Steve Nash ran the NBA's top offense for 9 years straight

[KevinNYC]

Quote from another thread
Fact: people on ISH overrate PG's who put up big numbers in bad offenses, and underrate PG's who put up less numbers while orchestrating great offenses.

"Michael Jordan and Wilt Chamberlain each led the league in scoring for seven straight seasons. Steve Nash ran the league’s best offense for nine straight (http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2014/10/24/nashs-greatness-found-in-the-numbers/), a run that started when Shaq and Kobe Bryant were at their best and ended when LeBron James was winning multiple MVPs."



The Suns played at a fast pace, but we’re not looking at points per game, here. We’re looking at points per possession. And not only did Nash run the No. 1 offense of the last 37 years, he’s run each of the top five offenses of the last 37 years.
https://turnernbahangtime.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/20141024_nash.gif

[navy]

Offensive maestro

[warriorfan]

He was the best at one half of the game during the regular season. Woohoo!

[24-Inch_Chrome]

He's so underrated on ISH. Some of the hate is just trolling but he still doesn't get the respect he deserves.

[navy]

He's so underrated on ISH. Some of the hate is just trolling but he still doesn't get the respect he deserves.
"Stole" Kobe's mvps. What do you expect. :confusedshrug:

[24-Inch_Chrome]

"Stole" Kobe's mvps. What do you expect. :confusedshrug:

True, all of the hate that isn't pure trolling comes from Kobe stans.

[AboutBuckets]

He was the best at one half of the game during the regular season. Woohoo!

http://i61.tinypic.com/2vknczk.jpg

[Young X]

This is why he's one of the greatest PG's ever. There's nothing more important at that position than running an offense effectively and few were better at it than Nash.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

This is why he's one of the greatest PG's ever. There's nothing more important at that position than running an offense effectively and few were better at it than Nash.

:applause:

[Keno]

and lead them to 1st round exits and most likely worst defensive team for 9 years. i like nash but come on...

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Show the Defense Ratings too :lol

[KevinNYC]

and lead them to 1st round exits and most likely worst defensive team for 9 years. i like nash but come on...
You know you can look this up.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

and lead them to 1st round exits and most likely worst defensive team for 9 years. i like nash but come on...

Um, what? Nash led Phoenix to one first round exit during that string of league leading ORTGs while bringing them to 3 Western Conference Finals and one Western Conference Semifinals.

During his time with Dallas as the league's best offense they lost once in the first round while making the Western Conference Finals and the Western Conference Semifinals once.

[warriorfan]

Show the Defense Ratings too :lol

Serious I hate it when these guys go on and on about NASH OFFENSIVE GOAT when they don't address the part that they basically punted defense. If you solely focus on offense guess what, your offense is probably gonna be fuccing good. Guess what, this isn't a viable winning strategy. It's bullshit gimmick ball.

What would happen if we made a team with Kevin Garnet, Ben Wallace, Bruce Bowen, Tony Allen, and Rajon Rondo. Guess what would happen, they would set records for #1 defense in all categories and then score about 60 points a game. GOAT defense but it doesn't mean shit.


There are 2 sides to basketball, Nash would only show up for one of them.

[Im Still Ballin]

Nash's my boy.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Serious I hate it when these guys go on and on about NASH OFFENSIVE GOAT when they don't address the part that they basically punted defense. If you solely focus on offense guess what, your offense is probably gonna be fuccing good. Guess what, this isn't a viable winning strategy. It's bullshit gimmick ball.

What would happen if we made a team with Kevin Garnet, Ben Wallace, Bruce Bowen, Tony Allen, and Rajon Rondo. Guess what would happen, they would set records for #1 defense in all categories and then score about 60 points a game. GOAT defense but it doesn't mean shit.


There are 2 sides to basketball, Nash would only show up for one of them.

http://i.giphy.com/kl2klL3zB1ois.gif

No one has claimed he was great, or even good defensively. Just that he was an all-time great level offensive point guard. Which he factually was. Now **** off and troll in some other thread, all we're going to be doing here is discussing offensive impact.

