stockton in terms of a set shot, Nash is WAY better at shooting off the dribble than Stockton. Nash creates HIS shot better than Stockton could do for himself.

Stockton and Malone ran a break neck style for a period of time, but it was different from Nash's tempo. Nash holds the ball more than Stockton ever did. Stockton is a superior man defender / tenacious as can be, but Nash is a crafty defender in his own right. He plays angles, draws charges very well. Nash is underrated on defense.

Nash is playing at a higher level now in his thirties than Stockton was in his thirties. Nash is THE dude (Lebowski style) on his team, and Stockton was numero dos on the Jazz. Nash holds much more weight for his team over the past 5 - 6 years than Stockton EVER did for the Jazz.

The comparison is being made via race and skin color. That's all.

And at least if they were going to do that they could've picked a better 90's counterpart to compare Nash to ... a prime Mark Price would've been better.

[BigTicket]

If we're just going by peak play, you could definately make a case for Nash. He's just as good a passer, and he is one of the best shooters of all time. He's arguably a better offensive player than Stockton, although he's obviously not as good a defender. I'll go with Stock, but it's close.

Nash is a great passer, but he's not as good as Stockton was. Stockton had 8 straight season with 12+ apg, Nash has never had 1.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Nash is the better scorer and can take over games, while Stockton is the better passer/playmaker and defender.

Toss-Up.
Nash is the better scorer / passer / playmaker

Stockton is the better defender

[Samurai Swoosh]

Nash is a great passer, but he's not as good as Stockton was. Stockton had 8 straight season with 12+ apg, Nash has never had 1.
Because Nash also scores more than Stockton ... not to mention, does Nash have anyone whose as good of a PF as Karl Malone (the best pick and pop big man of all time) to rack up EASY dimes with? No ... Nash creates more plays off the dribble for others than Stockton does. Stockton was surrounded with players who had AUTOMATIC jumpers. Thus, easy assists. Nash creates way more off the dribble in terms of creating for others.

[EricForman]

Not saying Nash isn't a great player, or that he isn't top 50 alltime, but it just annoys me how people talk about that 54 win season, as if we're supposed to be awed that an all-nba pg + an all-nba PF + solid roleplayers + great coach = 54 wins. I never understood why that was supposed to be surprising ?


I would bet anything that swap Iverson with Nash and the 06 Suns suck. Or put Nash on them Sixers squad from 04 to 06 that Iverson couldnt do nothing with and Nash turns them into 50 win ECFinalists.

Of course Marion put up numbers before Nash. But Marion is the type of player that plays the same way when he's on a 12 win team or a 60 win team. It's like he's just...there. Ultimately Nash drives the team and makes them win. It's been proven because other guys have come and gone. Really, if you say go back in time to 2005, take away Amare (whom everyone thought was a beast at the time) and put in current Grant Hill or Channing Frye. You think the Suns drop off and become an 8th seed? They probably still win 54 or 55. Now what sense does this make? No way is current Hill as good as Amare, but Nash would find a way to get more from everyone else to make up for whatever diff in production between 05 Amare and current Grant Hill. Of course this is just my opinion and guess, but I believe this. Nash has done enough to show you can interchange any part of the Suns team.

If you dont think he's top 50. THat's okay that is debatable. we'll just agree to disagree. I think Nash this decade has been one of the greatest offensive guards ever. Not just PPG, but total offense.

[DC Zephyrs]

Nash is a great passer, but he's not as good as Stockton was. Stockton had 8 straight season with 12+ apg, Nash has never had 1.

I'm a big Stockton fan, but his assists numbers are inflated, even more so than Nash's. He's one of the greatest passers ever, but he's not getting 14.5 assists a game on any other team or any other system, ever.

I've seen enough of Nash and enough of Stockton to know that if Nash wasn't as good a passer as Stockton, he was very close.

