OMG, the Nets stink

[BballTim]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

[BballTim]

I'm the one unfamiliar with what 1A/1B means?  1A/1B means neither is better than the other.  How can anybody be saying Deron is the best PG in the league if they're admitting he's not better than CP3.

Even if what your personal definition of the term is different, I think you could have plainly inferred that D.o.s. wasn't saying Deron Williams was the best PG in the league.

  The general meaing of 1A and 1B isn't that neither can be seen as better but either can be seen as better. D.o.s. clearly agrees with me, hence:

"There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash."

  He's clearly saying that Williams could be called the best pg in the league despite your denials.

And for the record, I was disagreeing about Nash being CLEARLY better around 07, not before that.  No one ever talked about before 07, you brought that out of nowhere.  But please continue to nitpick little things and avoid the overall subject.

  You're the one that started talking about before 07 when you were discussing whether Deron was seen as better than Paul back in 06-07. I was pointing out that since the conversation was about whether Deron was seen as the best pg in the league (and not whether he was better than CP), who of Deron and CP was seen as better didn't matter when Nash was a top MVP candidate. I wasn't avoiding the overall subject, I was trying (somewhat unsuccessfully) to explain what the overall subject was. Sorry if you consider that to be nit-picking. 

[D.o.s.]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

that's a hard one to crack, though, because the 7SOL Suns that snagged Nash his MVP honors played in a system that completely covered his weaknesses--anything to do with defense, while being on a team that was winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

The same way that Derrick Rose almost certainly wasn't the best PG in the league the year that he won MVP on a team that covered his weaknesses while winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

[mgent]

I'm the one unfamiliar with what 1A/1B means?  1A/1B means neither is better than the other.  How can anybody be saying Deron is the best PG in the league if they're admitting he's not better than CP3.

Even if what your personal definition of the term is different, I think you could have plainly inferred that D.o.s. wasn't saying Deron Williams was the best PG in the league.

  The general meaing of 1A and 1B isn't that neither can be seen as better but either can be seen as better. D.o.s. clearly agrees with me, hence:

"There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash."

  He's clearly saying that Williams could be called the best pg in the league despite your denials.

And for the record, I was disagreeing about Nash being CLEARLY better around 07, not before that.  No one ever talked about before 07, you brought that out of nowhere.  But please continue to nitpick little things and avoid the overall subject.

  You're the one that started talking about before 07 when you were discussing whether Deron was seen as better than Paul back in 06-07. I was pointing out that since the conversation was about whether Deron was seen as the best pg in the league (and not whether he was better than CP), who of Deron and CP was seen as better didn't matter when Nash was a top MVP candidate. I wasn't avoiding the overall subject, I was trying (somewhat unsuccessfully) to explain what the overall subject was. Sorry if you consider that to be nit-picking.

Um the 06-07 season IS 2007. 

What D.o.s. says in that quote definitely doesn't make your point.  In order for Deron Williams to be considered the best PG in the league, he'd have to be considered clearly better than CP3.  You're using semantics and stating the argument as "Williams being the best PG in the league" instead of "Williams and Paul being 1A/1B" because the first is easier to misconstrue and deny.

[BballTim]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

that's a hard one to crack, though, because the 7SOL Suns that snagged Nash his MVP honors played in a system that completely covered his weaknesses--anything to do with defense, while being on a team that was winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

The same way that Derrick Rose almost certainly wasn't the best PG in the league the year that he won MVP on a team that covered his weaknesses while winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

  I'm not claiming Nash deserved his MVPs, but he was still (IMO) a better player than a rookie or 2nd year CP or Deron.

[mgent]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

I'm agreeing with this (that it happened and that it was short), if by best you mean 1A/1B.

The only thing I didn't agree with was "Williams wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury."  I think he was on the same level as Paul for longer than a brief period, over a year.

[mgent]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

that's a hard one to crack, though, because the 7SOL Suns that snagged Nash his MVP honors played in a system that completely covered his weaknesses--anything to do with defense, while being on a team that was winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

The same way that Derrick Rose almost certainly wasn't the best PG in the league the year that he won MVP on a team that covered his weaknesses while winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

  I'm not claiming Nash deserved his MVPs, but he was still (IMO) a better player than a rookie or 2nd year CP or Deron.