[Im Still Ballin]

Shawn Marion was the closest thing they had to a rim defender

Don't knock Nash because Amare is terrible on defense

[warriorfan]

I'm mad because warriorfan hit me with a lethal dose of rat poison


:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[KevinNYC]

The other crazy thing about this is he did for two different teams and two different coaches.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

I think you've got some kind of a learning disability. If I'm not saying he's a good defender and you're telling me he's not a good defender you've accomplished jack shit. That's not "rat poison."

[24-Inch_Chrome]

The other crazy thing about this is he did for two different teams and two different coaches.

Yeah, I was surprised to see those 3 years with Dallas on the list. It speaks to his offensive skill level as a player and takes away from his detractors who argue that he was nothing more than a product of the Phoenix system (which is a :facepalm argument).

[IGOTGAME]

Shawn Marion was the closest thing they had to a rim defender

Don't knock Nash because Amare is terrible on defense

They played with that lineup because of Nash. With a traditional lineup he goes back to what he was in Dallas.

[Im Still Ballin]

They played with that lineup because of Nash. With a traditional lineup he goes back to what he was in Dallas.
Replace Amare with Garnett and they'd have won a championship or two

He's got the mobility and skill to run and gun

And he can lock down the paint

[iamgine]

Serious I hate it when these guys go on and on about NASH OFFENSIVE GOAT when they don't address the part that they basically punted defense. If you solely focus on offense guess what, your offense is probably gonna be fuccing good. Guess what, this isn't a viable winning strategy. It's bullshit gimmick ball.

What would happen if we made a team with Kevin Garnet, Ben Wallace, Bruce Bowen, Tony Allen, and Rajon Rondo. Guess what would happen, they would set records for #1 defense in all categories and then score about 60 points a game. GOAT defense but it doesn't mean shit.


There are 2 sides to basketball, Nash would only show up for one of them.
That is not correct. Their defensive rating was ranked at 13th-17th out of 30 teams, which was pretty much average. The Suns did play some defense.

[IGOTGAME]

Replace Amare with Garnett and they'd have won a championship or two

He's got the mobility and skill to run and gun

And he can lock down the paint

playing Garnet at center with Marion at 4 is a traditional lineup?

I also don't think they win playing that lineup. They would get pushed around too much, Spurs would beat them and same with the Heat.

Prime Duncan might work but its silly when you have to start cherry picking top 15 players(much better than Nash) to make a case for him playing a championship caliber style of play. When you add these players they are winning despite Nash's flawed style of play.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

That is not correct. Their defensive rating was ranked at 13th-17th out of 30 teams, which was pretty much average. The Suns did play some defense.

Facts don't work very well with him, just a warning.

[KevinNYC]

That is not correct. Their defensive rating was ranked at 13th-17th out of 30 teams, which was pretty much average. The Suns did play some defense.

Also the year before they got Nash, the Suns has S. Marbury. Their offensive rating was 21st and their defensive rating was 24th.

Also remember those Suns teams came very close to a championship.
Some injuries don't happen if the suspensions in 2007 don't happen....you never know.

[warriorfan]

That is not correct. Their defensive rating was ranked at 13th-17th out of 30 teams, which was pretty much average. The Suns did play some defense.


Yeah they would run the tanking teams out of the gym with their gimmick ball leading to inflated defensive stats. What happened every time in the playoffs? Experienced teams slowed the tempo and locked them down and their smallball bullshit wouldn't fly in the half court setting. Steve Nash should have asterisks by his shit. :oldlol:

[AussieG]

He was a great passer, high basketball IQ but his scoring was crazy efficient as well.

His teams were fun to watch. Especially with Amare, Marion, and all the 3 point shooters off the bench.

[AussieG]

Yeah they would run the tanking teams out of the gym with their gimmick ball leading to inflated defensive stats. What happened every time in the playoffs? Experienced teams slowed the tempo and locked them down and their smallball bullshit wouldn't fly in the half court setting. Steve Nash should have asterisks by his shit. :oldlol:
Agree it was always going to be hard to work in the playoffs but during the regular season they put on a great show and were great to watch.