[BigTicket]

Because Nash also scores more than Stockton ... not to mention, does Nash have anyone whose as good of a PF as Karl Malone (the best pick and pop big man of all time) to rack up EASY dimes with? No ... Nash creates more plays off the dribble for others than Stockton does. Stockton was surrounded with players who had AUTOMATIC jumpers. Thus, easy assists. Nash creates way more off the dribble in terms of creating for others.

Amare may not be Karl Malone, but he's not exactly a scrub either, and the Suns have a ton of shooters around Nash.

Stockton has 5 of the 6 best seasons ever in terms of apg, and the assist record is his by such a dominant margin that its doubtful it will ever be broken (Nash is about to turn 36, and he has half as many). The only player who should ever be argued as an equal passer to Stockton is Magic.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Amare may not be Karl Malone, but he's not exactly a scrub either
Amare's a superstar player no doubt ... but I'm saying with Malone you get easy / effortless plays. Just a simple pass if the defender rolls with Stockton to stop dribble penetration and he kicks it to Malone who was automatic from the elbow extended. Amare's game is different, Nash gets him the ball then he'll move via his own dribble / post moves etc. Negates some assists in the process.

[G.O.A.T]

He faced some really strong teams though. It's not like he stunked it up and lost to an inferior team. I mean 05 and 07 Spurs (and we all remember how close 07 was) were strong. We talking about a top ten player all time in his prime. 06 the Suns just had bad luck--Amare and Kurt Thomas was out. WIth just one of those guys they probably beat the Mavs.

MVP is a regular season award, you can't hold the fact he's ran into strong teams in the playoffs against him.

I was originally one of those guys who thought Nash was a fluke too. Nash beating Shaq for MVP was absolutely the craziest thing ever in my eyes in 2005. But really look at Nash now. He has proven that he can win with that system with ANYONE. Remember when detractors said it was only cause he has a freak of nature in Amare? Or remember how people say it's cause Marion is so versatile? Nash has done it without both. He's running with Channing Frye and getting similar results out of him.

As long as you dont put scrubs around Nash he gets something out of them and they win. Really, all Nash needs is one or two lanky forwards and a shooter and a slasher and he'll get wins. Team him with say, Ty Thomas, Tyson Chandler, JJ Reddick and like, Jamario Moon and he leads that team to 48 wins probably.

He's also quite possibly the best over 35 point guard ever right now. So really, Nash has proven he belongs in the conversation with other greats. Maybe back to back MVPs is a bit much. But he deserves at least one.


I can't ever justify it. he was never a top five player in my eyes and the Suns were never legit title contenders. That was my impression of them when they started out hot in 2005 and it's never changed.

It's much like John Stockton, who I think is an all-time great as well, but rightfully was never a top four MVP vote getter.

[G.O.A.T]

You just named similar albeit universal basketball skills. Nash / Stockton are great in the pick and role. Would anyone sare say Chris Paul plays like Nash / Stockton. No ... the comparison is made via race. Nash plays NOTHING like John Stockton. Nash handles the ball way more, creates off the dribble better, has more flash and pizzaz to his game than Stockton ever did ... Nash potentially is the better passer via superior passing skills / court vision. Nash plays better with either hand. Nash is just as good of a shooter as Stockton in terms of a set shot, Nash is WAY better at shooting off the dribble than Stockton. Nash creates HIS shot better than Stockton could do for himself.

Stockton and Malone ran a break neck style for a period of time, but it was different from Nash's tempo. Nash holds the ball more than Stockton ever did. Stockton is a superior man defender / tenacious as can be, but Nash is a crafty defender in his own right. He plays angles, draws charges very well. Nash is underrated on defense.

Nash is playing at a higher level now in his thirties than Stockton was in his thirties. Nash is THE dude (Lebowski style) on his team, and Stockton was numero dos on the Jazz. Nash holds much more weight for his team over the past 5 - 6 years than Stockton EVER did for the Jazz.

The comparison is being made via race and skin color. That's all.

And at least if they were going to do that they could've picked a better 90's counterpart to compare Nash to ... a prime Mark Price would've been better.

