Defense vs. Offense

Also 97 Bulls...you can't just throw out guys like Bird or West because they played a little defense.....

And then turn around and continue to list a bunch of defense players that were also great offensive player. LOL....so lets get this straight. I can only list guys that pretty much solely played offense (who by the way are just as good or better than the guys you are listing)....but you can list of guys like Hakeem and Pippen and Payton and Howard and Mourning...etc. All of those guys play more offense than than the guys I'm listing played defense.

And even with you listing off all time elite defenders that happened to also be great offensive forces. You can't come up with hardly any examples of the defensive guy being better than the offensive guy. LOL

Lets get specific on one comparison. Nash vs Payton. A perfect example of this debate.

Do you think its crazy for someone to say Nash is/was the better player?

Scorers are common, while elite defenders are harder to come by. I know that my team will score through ball movement/screens/second chance points. However, I don't know if my team will be able to contain the other team's players.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Also 97 Bulls...you can't just throw out guys like Bird or West because they played a little defense.....

And then turn around and continue to list a bunch of defense players that were also great offensive player. LOL....so lets get this straight. I can only list guys that pretty much solely played offense (who by the way are just as good or better than the guys you are listing)....but you can list of guys like Hakeem and Pippen and Payton and Howard and Mourning...etc. All of those guys play more offense than than the guys I'm listing played defense.

And even with you listing off all time elite defenders that happened to also be great offensive forces. You can't come up with hardly any examples of the defensive guy being better than the offensive guy. LOL

Lets get specific on one comparison. Nash vs Payton. A perfect example of this debate.

Do you think its crazy for someone to say Nash is/was the better player?[/QUOTE]
Off course not. This is our opinion. You disagree with me and thus we converse.

And to answer your question, in my opinion, payton is better. Is it silly to say nash is better? No. I just want to hear your pov.

But your still going by the consensus ranking of nba players. Let me ask you. Do you think those players are ranked according to talent or accomplishments. And pleasee don't say both because they all are extremely talented.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol how can you throw out winning? You're basing your pov on the consensus ranking of these players. And the rankings are made according to who the best players are. It goes by who has accomplished the most in the nba. Who is the most decorated player. Who's won thee most championships, mvp, dpoys, allnba, alldenfense, the records, etc. All of which are handed out to the BEST PLAYER ON THE BEST TEAMS.

If the league gave the mvp to the best player, jordan would've won it every year from 87 to 98. Lebron james woulldve won it last year over derrick rose.[/QUOTE]

No I'm not. I'm not saying that Dirk/Barkley are better than Robinson because of winning. In fact, Barkley never won anything. I'm going off which players I thought were better.

Its not crazy to think that bird/magic/shaq were just better basketball players than Hakeem. Its not crazy to think Dr. J was about as good as KG. Its not crazy to think Thomas was as good or better than Pippen...and on and on.

Has nothing to do with all time rank for me.

I would have taken Dirk over Howard in 09...had nothing to do with winning. Howard made the Finals and Dirk lost in the 2nd round. I'm not doing that at all. I'm just giving you my opinion on these players. And again, the very fact that they are at least debatable pretty much proves my side.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]Off course not. This is our opinion. You disagree with me and thus we converse.

And to answer your question, in my opinion, payton is better. Is it silly to say nash is better? I just want to hear your pov.

But your still going by the consensus ranking of nba players. Let me ask you. Do you think those players are ranked according to talent or accomplishments. And pleasee don't say both because they all are extremely talented.[/QUOTE]

For the last time...I'm not going by any ranking. I'm going by who I think was the better player.

If I had to pick a pg for my team. I'd almost always take Nash over Payton. Just my opinion though. My point is that I can admit its debatable....as should anyone that actually watched them both play. If it is debatable, I don't see how individual defense is more important. Payton is one of the best pg defenders ever....Nash is one of the worst. That is just a fact.

So how could it be debatable given that? And also given that Payton was a damn good offensive player....much beter offensively than Nash was defensively.

Do you think its crazy to say Nash vs Payton as basketball player...forget rankings....is debatable?