They made basketball fun and entertaining which is more valuable to me, than winning internet arguments about players, legacies and stans.

It'll be interesting to see how far the Warriors can go in the next few seasons because they do a similar thing in some ways.

[Kblaze8855]

What would happen if we made a team with Kevin Garnet, Ben Wallace, Bruce Bowen, Tony Allen, and Rajon Rondo. Guess what would happen, they would set records for #1 defense in all categories and then score about 60 points a game. GOAT defense but it doesn't mean shit.

Thats funny to me because its pretty much the opposite of what the Mavs did the year the chart in the OP says they had the greatest offense in 40 years relative to their league.

That team they have at #1 had 5 all star level players on it on it...all of them offensive players first, second, and third. Dirk, Nash, Finley, Walker, and Jamison...all 5 were all stars while on the same general level of ability they were that year.

Jamison had his most productive years on the Warriors and was an all star on the Wizards. Finley did like 19 a game. Not bad for a teams 3rd or 4th best player. Walker was an all star the previous 2 years...put up 20/9/4 on the Hawks the next season then won a ring as a 3rd option the year after. The only one of the 5 who was quickly approaching washed up is Finley who was still their second leading scorer.

The Mavs fan topic for that year(We had individual topics for a teams fans not team forums) was named "2004 Mavs - 130PPG!".

They piled up scorers and offensive talent like they didnt know any better....won like 52 games...and lost in the first round.

They then decided to give Nashs money to Eric Dampier instead sensing that he was breaking down and they needed to build a more traditional team...

A laughable contract no doubt...but they won more with less talent/a worse offense and were in the finals by 06 and eventually won a ring with a PG called __ason Kidd who is often mocked for his teams poor offenses, a great mobile defensive bigman, Dirk making contested jumpers, and role players hustling.

In the end....I lean towards a good defense and someone who can make a couple shots under durress. Im not that worried what my offensive rating is when its a 2 point game with 40 seconds left. All the transition layups, open threes, and secondary break pullup jumpers that pad points per possession arent as easy to come by in a close game late.

Its exciting...but im not sure its what id call the best. Not when a lot of other great offenses had people who could and would just decide to score right now...and end a series.

If Jordans Bulls rating is less than Nashs(relative)....that mean I have more faith they score a basket I need?

I see it kinda like saying the leagues leading scorer or most efficient is automatically its best.

Ability to perform on command comes before the season average to me.

Id say Dirk....Hakeem...some guys like that who might have years in the 20-24 a game range....are often more reliable scorers than people scoring more.

And im not sure something similar doesnt apply to this.

Defensive rating may be better than offensive far as painting an accurate picture. But id have to look more into it to say for sure....

Im just saying....if Nashs suns and Magics Lakers have similar absurd ratings....is it wrong I lean to Magics lakers offense because Magic, Kareem, and Worthy could all just go get me a basket I need easier than those Suns could?

Is that not a fair tiebreaker?

Say the two are neck and neck....I dont know that they are...lets just assume.

One of them can get a good shot 90% of the time by giving it to Kareem.

One cant.

Irrational tiebreaker when the issue is which offense is best?

I dont feel like it is.

[iamgine]

Yeah they would run the tanking teams out of the gym with their gimmick ball leading to inflated defensive stats. What happened every time in the playoffs? Experienced teams slowed the tempo and locked them down and their smallball bullshit wouldn't fly in the half court setting. Steve Nash should have asterisks by his shit. :oldlol:
What happened in the playoff was they were outplayed by a better team in the Spurs. They did beat a lot of good teams in the playoff. They didn't punt defense at all like you suggested.

[inclinerator]

thought it was consensus on here that rs doesnt mean sht

[warriorfan]

Thats funny to me because its pretty much the opposite of what the Mavs did the year the chart in the OP says they had the greatest offense in 40 years relative to their league.

That team they have at #1 had 5 all star level players on it on it...all of them offensive players first, second, and third. Dirk, Nash, Finley, Walker, and Jamison...all 5 were all stars while on the same general level of ability they were that year.