I disagree with almost everything you say here. Stockton has all-time great court vision and passing skills. Created his own shot just as well as Nash when he needed to and threw plenty of no look and behind the back passes.

I just think you're reaching because it seems too obvious since they are both white. And yes I'd say Chris Paul plays exactly like John Stockton (on the perimeter), he's just much bigger, stronger and more athletic and so his game changes when he gets in the lane to something Stockton could never do.

[Andrei89]

John who?>

[catch24]

If my team ran a fast run and gun pace, I'd go with Nash. If I want an all around point guard who has the ability to play on both ends, give me Stockton. Their leadership skills are a wash.

[SCdac]

If we're going by their peaks, I'll take John Stockton easily. 14.5 assists per game, 2.7 steals, and 17 PPG on .514 FG% ? That's simply amazing. The next season (1991) averaging basically the same thing. And the fact that Sloans Jazz player at a slower pace is only more impressive when looking at his seasons of 1100+ assists. From 88 to 95, Stockton was averaging more assists per game than Nash ever has - 8 straight seasons of 12+ assists per game. If that's not consistency, I don't know what is. Maybe he's not as good of a three point shooter from year to year, but it's not like he hasn't had seasons in the mid-40's % wise... Stockton was def one of my favorite players growing up, wouldn't hesitate to take him over Nash.

[Lebron23]

Steve Nash

2x NBA MVP

[purple32gold]

Steve Nash

2x NBA MVP
if that is your absolute clear cut argument, i would really like to understand your reasoning. no way should steve have won 2 back to back, the first one was warranted and very deserved, the 2nd...with kobe putting up 35ppg a state over, tmac playing well, timmy, ect.

[Mrofir]

That goes both ways you know. Or maybe you think its a coincidence that Nashs assists, shooting percentage, effective field goal percentage, and points per attempt all went up dramatically once he got guys like Stoudemire and Marion to pass to, and a higher pace team to play on.

No, it doesn't go both ways. How many times must it happen before people take notice? REMEMBER??????

Marion, Bell, Diaw, Q, Jim Jackson, Tim Thomas, Shaq, Gordan Giricek, James Jones, Kurt Thomas, Jumaine Jones, Matt Barnes, Steven Hunter

That's a list of 13 players off the top of my head who came into Phoenix, had their most productive season(s), left, and either came back down to Earth, or dropped completely off the face of it. I could make a completely different list of players whose careers have been reinvigorated by Nash's presence that HAVEN'T left, starting with Grant Hill and Channing Frye.

Individual cases may vary -- someone might say "HEY MAN!! Matt Barnes is still averaging 5 rebounds a game this year!!" But dudes,

GIVE NASH HIS CREDIT. He's a freaking phenomenal offensive player. At his peak he controlled the game like no point guard ever has. You knew it when you saw it. I don't know if I'd rank him ahead of Stockton all time (no I wouldn't unless he gives us 3-4 more years at the current level), but depending on the composition of my team, in many cases I'd take Nash at his peak over Stockton. 50\50.


And I must add: No elite level player is disrespected as much as Nash. Nobody is so heavily assaulted for having won an MVP. Out of the past 13 MVP winners, starting with Barkley in 92-93, 6 have never won a championship. Barkley probably never will. None of those winners are criticized by means of overrating the talent they had around them, except for Nash.

If someone could come up with a similar clear-cut list for any other player ever, I would be purely curious and impressed to see it.

[KAJ=GOAT]

Is this a joke?

lol at the dude who said Nashs defense wasn't all that bad because he takes charges.


When did standing there and waiting to get ran into to draw a foul become a part of playing defense?


We're talking about the career assists and steals leader against, lol, Steve Nash.

[Mrofir]

Something has happened to ISH. I don't think I'll spend much time thinking about how to write a post here anymore. I never felt like everyone read each post and thought about what others were saying, but often times if I had something to say, SOMEONE would notice and respond, agree or not.. back in 2007.

