Steve Nash deserves a ring

[soap07]

I'm curious if any team where the superstar pg is clearly the best player has ever won.  Kidd never won it, Stockton never won (though with Malone he was not clearly the best), Billups won (but he was not a superstar), Magic won (but with Kareem and Big Game James he was not clearly the best). I would love to see Nash win it all, but I can't think of an example of a superstar pg who is clearly the best winning it all. Maybe DJ in Seattle?

Isiah?

[wdleehi]

He's been the leader on multiple teams that have gotten deep into the playoffs.

Well, we'll ignore the fact that Carter has been out of the first round multiple times. In fact, we can ignore the fact that Nash has been out of the first round exactly one more time than Carter.

I see. Rasheed has had a better career than Vince Carter because Vince has only made a conference final series and Rasheed has a title, which makes Vince a career loser. Steve Nash has gone as deep in the playoffs as Vince Carter has, but Nash is a "winner" because his teams have gotten "deep into the playoffs" - namely, as far as Vince Carter has.

The reason he hasn't sustained more success is due to the systems he has played in.

A. Yeah, those Nets systems that Vince played in were real winners.
B. The system is set up exactly to tailor to Steve Nash's game. Is your point that Steve Nash's style of play isn't championship caliber?

The fact that Nash has enjoyed as much success as he has in an "offense only" system is a testament to him.

It's actually not, it's a detriment to Nash. Why is it offense only? Could it be because Nash has been a liability on the defensive end his whole career? Of course Nash makes his team better on the offensive end. But on the defensive end, he makes his team much worse. So, what about that makes him less of a "career loser" than Vince Carter?

Vince, on the other hand, is indeed a career loser, who has never been a leader on a team, period.  The guy puts up empty stats, and doesn't contribute to wins.

I don't even know what that means. Steve Nash's stats are less empty than Carter's? Carter doesn't contribute to wins? What exactly has Nash led his team to? I think Vince Carter can lead a team to no rings just as well as Nash.

The bias here is ridiculous. It just goes to show how overused and cliche the terms "winner" and "loser" are.

NJ was Kidd's team, not Carter.


Unfortunately for Kidd, they replaced Martin with Carter.  They went from being a team that made the finals to just another playoff team.



Nash has also lead his team to three conference titles.  Carter road his way to his only one.



They are not comparable.

[ibby]

I'm curious if any team where the superstar pg is clearly the best player has ever won.  Kidd never won it, Stockton never won (though with Malone he was not clearly the best), Billups won (but he was not a superstar), Magic won (but with Kareem and Big Game James he was not clearly the best). I would love to see Nash win it all, but I can't think of an example of a superstar pg who is clearly the best winning it all. Maybe DJ in Seattle?

Isiah?

I knew there had to be one and that is it, even though Dumars was a Finals MVP I think that is the best example. I know someone said '87 Magic, but he still had Worthy and Kareem, but that one is a good example to. Too bad the Suns will never play d like those Piston teams, nor will Grant Hill or Amare be as good as Kareem or Worthy.

[soap07]

NJ was Kidd's team, not Carter.


Unfortunately for Kidd, they replaced Martin with Carter.  They went from being a team that made the finals to just another playoff team.



Nash has also lead his team to three conference titles.  Carter road his way to his only one.



They are not comparable.

Couple things: Who gives a crap whose team it was? If the C's win the championship this year, should we discount the Big 3's contributions because this is "Rondo's team?" At that point, Kidd and Carter were on the same level of play. Kidd's knees, inability to shoot and terrible defense were immense detriments to that team. Vince had one of the best years of his career with the Nets. And are we really giving the Nets that much credit for making the Finals in those terrible Eastern Conferences? And considering Kenyon Martin's contributions post-NJ, are we really going to say that upgrading to Carter was a bad move? The revisionist history here is a bit off.

Nash has also lead his team to three conference titles.  Carter road his way to his only one.

Sorry, miscounted. And so what? So Nash has led his team as far as Vince has....to nothing. Just because he's the best player on a team that couldn't win doesn't Nash any more of a winner than Vince....it just means there is a double standard for players that fans like and players that fans don't like. As I said, Vince led his team to nothing just as well as Nash did.