Jamison had his most productive years on the Warriors and was an all star on the Wizards. Finley did like 19 a game. Not bad for a teams 3rd or 4th best player. Walker was an all star the previous 2 years...put up 20/9/4 on the Hawks the next season then won a ring as a 3rd option the year after. The only one of the 5 who was quickly approaching washed up is Finley who was still their second leading scorer.

The Mavs fan topic for that year(We had individual topics for a teams fans not team forums) was named "2004 Mavs - 130PPG!".

They piled up scorers and offensive talent like they didnt know any better....won like 52 games...and lost in the first round.

They then decided to give Nashs money to Eric Dampier instead sensing that he was breaking down and they needed to build a more traditional team...

A laughable contract no doubt...but they won more with less talent/a worse offense and were in the finals by 06 and eventually won a ring with a PG called __ason Kidd who is often mocked for his teams poor offenses, a great mobile defensive bigman, Dirk making contested jumpers, and role players hustling.

In the end....I lean towards a good defense and someone who can make a couple shots under durress. Im not that worried what my offensive rating is when its a 2 point game with 40 seconds left. All the transition layups, open threes, and secondary break pullup jumpers that pad points per possession arent as easy to come by in a close game late.

Its exciting...but im not sure its what id call the best. Not when a lot of other great offenses had people who could and would just decide to score right now...and end a series.

If Jordans Bulls rating is less than Nashs(relative)....that mean I have more faith they score a basket I need?

I see it kinda like saying the leagues leading scorer or most efficient is automatically its best.

Ability to perform on command comes before the season average to me.

Id say Dirk....Hakeem...some guys like that who might have years in the 20-24 a game range....are often more reliable scorers than people scoring more.

And im not sure something similar doesnt apply to this.

Defensive rating may be better than offensive far as painting an accurate picture. But id have to look more into it to say for sure....

Im just saying....if Nashs suns and Magics Lakers have similar absurd ratings....is it wrong I lean to Magics lakers offense because Magic, Kareem, and Worthy could all just go get me a basket I need easier than those Suns could?

Is that not a fair tiebreaker?

Say the two are neck and neck....I dont know that they are...lets just assume.

One of them can get a good shot 90% of the time by giving it to Kareem.

One cant.

Irrational tiebreaker when the issue is which offense is best?

I dont feel like it is.


:applause:


Great post.

[AnaheimLakers24]

Look at all those rings it won him

[KevinNYC]

He was a great passer, high basketball IQ but his scoring was crazy efficient as well.

His teams were fun to watch. Especially with Amare, Marion, and all the 3 point shooters off the bench.
It wasn't just his shooting. The TEAMS he played with became more offensively efficient.

A lot of point guards like Steph Curry and Goran Dragic are talking about how Nash changed the game.

[3ball]

Steve Nash was a nice player.. But....

His teams only had the top offense a few times IN THE REGULAR SEASON.

When the competition went up to the next level in the playoffs, his team's offenses were NOWHERE NEAR the top - his ball-dominant style did not have enough substance to succeed at a high level against the superior competition - this was proven over and over and over again... it was proven so much that it became cringeworthy watching him fail repeatedly (because you knew ahead of time all that all the ball-pounding was for naught and would end unfavorably for him).. Chris Paul's ball-dominant style finds the same fate in the playoffs.

It's not surprising that all the overhyped players disappoint in the playoffs, especially point guards - for example, Derrick Rose's WS/48 drops from 0.124 in the regular season, to 0.098 in the playoffs.. Chris Paul's drops from 0.246 to 0.189... Nash is no different - his drops from almost 20%, from 0.164 to 0.133.. This is all very significant because if Phoenix wins 62 games in the regular season, this is just fools gold - with Nash's win share drop-off, the Suns aren't really a 62-win team in the playoffs, hence their repeated disappointments.