Now, nobody reads anything. Nobody responds to anyone. Just a series of semi-related posts on some topic. The only responses are total flames. WTF

[G.O.A.T]

Something has happened to ISH. I don't think I'll spend much time thinking about how to write a post here anymore. I never felt like everyone read each post and thought about what others were saying, but often times if I had something to say, SOMEONE would notice and respond, agree or not.. back in 2007.

Now, nobody reads anything. Nobody responds to anyone. Just a series of semi-related posts on some topic. The only responses are total flames. WTF

You just got to find the people who want to listen and learn. Some moderation and organization would make it easier, but that's not this sites goal.

Check out my GOAT list or drop me a PM anytime you want to talk hoops.

[D.J.]

Offensively, Nash does get the edge. He was a better shooter, just as efficient, and was also great at creating for his teammates. However, defense is the main issue. Not only was Stockton a far superior defender, he actually played defense. Steve Nash has two MVP's, but has never been to the Finals. Stockton would have at least one ring if he did not run into Jordan or a prime Olajuwon.

[Micku]

Bumping because of I was going to make this thread.

Stockton would probably get the edge because of defense. Both are great though, but John Stockon is the all time leader of assists and steals, and he scored very efficiently.

Nash is very good offensively, and might be better than Stockton in that aspect. But Nash is playing very well without the talent he used to have in his prime.

[StateOfMind12]

Steve Nash. John Stockton's greatness doesn't come from his prime or peak play, it comes from his longevity. Does anyone here even know when Stockton's peak and prime years were? Cause I honestly don't. It shows that Stockton was consistently great for a long period of time but he was never flat out dominant in some seasons than he was in other seasons like many other all-time greats were. With that being said, Stockton was never the offensive player Nash was.

[joshwake]

Steve Nash. John Stockton's greatness doesn't come from his prime or peak play, it comes from his longevity. Does anyone here even know when Stockton's peak and prime years were? Cause I honestly don't. It shows that Stockton was consistently great for a long period of time but he was never flat out dominant in some seasons than he was in other seasons like many other all-time greats were. With that being said, Stockton was never the offensive player Nash was.
Reading this I know for a fact you did not see him play during his peak. If any PG today put up the kind of numbers he did from around 88-92 everyone would be screaming for him to be MVP. And the crazy thing is his numbers on paper don't show how good he really was. I am convinced he could take over a game just as good as any offensive PG when he was at his peak, he just chose to keep the team involved.

[Xiao Yao You]

I think the only knocks on Stockton are he was too unselfish and too loyal to the Jazz.

Only knock on Nash is D.

Both all-time great players that were/are a pleasure to watch play the game the way it was meant to be played as a team. Now it's Rubio's turn to continue the great tradition.

[Sarcastic]

Nash is/was far better than Stockton.

Stockton never came close to winning an MVP. Nash has 2.

[Odinn]

Nash is/was far better than Stockton.

Stockton never came close to winning an MVP. Nash has 2.
I'd love to see Nash coming close to winning an MVP while Jordan-Malone-Barkley-Hakeem-DRob was in their primes.:roll:

[Sarcastic]

I'd love to see Nash coming close to winning an MVP while Jordan-Malone-Barkley-Hakeem-DRob was in their primes.:roll:

He did it during Kobe-Shaq-Duncan-Dirk-Lebron-Wade in their prime.

[Scoooter]

Nash.

[UtahJazzFan88]

He did it during Kobe-Shaq-Duncan-Dirk-Lebron-Wade in their prime.

Shaq was in his prime in 2005/2006? :confusedshrug:

Kobe was on a team with no talent around him really, can't win an MVP without having a lot of wins for a regular season award.

Duncan and Dirk certainly had nice seasons, but Nash edged them out due to the fact Amare was out the whole season basically from what I remember.

I guess Derrick Rose is an even or better player to Kobe if you're judging how good a player is by MVP awards, which is a bit flawed of an award.

[brisbaneman]

Stockton was a uniquely nasty and dirty player. Give me Stockton.