[soap07]

I knew there had to be one and that is it, even though Dumars was a Finals MVP I think that is the best example. I know someone said '87 Magic, but he still had Worthy and Kareem, but that one is a good example to. Too bad the Suns will never play d like those Piston teams, nor will Grant Hill or Amare be as good as Kareem or Worthy.

Good point. Does Dwayne Wade count as a point guard? Payton and Kidd have both made Finals as the best players but neither won.

[wdleehi]

NJ was Kidd's team, not Carter.


Unfortunately for Kidd, they replaced Martin with Carter.  They went from being a team that made the finals to just another playoff team.



Nash has also lead his team to three conference titles.  Carter road his way to his only one.



They are not comparable.

Couple things: Who gives a crap whose team it was? If the C's win the championship this year, should we discount the Big 3's contributions because this is "Rondo's team?" At that point, Kidd and Carter were on the same level of play. Kidd's knees, inability to shoot and terrible defense were immense detriments to that team. Vince had one of the best years of his career with the Nets. And are we really giving the Nets that much credit for making the Finals in those terrible Eastern Conferences? And considering Kenyon Martin's contributions post-NJ, are we really going to say that upgrading to Carter was a bad move? The revisionist history here is a bit off.

Nash has also lead his team to three conference titles.  Carter road his way to his only one.

Sorry, miscounted. And so what? So Nash has led his team as far as Vince has....to nothing. Just because he's the best player on a team that couldn't win doesn't Nash any more of a winner than Vince....it just means there is a double standard for players that fans like and players that fans don't like. As I said, Vince led his team to nothing just as well as Nash did.

Then put it this way, Vince has now joined two teams, and both teams took steps backwards.


Nash joins a team and it goes from lotto land to conference Finals (3 times)


If Nash ever got to play with a player like Howard, watch out.  He would finally have an interior defense to go with his free wheeling offense.

[Roy Hobbs]

NJ was Kidd's team, not Carter.


Unfortunately for Kidd, they replaced Martin with Carter.  They went from being a team that made the finals to just another playoff team.



Nash has also lead his team to three conference titles.  Carter road his way to his only one.



They are not comparable.

Couple things: Who gives a crap whose team it was? If the C's win the championship this year, should we discount the Big 3's contributions because this is "Rondo's team?" At that point, Kidd and Carter were on the same level of play. Kidd's knees, inability to shoot and terrible defense were immense detriments to that team. Vince had one of the best years of his career with the Nets. And are we really giving the Nets that much credit for making the Finals in those terrible Eastern Conferences? And considering Kenyon Martin's contributions post-NJ, are we really going to say that upgrading to Carter was a bad move? The revisionist history here is a bit off.

Nash has also lead his team to three conference titles.  Carter road his way to his only one.

Sorry, miscounted. And so what? So Nash has led his team as far as Vince has....to nothing. Just because he's the best player on a team that couldn't win doesn't Nash any more of a winner than Vince....it just means there is a double standard for players that fans like and players that fans don't like. As I said, Vince led his team to nothing just as well as Nash did.

Then put it this way, Vince has now joined two teams, and both teams took steps backwards.


Nash joins a team and it goes from lotto land to conference Finals (3 times)


If Nash ever got to play with a player like Howard, watch out.  He would finally have an interior defense to go with his free wheeling offense.

Agreed.  I'm just not sure how a guy who three WCF teams were built around has had the same impact on winning as a guy who joined a Finals team, and immediately becomes the weakest link as they take a step backward.

Vince just disappeared in the biggest series of his life.  That doesn't scream "winner" to me, especially after his antics earlier in his career (such as tanking to force a trade.)

[soap07]

Then put it this way, Vince has now joined two teams, and both teams took steps backwards.

To singularly blame Vince for that is beyond unfair - and I suspect you know that.

Agreed.  I'm just not sure how a guy who three WCF teams were built around has had the same impact on winning as a guy who joined a Finals team, and immediately becomes the weakest link as they take a step backward.