Otoh, look at less over-hyped, but winning point guards like Isiah Thomas - his WS/48 actually INCREASES in the playoffs, significantly - from 0.109 to 0.143... So if Detroit wins 62 games in the regular season, this under-represents their true playoff strength, because Isiah's WS/48 increases 40% in the playoffs... Also, it really says something about Isiah's game that when the competition goes up to the next level in the playoffs, the team coalesces around his game - increases in HIS GAME specifically make the team better and more able to compete against better competition.

[Young X]

Steve Nash was a nice player.. But....

His teams only had the top offense a few times IN THE REGULAR SEASON.

When the competition went up to the next level in the playoffs, his team's offenses were NOWHERE NEAR the topThis isn't true. The '05-'07 and '10 Suns were all either #1 or #2 offensively in the postseason. They lost because of defense NOT offense.

[3ball]

This isn't true. The '05-'07 and '10 Suns were all either #1 or #2 offensively in the postseason. They lost because of defense NOT offense.
it's not even true for the three year period you mention - they only had a 107 ORtg when they lost to the Spurs in 2007.

and again, like most non-goat point guards, nash's win shares drop off materially in the playoffs - accordingly, a 62-win Suns team in the regular season is less than that in the playoffs due to Nash's win share drop-off.. this is why the Suns always disappoint in the playoffs - it's because NASH underperforms from his regular season standard - a Nash regular season is fool's gold.. the stats don't lie.

[navy]

it's not even true for the three year period you mention - they only had a 107 ORtg when they lost to the Spurs in 2007.

and again, like most non-goat point guards, nash's win shares drop off materially in the playoffs - accordingly, a 62-win Suns team in the regular season is less than that in the playoffs due to Nash's win share drop-off.. this is why the Suns always disappoint in the playoffs - it's because NASH underperforms from his regular season standard - a Nash regular season is fool's gold.. the stats don't lie.
do you know what win shares are?

[24-Inch_Chrome]

do you know what win shares are?

If he can't relate something to Jordan he knows jack shit about it.

[Young X]

it's not even true for the three year period you mention - they only had a 107 ORtg when they lost to the Spurs in 2007.

and again, like most non-goat point guards, nash's win shares drop off materially in the playoffs - accordingly, a 62-win Suns team in the regular season is less than that in the playoffs due to Nash's win share drop-off.. this is why the Suns always disappoint in the playoffs - it's because NASH underperforms from his regular season standard - a Nash regular season is fool's gold.. the stats don't lie.
The '05 Suns had a 114 ORtg against the Spurs and a 118 ORtg for the entire postseason which is historically good and better than their regular season output. They lost because they couldn't stop their opponents, they had more than enough to win offensively.

[joe]

it's not even true for the three year period you mention - they only had a 107 ORtg when they lost to the Spurs in 2007.

and again, like most non-goat point guards, nash's win shares drop off materially in the playoffs - accordingly, a 62-win Suns team in the regular season is less than that in the playoffs due to Nash's win share drop-off.. this is why the Suns always disappoint in the playoffs - it's because NASH underperforms from his regular season standard - a Nash regular season is fool's gold.. the stats don't lie.

Is this a serious post? Nash stepped up his game in the playoffs more than mostly any other player I have ever watched. How often did he drop 30+ points in the regular season? And he did it MANY times in the playoffs, while still getting double digit assists.

You know what I think.... most people on here never watched Nash play. And they just come in here spewing common anti-Nash statements that they heard others say, who also never watched him play. It is the only explanation for all of the ignorance in these threads.

The Suns lost in the playoffs because......wait for it.... they were not as good as the best teams. They were the second best team like, at least two or three times. Kobe was simply better than Nash. Duncan was simply better than Nash. It is very rare for a point guard to win a title as the best player on his team. The list is like, Isiah, Magic, and that is it. And one of those two is the size of Lebron James. So, do the math.

Also, 2007 was legitimately tainted for me, as a basketball fan. Forget the suspensions and Nash's freak nose bleed. Tim Donoughy was involved in that series and made some ridiculous calls at times against the Suns. Not to mention, Bruce Bowen was allowed to handcheck that ENTIRE series, and was not getting called for it. He kept smacking Nash's arms and the refs were just letting it go. It made me sick. That series made me hate Bruce Bowen, who otherwise is one of my favorite role players of all time. He was just doing his job, but the refs absolutely blew that series. Suns win that series, they probably do not lose another game in the playoffs. The Jazz and Cavaliers were not touching them.