[Harison]

Stockton was better all-around player than Nash ever was. Its obvious that people who pick Nash are from a younger generation and didnt see Stockton in prime.

What concerns MVPs, you dont win those if there is a better player on a team (Malone). Would Nash win MVP on those Jazz teams? Of course not. And another thing - in the Golden age Nash wouldnt even be close to winning MVPs even if he was the "man" on a team without Malone.

Accolades comparison is meaningless if circumstances are ignored.

[brisbaneman]

Stockton was better all-around player than Nash ever was. Its obvious that people who pick Nash are from a younger generation and didnt see Stockton in prime.

What concerns MVPs, you dont win those if there is a better player on a team (Malone). Would Nash win MVP on those Jazz teams? Of course not. And another thing - in the Golden age Nash wouldnt even be close to winning MVPs even if he was the "man" on a team without Malone.

Accolades comparison is meaningless if circumstances are ignored.

Nash absolutely deserved his MVPs

[Odinn]

He did it during Kobe-Shaq-Duncan-Dirk-Lebron-Wade in their prime.
Let's see...

2004-05 season;
O'Neal, LeBron and Wade weren't in their primes. Duncan and Kobe suffered injuries, both of them missed 16 games.

2005-06 season;
O'Neal, LeBron and Wade weren't in their primes. Maybe you can make a case for Wade being in his prime due to his playoff run. Duncan didn't force himself. Kobe who should won the MVP in that year.

Are you truly Sarcastic?:oldlol: Nash has more MVPs than Kobe and O'Neal? Did you realize?:oldlol: :oldlol:

[Sarcastic]

Let's see...

2004-05 season;
O'Neal, LeBron and Wade weren't in their primes. Duncan and Kobe suffered injuries, both of them missed 16 games.

2005-06 season;
O'Neal, LeBron and Wade weren't in their primes. Maybe you can make a case for Wade being in his prime due to his playoff run. Duncan didn't force himself. Kobe who should won the MVP in that year.

Are you truly Sarcastic?:oldlol: Nash has more MVPs than Kobe and O'Neal? Did you realize?:oldlol: :oldlol:

How is 04/05 Shaq not prime? He finished second in MVP voting.

05/06 Lebron put up 31.4/7/6.6 on a 50 win team.

How is that not prime numbers? He has never scored that much since.

[Odinn]

How is 04/05 Shaq not prime? He finished second in MVP voting.

05/06 Lebron put up 31.4/7/6.6 on a 50 win team.

How is that not prime numbers? He has never scored that much since.
Just shut up. Everyone slammed you, and you keep scattering some trashes.

[Sarcastic]

Just shut up. Everyone slammed you, and you keep scattering some trashes.

What?

Stockton was barely a top 10 player for most of his prime (if you were around at the time, you would know). Nash has done far more, with far less than Stockton ever had.

[Asukal]

Nash is/was far better than Stockton.

Stockton never came close to winning an MVP. Nash has 2.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :hammerhead:

ISHIOTS! :applause:

[Micku]

Nash is/was far better than Stockton.

Stockton never came close to winning an MVP. Nash has 2.

Steve Nash wouldn't win MVP in the 90s. Look at the competition:

Jordan
Hakeem
Shaq
David Robinson
Charles Barkley
Patrick Ewing
Karl Malone
Scottie Pippen
Alonzo Mourning
Clyde Drexler
Gary Payton
Kevin Johnson
Isiah Thomas

That's too much talent, and the teams were too good. Michael Jordan was MVP mostly throughout the 90s, Hakeem, Barkley and Karl Malone would beat Nash out. Plus you have Shaq in Orlando/Lakers.

Nash wouldn't win any MVPs. I think if you replace Nash with Stockton, they wouldn't be that much of a difference. If Nash was on the Jazz he would do well, but he wouldn't be the best player on the team like the Suns. Karl Malone was better than him, but Nash would average a decent amount of assists like always. Could he average the same amount of assists like Stockton? Who knows, maybe not. It probably doesn't matter since the results would not change. They wouldn't win a ring.