Again, the key there is "WCF"...it's not Finals. Sure, you can win in the regular season building teams around Steve Nash. You just can't win a championship with it. Can any one honestly say that Steve Nash doesn't have great support around him? Key role players, another All-Star, etc.? Heck, he once had three All-Star caliber players around him during a playoff run...(JJ, Amare, Marion) and couldn't make the Finals.

This makes him as much of a "career loser" as Vince. My point is that that term in itself shouldn't be used. Neither of these players are career losers. They just couldn't get over the hump, in the same way Kidd, Malone, Barkley, etc. couldn't.

Vince just disappeared in the biggest series of his life.  That doesn't scream "winner" to me, especially after his antics earlier in his career (such as tanking to force a trade.)

Many other players have done this, including Jason Kidd and Kobe Bryant. I don't think that you think that Kidd is a career loser. Although, under your criteria, Kidd should be just as bad as Carter considering how Kidd left NJ.

If Nash ever got to play with a player like Howard, watch out.  He would finally have an interior defense to go with his free wheeling offense.

Again...that team would also get worse defensively because of Nash. Huge assumption to make on your part. And really? Nash's problem has been his supporting cast? He has always had solid players around him during playoff runs.


If you're going to hold Carter to a championship standard, same should be held of Nash.

[zerophase]

People need to stop comparing Nash and Carter... their situations really aren't similar nor their respective roles and impacts on their teams.

IMO if Nash wants to win a ring, he'll have to come to the East and serve as a 6th man. I don't see how he can start on a western conference team that can take down the Lakers. This Suns team right now with their porous defense simply cannot win a championship. With the talent the Lakers have put together, it'll be really hard for any western team to dethrone them for quite some time.

[wdleehi]

People need to stop comparing Nash and Carter... their situations really aren't similar nor their respective roles and impacts on their teams.

IMO if Nash wants to win a ring, he'll have to come to the East and serve as a 6th man. I don't see how he can start on a western conference team that can take down the Lakers. This Suns team right now with their porous defense simply cannot win a championship. With the talent the Lakers have put together, it'll be really hard for any western team to dethrone them for quite some time.

He is one of the top 5 PGs and you think he has to come off the bench to win?


No.  He needs a better big man.  One who can defend.  One who will rebound. 

[cornbreadsmart]

I think he deserves it over a guy like barkley. As great as barklley was he coasted and dogged it at times. Nash is awful on defense but that's never because of effort.

[fairweatherfan]

I agree - or at least a trip to the Finals.  Nash is neck-and-neck with Kidd for best PG of the decade, but instead of a couple of incredibly soft years for the conference like Kidd's Net teams got, he's had Joe Johnson break his face, Amare miss major periods of time, and his best bigs suspended in the playoffs. 

The Suns were my surrogate team to root for when the Cs were in the lottery a few years back - I hope Nash can get a shot at a ring, but he's running out of chances.

[MattG12]

I agree - or at least a trip to the Finals.  Nash is neck-and-neck with Kidd for best PG of the decade, but instead of a couple of incredibly soft years for the conference like Kidd's Net teams got, he's had Joe Johnson break his face, Amare miss major periods of time, and his best bigs suspended in the playoffs. 

The Suns were my surrogate team to root for when the Cs were in the lottery a few years back - I hope Nash can get a shot at a ring, but he's running out of chances.

I too rooted for the Suns while the Celtics were the NBA's cellar. Steve Nash is an extraordinarily gifted athlete.

[LB3533]

Steve Nash doesn't need to be a 6th man or come off the bench.

His game hasn't fallen off at all.

If he continues to receive nice minutes from his backup, Nash can play for a long, long time.

[celticmaestro]

In my opinion, Steve Nash is one of the most humble and nicest guys to play in the NBA. Wonderful talent and fully deserving of a ring. Had we played the Suns in the Finals, I wouldn't have begrudged him one. That's not to say I would have wanted them to win, but I'd have taken solace in the fact that he'd won one.