[3ball]

i give nash props - but you gotta understand that extensive ball-domination simply DOES.... NOT.... WORK... Ball-domination never beats the best teams on ANY level, whether it's high school, college or the pros.

also, let's not forget that nash's stats didn't jump up to the elite level until the rule changes in 2005.

It was like night and day - for 8 seasons, his stats were at a lower level, and then ALL OF A SUDDEN, they increased sharply - and remained that way for the rest of his career... If it wasn't for the rule changes that increased everyone's numbers, this would be unheard of.
.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Yup, there 3ball goes with the rule changes. Take that shit somewhere else and stop rehashing the same crap again and again ad nauseam.

[3ball]

Yup, there 3ball goes with the rule changes.


I never bring up the rule changes unless they're relevant.

Nash's career is one of the best examples of how the rule changes helped everyone's game.

It was like night and day - for 8 seasons, his stats were at a lower level, and then ALL OF A SUDDEN, they increased sharply - and remained that way for the rest of his career.

If it wasn't for the rule changes that increased everyone's numbers, this would be completely unheard of.

[warriorfan]

Yup, there 3ball goes with the rule changes. Take that shit somewhere else and stop rehashing the same crap again and again ad nauseam.


It's called context you fuccing idiot.

[bdreason]

How many Finals appearances?




Nash was an amazing player, but the system that he ran was fools gold.

[dunksby]

Typical ISH, let's hate on a player's weakness in his tribute thread. :lol

[joe]

I never bring up the rule changes unless they're relevant.

Nash's career is one of the best examples of how the rule changes helped everyone's game.

It was like night and day - for 8 seasons, his stats were at a lower level, and then ALL OF A SUDDEN, they increased sharply - and remained that way for the rest of his career.

If it wasn't for the rule changes that increased everyone's numbers, this would be completely unheard of.

There are other factors to consider. Nash switched teams, and suddenly was the center piece of his teams offense. He was playing with a power forward that perfectly suited his game. Nash is also a basketball junkie and a gym rat; if any player would have a number spike in the middle of their career, it would be Nash. This is the guy who added a hook shot to his game at age 35. With both hands.

Another factor is that Nash is always content to do what is best for the team. In Dallas, it was Dirk and Michael Finley's team- Nash was the third guy. And as we learned later in his career, Nash is not the best spot up shooter. He is better having the ball in his hands, constantly creating for others. Dallas might not have been the best situation to really showcase his talent.

[joe]

How many Finals appearances?




Nash was an amazing player, but the system that he ran was fools gold.

How many finals appearances if the Suns were in the East? They did not win the title, of course, but finals appearances is not a good measure of how effective the team was.

In 2005, they were no less than the 4th best team. Spurs, Suns, Pistons, and Heat, in some order.

2006, even without Amare, they were one of the 4 best teams in the league. I think they would have beaten the 2006 Pistons, and would have had a shot against the Heat.

In 2007, they were quite clearly the 2nd best team in the league, arguably 1st with all the shenanigans in that Spurs series.

In 2010, they were arguably the 2nd best team in the league, maybe the 3rd. It comes down to them or the Celtics.


Nobody says that the Webber Kings were some fluke team just because they never made the finals. They happened to run into another great team, and some terrible luck. The Nash Suns are in the exact same boat; one of the greatest teams to never win the title. In my opinion, anyway.

[ImKobe]

And? Did it even result in ONE Finals appearance? He had some stacked rosters during that time, and didn't capitalize.

just look at the 05 Suns outside of Nash

Joe Johnson 17/5/4 on 46% shooting, 47,8% from 3 with 4.5 3PA
Shawn Marion 19/11/2/2/2 on 47,6% FG
Amare Stoudemire 26/9/2/1/2 on 56% FG

and top of that, they also had Q-Rich and other solid role players

they lost in 5 in the WCF :kobe:

They had the top offense because they didn't care about playing defense, and they just pushed the ball every time and more often than none, were able to outscore their opponents by a decent margin.