The main difference as I see it is that your not gonna find very many players top players that weren't effective on both sides of the ball in some way. What you want me to find you dmavs, is a defensive specialists that's in the consensus top 50. Which is just as rare as me asking you to find me an offensive specialts in the top 50. I have a feeling rodman will be in the top 75. And even though I wouldn't even call him a defensive specialist, like a bobby jones or bruce bowen, I guess you could use him.

But I've already given you what my definition of an offensive player/ defensive player. Or I should say specialist is. Bruce bowen is a defensive specialist. Jason terry is an offensive specialist

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]For the last time...I'm not going by any ranking. I'm going by who I think was the better player.

If I had to pick a pg for my team. I'd almost always take Nash over Payton. Just my opinion though. My point is that I can admit its debatable....as should anyone that actually watched them both play. If it is debatable, I don't see how individual defense is more important. Payton is one of the best pg defenders ever....Nash is one of the worst. That is just a fact.

So how could it be debatable given that? And also given that Payton was a damn good offensive player....much beter offensively than Nash was defensively.

Do you think its crazy to say Nash vs Payton as basketball player...forget rankings....is debatable?[/QUOTE]
No because nash runs a team better. But you keep saying players are regarded as better, where, who, or what are you basing it on? Cuz when you say "regarded" I'm assuming you're referring to what the consensus is.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]The main difference as I see it is that your not gonna find very many players top players that weren't effective on both sides of the ball in some way. What you want me to find you dmavs, is a defensive specialists that's in the consensus top 50. Which is just as rare as me asking you to find me an offensive specialts in the top 50. I have a feeling rodman will be in the top 75. And even though I wouldn't even call him a defensive specialist, like a bobby jones or bruce bowen, I guess you could use him.

But I've already given you what my definition of an offensive player/ defensive player. Or I should say specialist is. Bruce bowen is a defensive specialist. Jason terry is an offensive specialist[/QUOTE]

But Jason Terry can't consistently take over late in games...nor can he consistently even score points night in night out. And its that being able to perform in crunch time that is so valuable in this hypothetical.

I'm not asking for defensive specialists at all. The players you have listed are hardly solely defensive players. In fact, the players you have listed are better two way players than almost all the players I've listed.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]No I'm not. I'm not saying that Dirk/Barkley are better than Robinson because of winning. In fact, Barkley never won anything. I'm going off which players I thought were better.

Its not crazy to think that bird/magic/shaq were just better basketball players than Hakeem. Its not crazy to think Dr. J was about as good as KG. Its not crazy to think Thomas was as good or better than Pippen...and on and on.

Has nothing to do with all time rank for me.

I would have taken Dirk over Howard in 09...had nothing to do with winning. Howard made the Finals and Dirk lost in the 2nd round. I'm not doing that at all. I'm just giving you my opinion on these players. And again, the very fact that they are at least debatable pretty much proves my side.[/QUOTE]
How does it being debateable prove your side? I've already explaineed that basketball is a team sport. The smart teams get guys that can make up the definciencies of their stars. You seem to act as if basketball is played 1v1.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]No because nash runs a team better. But you keep saying players are regarded as better, where, who, or what are you basing it on? Cuz when you say "regarded" I'm assuming you're referring to what the consensus is.[/QUOTE]

Not at all. I'm just saying "regarded" as just common opinion here or with people that know basketball.

Nash vs Payton is perfect for this. It gives you exactly what you need. Nash is solely an offensive player. Just the truth. He's a negative defensively...not even average. Payton is one of the best pg defenders ever....and also great offensively.

Not talking about MVP or all time ranking. Just debating as to who the better basketball player was.....I think Nash was ever so slightly better. I'd rather have Nash on my team. At the very least I think we are in agreement that its debatable. And we've reached that conclusion on a lot of players like Barkley/Dirk vs Howard/Robinson/KG....Magic/Bird vs. Hakeem. Thomas vs Pippen...etc.

So my question is simple. If defense is more important, then how come these mainly offensive players are as good as or better than elite defensive players that also play good to great offense? Logically it doesn't work.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]But Jason Terry can't consistently take over late in games...nor can he consistently even score points night in night out. And its that being able to perform in crunch time that is so valuable in this hypothetical.