You're claiming that being in MVP discussion makes you clearly better than anybody not in MVP discussion.  That's debatable.  Nash was also destroying guys like LeBron, Wade, KG, etc. in MVP voting, I don't think anybody would say he was clearly a better player than those guys in 06-07.

[BballTim]

I'm the one unfamiliar with what 1A/1B means?  1A/1B means neither is better than the other.  How can anybody be saying Deron is the best PG in the league if they're admitting he's not better than CP3.

Even if what your personal definition of the term is different, I think you could have plainly inferred that D.o.s. wasn't saying Deron Williams was the best PG in the league.

  The general meaing of 1A and 1B isn't that neither can be seen as better but either can be seen as better. D.o.s. clearly agrees with me, hence:

"There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash."

  He's clearly saying that Williams could be called the best pg in the league despite your denials.

And for the record, I was disagreeing about Nash being CLEARLY better around 07, not before that.  No one ever talked about before 07, you brought that out of nowhere.  But please continue to nitpick little things and avoid the overall subject.

  You're the one that started talking about before 07 when you were discussing whether Deron was seen as better than Paul back in 06-07. I was pointing out that since the conversation was about whether Deron was seen as the best pg in the league (and not whether he was better than CP), who of Deron and CP was seen as better didn't matter when Nash was a top MVP candidate. I wasn't avoiding the overall subject, I was trying (somewhat unsuccessfully) to explain what the overall subject was. Sorry if you consider that to be nit-picking.

Um the 06-07 season IS 2007. 

  Um you were still the one that brought up what happened then (and earlier). I think your reliance on the word "um" is fairly fitting.

What D.o.s. says in that quote definitely doesn't make your point.  In order for Deron Williams to be considered the best PG in the league, he'd have to be considered clearly better than CP3.  You're using semantics and stating the argument as "Williams being the best PG in the league" instead of "Williams and Paul being 1A/1B" because the first is easier to misconstrue and deny.

  If you're going to put so much effort into arguing the distinction between "nobody would bat an eye if you said he was the best in the league" and "he could be considered the best in the league" you should probably avoid talking about others nit-picking.

[BballTim]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

I'm agreeing with this (that it happened and that it was short), if by best you mean 1A/1B.

The only thing I didn't agree with was "Williams wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury."  I think he was on the same level as Paul for longer than a brief period, over a year.

  I'd say that year+ was earlier in their careers and not immediately prior to the knee injury though.

[BballTim]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

that's a hard one to crack, though, because the 7SOL Suns that snagged Nash his MVP honors played in a system that completely covered his weaknesses--anything to do with defense, while being on a team that was winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

The same way that Derrick Rose almost certainly wasn't the best PG in the league the year that he won MVP on a team that covered his weaknesses while winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

  I'm not claiming Nash deserved his MVPs, but he was still (IMO) a better player than a rookie or 2nd year CP or Deron.

You're claiming that being in MVP discussion makes you clearly better than anybody not in MVP discussion.  That's debatable.  Nash was also destroying guys like LeBron, Wade, KG, etc. in MVP voting, I don't think anybody would say he was clearly a better player than those guys in 06-07.

  I didn't say that being in MVP discussion makes you clearly better than anybody not in MVP discussion.

  I'd also disagree with the claim that nobody considered him to be a better player than those guys, obviously the opposite is true. I think you'd have a hard time defending the notion that *none* of the people that voted for him for MVP thought he was the best player in the league, especially those who voted for him 2-3 years in a row.

[BballTim]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

that's a hard one to crack, though, because the 7SOL Suns that snagged Nash his MVP honors played in a system that completely covered his weaknesses--anything to do with defense, while being on a team that was winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

The same way that Derrick Rose almost certainly wasn't the best PG in the league the year that he won MVP on a team that covered his weaknesses while winning a ton of games and providing a nice alternative to voting for LeBron James.

  James was 5th in mvp voting that year, it's not like Nash was the only alternative to voting for him.

[mgent]

I'm the one unfamiliar with what 1A/1B means?  1A/1B means neither is better than the other.  How can anybody be saying Deron is the best PG in the league if they're admitting he's not better than CP3.

Even if what your personal definition of the term is different, I think you could have plainly inferred that D.o.s. wasn't saying Deron Williams was the best PG in the league.