But what separates them is the defense. Stockton could played it better than Nash. Plus, Stockton is number 1 in NBA history in assists and steals.

[Myth]

The one that plays defense and goes to the Finals.

[bumpyknucks]

I know it

[Lebron23]

John Stockton. They nearly produced the same numbers, but Stockton played better defense.

[Asukal]

John Stockton. They nearly produced the same numbers, but Stockton played better defense.

Far more better defense and 1-2 more apg. Nash has what? 1-2 more ppg? :roll:

Although on topic peak vs peak, its a close call. :cheers:

[rodman91]

Very close but Nash.

Prime Nash was much better scorer and shooter. Stockton was good to great jumpshooter.

Stockton was much better on defense though.

Nash had ability to carry and take games over with his scoring power. Stockton didn't had such ability.

Nash and Stocton has similar stats because of they are pass first players but in reality Nash was far better scorer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS5G8Pzsu_g&feature=related

[obonpaxis]

Stockton didn't shoot much, but when he did he was efficient. And he was twice the defender Nash was.

Compare their best supporting cast. If you were a PG, who would you rather have? 2005 Amare/Marion/Johnson/Richardson or 1997 Malone/Hornacek/Russell/Ostertag? I think Stockton did more with less.

[Go Getter]

Very close but Nash.

Prime Nash was much better scorer and shooter. Stockton was good to great jumpshooter.

Stockton was much better on defense though.

Nash had ability to carry and take games over with his scoring power. Stockton didn't had such ability.

Nash and Stocton has similar stats because of they are pass first players but in reality Nash was far better scorer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS5G8Pzsu_g&feature=related
A far better scorer yet he only averages a couple points more in the non handcheck era?


So since Stock has far more assists and steals does that make him a far better passer and defender?

[Kiddlovesnets]

Not even close... Stockton is a top 5 PG of all time, Nash aint top 10.

[rodman91]

A far better scorer yet he only averages a couple points more in the non handcheck era?


So since Stock has far more assists and steals does that make him a far better passer and defender?

He was better at many aspects of scoring. Driving,creating space,finishing.. They have just took same amount of shots.

Steve Nash carried Suns with scoring, especially in playoffs. He had better arsenal compared to Stockton.

[Nashty]

Nash- better shooter, Stockton was very good but his most shots were open, when his man goes under the screen or when Malone kicks back to him for wide open shot or, Nash on the otherside is great at creatig his own shot off the dribble and hits fadeaway jumpshots, neither of them were great at driving and finishing at the rim, but Nash was better.

Nash for me was a better passer too, and don't start with the numbers, because Stockton got most of his assist just by passing the ball to Malone in the post and then Malone hits a no dribble or one dribble turnaround jumper or hook shot, or hitting a guy who comes gets open after off the ball screen, Nash is better at creating plays off the dribble, pick an roll , drive and kicks, keeping the dribble alive, both were great in transition.

Stockton was better defender, but Nash is a better overall player.

[Go Getter]

He was better at many aspects of scoring. Driving,creating space,finishing.. They have just took same amount of shots.

Steve Nash carried Suns with scoring, especially in playoffs. He had better arsenal compared to Stockton.
Carried them where exactly?

Steve Nash is the better shooter by numbers but John played in an era where guards could actually be touched on a drive.

Imagine him playing now:bowdown:

With all of Nash's passing abilities Stockton was a cut above in passing and in another league as far as DEFENDING HIS POSITION.

Would Nash be effective as Stockton against Zeke and the Piston's defense (with hand checking)?

[Go Getter]

Nash- better shooter, Stockton was very good but his most shots were open, when his man goes under the screen or when Malone kicks back to him for wide open shot or, Nash on the otherside is great at creatig his own shot off the dribble and hits fadeaway jumpshots, neither of them were great at driving and finishing at the rim, but Nash was better.