I'm not asking for defensive specialists at all. The players you have listed are hardly solely defensive players. In fact, the players you have listed are better two way players than almost all the players I've listed.[/QUOTE]
But again, as tpols said. There really is no such thing as a one dimensional all-time great. Other than magic and russell. And you threw that out. I named rodman. I'm sure wallace will be in the hall.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]How does it being debateable prove your side? I've already explaineed that basketball is a team sport. The smart teams get guys that can make up the definciencies of their stars. You seem to act as if basketball is played 1v1.[/QUOTE]

This is an individual thread. Basketball is absolutely a team sport and it takes a team to win.

But we absolutely can compare players to players in terms of their impact.

It proves my side because I'm giving you a bunch of examples of strictly offensive players being as valuable or more valuable than all time great defensive players that also played great offense.

So if individual defense was truly more important as you claim, then the defensive guys should be winning these comparisons each time.

Here is another way to look at it. The gap between Nash and Payton on offense is huge. As big as it could get. If Payton is a 10 on defense....Nash is a 0 or 1. The gap between their offense is not nearly as big as the gap between their defense. Not even close.

So if defense really matters more...then why isn't Payton easily a better basketball player than Nash?

Do you understand that?

[QUOTE=97 bulls]But again, as tpols said. There really is no such thing as a one dimensional all-time great. Other than magic and russell. And you threw that out. I named rodman. I'm sure wallace will be in the hall.[/QUOTE]

How one dimensional? I consider Barkley pretty one dimensional....he's definitely an all time great. Same with Dirk. definitely an all time great.

You can't have it only your way. You can't list off guys like Hakeem and Pippen and Payton and Howard and Robinson as your examples....and expect me to solely counter with guys that didn't play any defense...even though I actually kind of did. Your guys all played good to great offense....so some of my examples deserve to have played a little defense. Regardless though:

Nash over Payton
Barkley over Robinson
Dirk over Howard
Bird over Hakeem
Thomas over Pippen
Barkley over Mourning
Dirk over Ewing
Dr. J over KG

My guys all play less defense than your guys play offense....and at the very least, every single one of those comparisons above is debatable.....the truth is that the offensive guys are just better than the defensive guys as a whole on that list above.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Not at all. I'm just saying "regarded" as just common opinion here or with people that know basketball.

Nash vs Payton is perfect for this. It gives you exactly what you need. Nash is solely an offensive player. Just the truth. He's a negative defensively...not even average. Payton is one of the best pg defenders ever....and also great offensively.

Not talking about MVP or all time ranking. Just debating as to who the better basketball player was.....I think Nash was ever so slightly better. I'd rather have Nash on my team. At the very least I think we are in agreement that its debatable. And we've reached that conclusion on a lot of players like Barkley/Dirk vs Howard/Robinson/KG....Magic/Bird vs. Hakeem. Thomas vs Pippen...etc.

So my question is simple. If defense is more important, then how come these mainly offensive players are as good as or better than elite defensive players that also play good to great offense? Logically it doesn't work.[/QUOTE]
And again, its because the teams go out and get players that can coverr nashes ass. So his lack of defense doesn't hurt them as much. Until the playoffs come around.

And then you also must understand that nash isn't just a guy with a wet jumper. He runs the team. He's crafty, he scores in different ways. As well as sets up his teammates. If he was just a shooter, he'd be steve kerr. A specialists. So to answer your question, its not just nashes ability to put the ball in the basket vs paytons defense and offense. Its nashes ability to put the ball in the basket and run a team that makes this debatable.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]But again, as tpols said. There really is no such thing as a one dimensional all-time great. Other than magic and russell. And you threw that out. I named rodman. I'm sure wallace will be in the hall.[/QUOTE]

You named Rodman.

Don't you think then a fair comparison would be Dirk or Barkley vs Rodman. Rodman was a great defensive player....one of the best ever.

Would you take Rodman over Dirk or Barkley?

Edit:

And you are accusing me of using "all time rankings" over ability? The only player you have really named that fits your assertion at all is Russell. Is there another player in NBA history that gained more on his reputation/ranking than Russell due to team accomplishments and how people rank? LOL