  The general meaing of 1A and 1B isn't that neither can be seen as better but either can be seen as better. D.o.s. clearly agrees with me, hence:

"There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash."

  He's clearly saying that Williams could be called the best pg in the league despite your denials.

And for the record, I was disagreeing about Nash being CLEARLY better around 07, not before that.  No one ever talked about before 07, you brought that out of nowhere.  But please continue to nitpick little things and avoid the overall subject.

  You're the one that started talking about before 07 when you were discussing whether Deron was seen as better than Paul back in 06-07. I was pointing out that since the conversation was about whether Deron was seen as the best pg in the league (and not whether he was better than CP), who of Deron and CP was seen as better didn't matter when Nash was a top MVP candidate. I wasn't avoiding the overall subject, I was trying (somewhat unsuccessfully) to explain what the overall subject was. Sorry if you consider that to be nit-picking.

Um the 06-07 season IS 2007. 

  Um you were still the one that brought up what happened then (and earlier). I think your reliance on the word "um" is fairly fitting.

What D.o.s. says in that quote definitely doesn't make your point.  In order for Deron Williams to be considered the best PG in the league, he'd have to be considered clearly better than CP3.  You're using semantics and stating the argument as "Williams being the best PG in the league" instead of "Williams and Paul being 1A/1B" because the first is easier to misconstrue and deny.

  If you're going to put so much effort into arguing the distinction between "nobody would bat an eye if you said he was the best in the league" and "he could be considered the best in the league" you should probably avoid talking about others nit-picking.

If you can't see the distinction between "nobody would bat an eye if you said Williams was the best in the league" and "Williams is better than Chris Paul," then same to you.

I brought up the 06-07 season where I said it could argued Williams was better than Paul while Nash was declining, my point didn't hinge on it.  You brought Nash winning MVP (chronologically before that).  You also just asserted again that Nash was better than a rookie or second year CP3/Deron 05-07, which is not being disputed.  D.o.s. said from the beginning 07-on.

[Snakehead]

MVP voting is not something to hang your hat on as proof of anything.

If James was 5th that year that only proves it.

Jordan was the best player when Barkley won MVP.  Who cares.

[mgent]

I guess I should clarify.

There was a long period of time when someone could make a convincing argument that Deron Williams and Chris Paul were the two best point guards in the league. You could put either one at the top, and no one was really going to bat an eyelash. From what I've read over the years, that period of time extended basically 2007 to Williams being traded from Utah. Hence considered 1A and 1B.

Steve Nash is a bit of an outlier, because he's always had that "doesn't play defense" knock on him, as well as his injury history. You put Paul and Williams over Nash because, as mgent pointed out, potential is weighed when those lists are made up--people have been predicting Nash's crumbling to dust for probably the last five years now?

  I'd say that much of the "CP vs Deron" debate was over the best young pg and took place while Nash was winning or almost winning MVPs. I'd also say that by the time they'd arguably gotten to or past Nash's level CP was ahead of Deron (finishing 2nd and 5th in MVP voting). IMO if there was a period of time before Paul's inury that Deron was seen as the best in the league it was awfully brief.

I'm agreeing with this (that it happened and that it was short), if by best you mean 1A/1B.

The only thing I didn't agree with was "Williams wasn't really on the level of CP3 before Paul's knee injury."  I think he was on the same level as Paul for longer than a brief period, over a year.

  I'd say that year+ was earlier in their careers and not immediately prior to the knee injury though.

That was debated.

[mgent]

  I didn't say that being in MVP discussion makes you clearly better than anybody not in MVP discussion.

  He might have been seen as on the level of CP3 in 06-07 but that's not the same as being 1A-1B for best point guard in the league, Steve Nash would have been widely seen as the best in the league.

You went on to defend that Nash was CLEARLY better than Williams and Paul because he was an MVP candidate and they weren't.  You also added the fact that Paul was clearly better Williams the year after that given evidence that Paul was an MVP candidate and Williams wasn't.  This is obviously one of your views.

  I'd also disagree with the claim that nobody considered him to be a better player than those guys, obviously the opposite is true. I think you'd have a hard time defending the notion that *none* of the people that voted for him for MVP thought he was the best player in the league, especially those who voted for him 2-3 years in a row.

Which is the crux of the issue.  People voting for MVP aren't exactly voting the best player in the league (as you can see by previous winners).