Nash for me was a better passer too, and don't start with the numbers, because Stockton got most of his assist just by passing the ball to Malone in the post and then Malone hits a no dribble or one dribble turnaround jumper or hook shot, or hitting a guy who comes gets open after off the ball screen, Nash is better at creating plays off the dribble, pick an roll , drive and kicks, keeping the dribble alive, both were great in transition.

Stockton was better defender, but Nash is a better overall player.
:rolleyes:

[Maniak]

Not even close... Stockton is a top 5 PG of all time, Nash aint top 10.
You're hilarious.

I'd rather have Stockton than Nash, though.

[Nashty]

:rolleyes:

???

Stockton was near as good as Nash at creating his own shot and at shooting fadeaway jumpers.

Malone did most of the work, unlike Nash-Amare.

Yes, he is.

[rodman91]

Nash would be effective in any era with that godly shooting & passing skill. Get real.

[ThatsGame]

Stockton is clearly better. Look at his stats.

[Go Getter]

???

Stockton was near as good as Nash at creating his own shot and at shooting fadeaway jumpers.

Malone did most of the work, unlike Nash-Amare.

Yes, he is.
Who cares about fadeaway jumpers.

ALL TIME ASSISTS AND STEALS LEADER.

Do you have any idea what that means to have that title as one man in one uniform?

:bowdown:

And I guess Nash also made Dirk a HOF, made pre knree-injury Amare one of the best finishers of all-time, and gave Joe Johnson the ability to go out and net a max contract too.

[Go Getter]

Nash would be effective in any era with that godly shooting & passing skill. Get real.
READ: "As effective"

[Nashty]

Who cares about fadeaway jumpers.

ALL TIME ASSISTS AND STEALS LEADER.

Do you have any idea what that means to have that title as one man in one uniform?

:bowdown:

And I guess Nash also made Dirk a HOF, made pre knree-injury Amare one of the best finishers of all-time, and gave Joe Johnson the ability to go out and net a max contract too.

:applause: for assists and steals leader but that don't make him better player than Nash.

No, but Malone made Stockton a great assist man. Imagine if Amare had low post skills like Malone, Nash would average 15 assists easily.

[DKLaker]

Stockton's numbers for a 10+ year stretch on offense and defense are unreal!!!
There is NO COMPARISON AT ALL......It's all :bowdown: STOCKTON!!!!!

[Foster5k]

Anyone picking Nash doesn't know basketball.

John Stockton was a beast.

[TheAdmiral3]

Anyone picking Stockton doesn't know basketball.

Steve Nash was a beast.

[1987_Lakers]

Anyone picking Stockton doesn't know basketball.

Steve Nash was a beast.
:lol

[rodman91]

Who cares about fadeaway jumpers.

ALL TIME ASSISTS AND STEALS LEADER.

Do you have any idea what that means to have that title as one man in one uniform?

:bowdown:

And I guess Nash also made Dirk a HOF, made pre knree-injury Amare one of the best finishers of all-time, and gave Joe Johnson the ability to go out and net a max contract too.

If Stockton has Nash's scoring skills, they would have better chance against Bulls.

Everybody blames Malone for shortcomings but it was Stockton who sucked againts Bulls in 98.

24 pts (%75) 8 asts
9 pts (%80) 7 asts
2 pts (%25) 7 asts
7 pts (%27) 13 asts
6 pts (%43) 12 asts
10 pts (%40) 5 asts

Stockton at 35 in 98 finals : 9.6 ppg & 8.6 apg. :rolleyes:

Steve Nash at 35 vs Lakers : 17.6 ppg 11.8 apg
Steve Nash at 35 vs Spurs : 22 ppg 7.8 apg

Nash was far better at creating his own shots.

[D.J.]

Nash absolutely deserved his MVPs


I have no problem with his first MVP. His 2nd MVP, not so much. Kobe, Dirk, and LeBron all deserved it more.

[greymatter]

Purely from an offensive perspective, Nash is clearly better. They're about equal as distributors, but Nash is just an all-around better shooter.

PG defense has very little impact on the defensive side of the ball. It's why garbage like Fisher and Jameer Nelson can be starters and still play on teams which have given up 42-43% shooting over the past few years.

Though Stockton was clearly a better overall player, it's not necessarily easy to say you could more easily build a team around him. For one thing, all but one of his seasons he had Mailman; so there's no actual sample to compare. Nash has had to deal with different pieces coming in and out and up until last year was still able to play at an elite level, proving that he can take any cast and elevate them on the offensive side of the ball (just like CP3).

[DKLaker]

Purely from an offensive perspective, Nash is clearly better. They're about equal as distributors, but Nash is just an all-around better shooter.

PG defense has very little impact on the defensive side of the ball. It's why garbage like Fisher and Jameer Nelson can be starters and still play on teams which have given up 42-43% shooting over the past few years.

Though Stockton was clearly a better overall player, it's not necessarily easy to say you could more easily build a team around him. For one thing, all but one of his seasons he had Mailman; so there's no actual sample to compare. Nash has had to deal with different pieces coming in and out and up until last year was still able to play at an elite level, proving that he can take any cast and elevate them on the offensive side of the ball (just like CP3).


:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: FAIL!!!!!!!! Learn basketball before you post crap like this :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[BlackJoker23]

nash and it aint even close

[D.J.]

Purely from an offensive perspective, Nash is clearly better. They're about equal as distributors, but Nash is just an all-around better shooter.


Agree that Nash is a better shooter and more versatile offensively. Stockton was a better distributor.


PG defense has very little impact on the defensive side of the ball. It's why
garbage like Fisher and Jameer Nelson can be starters and still play on teams which have given up 42-43% shooting over the past few years.


If it has very little impact, perhaps Nash would have made the Finals at least once. I guess him getting burned by guys like Tony Parker and Jason Terry did have an impact.



Though Stockton was clearly a better overall player, it's not necessarily easy to say you could more easily build a team around him. For one thing, all but one of his seasons he had Mailman; so there's no actual sample to compare. Nash has had to deal with different pieces coming in and out and up until last year was still able to play at an elite level, proving that he can take any cast and elevate them on the offensive side of the ball (just like CP3).


Malone did not make Stockton, nor did Malone need Stockton. They complimented each other perfectly. But Malone was not responsible for all of Stockton's assists or even the majority. Stockton certainly elevated his teammates. Thurl Bailey was putting up nearly 20 a night. Jeff Malone's eFG% and overall offensive efficiency actually went up with Stockton. Jeff Hornacek's eFG% went up playing with Stockton.

[greymatter]

:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: FAIL!!!!!!!! Learn basketball before you post crap like this :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Maybe pull your nose out of Kobe's ass before talking.

[rule1223]

nash has 2 mvps 'nuff said

[greymatter]

Malone did not make Stockton, nor did Malone need Stockton. They complimented each other perfectly. But Malone was not responsible for all of Stockton's assists or even the majority. Stockton certainly elevated his teammates. Thurl Bailey was putting up nearly 20 a night. Jeff Malone's eFG% and overall offensive efficiency actually went up with Stockton. Jeff Hornacek's eFG% went up playing with Stockton.

Never said Stockton didn't elevate his teammates. The point was that he had a lot more continuity than Nash's Suns teams have had and that it's not as easy to compare how good they were at elevating.

Thurl Bailey and both Jeffs aren't very good examples. Bailey's last two seasons with Utah already showed a sizable dropoff before he was traded. The 2 Jeffs were already 17-20ppg scorers. Malone showed a modest 1.5 to 2% increase in FG% while Horny's efficiency stayed fairly close to his Suns days.

[greymatter]

If it has very little impact, perhaps Nash would have made the Finals at least once. I guess him getting burned by guys like Tony Parker and Jason Terry did have an impact.


Amare and Diaw anchoring the Dantoni defense had a lot more to do with Nash not making the finals than TP and JT.