That style of play was never a winning formula in the Playoffs against top defensive teams like the Spurs.

[Jacks3]

those ORTG numbers are inflated by the suns strategy. they would sacrifice defense and rebounding by amare at the five and marion at the four. their coach didn't give a damn about defense. it was the same thing with the mavs under nelson. this would inflate their offense but consistently lead to their demise in the post-season.

[ralph_i_el]

Thanks for quoting me OP!

If you ranked every guard on only offense, Nash HAS to be in your top 10

[Bigsmoke]

The 2009 wasnt in the playoffs.


How do u run this epic offense and not make the playoffs:lol

[24-Inch_Chrome]

It's called context you fuccing idiot.

Look at the numbers before you open your mouth. :hammerhead:

3ball is full of shit about Nash's stats suddenly becoming elite. The only thing that really jumped in Phoenix relative to his Dallas days was his APG. His PPG actually dropped in his first year there (the 2005 season, when he supposedly took off).

You want context as to his eventual jump to "elite" (small bump in APG/2P%) status? Does a new, purely offensive system not offer that? It shouldn't be a surprise that Nash's offensive numbers went up in Phoenix but that's attributable to Phoenix's system rather than the rule changes.

[Bigsmoke]

How many finals appearances if the Suns were in the East? They did not win the title, of course, but finals appearances is not a good measure of how effective the team was.

In 2005, they were no less than the 4th best team. Spurs, Suns, Pistons, and Heat, in some order.

2006, even without Amare, they were one of the 4 best teams in the league. I think they would have beaten the 2006 Pistons, and would have had a shot against the Heat.

In 2007, they were quite clearly the 2nd best team in the league, arguably 1st with all the shenanigans in that Spurs series.

In 2010, they were arguably the 2nd best team in the league, maybe the 3rd. It comes down to them or the Celtics.


Nobody says that the Webber Kings were some fluke team just because they never made the finals. They happened to run into another great team, and some terrible luck. The Nash Suns are in the exact same boat; one of the greatest teams to never win the title. In my opinion, anyway.

The 06 Pistons would of raped the 06 suns.

The pistons already beaten the suns twice that year and they would have had home court advantage.

[Derka]

Um, what? Nash led Phoenix to one first round exit during that string of league leading ORTGs while bringing them to 3 Western Conference Finals and one Western Conference Semifinals.

During his time with Dallas as the league's best offense they lost once in the first round while making the Western Conference Finals and the Western Conference Semifinals once.

Yeah, its not worth arguing. Silly things like facts will never stop haters from hating.

[ArbitraryWater]

Because PGs anchor defenses.... their impact on Offense is FAR bigger.


How many Finals appearances?




Nash was an amazing player, but the system that he ran was fools gold.

Didn't expect you to say such a foolish thing.. elaborate on that.

BTW: The 2006 Pistons didn't rape the 2006 Cavaliers, in fact they were a few seconds away from being eliminated, so I doubt they'd rape the Suns.

[KevinNYC]

those ORTG numbers are inflated by the suns strategy. they would sacrifice defense and rebounding by amare at the five and marion at the four. their coach didn't give a damn about defense. it was the same thing with the mavs under nelson. this would inflate their offense but consistently lead to their demise in the post-season.

Are you making a pace argument? Because the stats in original post are per 100 possessions.

Or are you saying they put their 5 best offensive players on the floor.

[Norcaliblunt]

The Suns problems in those days were rebounding, no defensive anchor, their small frontline, and no second option to create offense in the half court. In the playoffs during crunch time they couldn't rebound and defend against the post, or big talented frontlines at all. Duncan, Dirk, and LA's huge frontline of Pau, Bynum, and Odom were just too much for Phoenix's bigs. Plus Nash was the only creator they had in the half court. They had no one else who could create a shot for themselves or others, other than Nash.

[John Tesh]

He was the best at one half of the game during the regular season. Woohoo!

:roll: