Is Steve Nash a Hall of Famer?

[Edgar]

he;s in...this has him ahead of PP and ray

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/hof_prob_active.html

Most of the list is fair enough
BUT TRACY MCGRADY!!!

Come on!!

2 scoring title in a low in scoring league...
not enough imho
All other accomplish are mediocre or media got

[BudweiserCeltic]

I'm pretty sure that every eligible player who has won an MVP award has made the HOF.  Nash will get in, even if his career numbers don't ultimately stack up.

That's the part that is unsettling to me. In baseball, the career is the focus, not individual seasons. Otherwise, Roger Maris and Dale Murphy would be in the HOF. In basketball, all you need is a good career with a few stellar seasons? If Nash wasn't traded to a high-octane offensive team, he wouldn't even be considered. He was a marginal all-star at best.

And we can debate whether he should have won those MVP trophies over the likes of Duncan, Lebron and Kobe. He was definitely the MVP of the Suns, but they didn't win a championship and their style of play inflated his stats. If he averaged 14 and 9.5, I don't think he would've won.

I guess the high octane offense also accounted for his shooting accuracy. We can also rationalize how others have benefited from their regarded systems. Kobe for playing with a bad team in which he had to do everything (and Jackson's triangle offense), same as LeBron. Duncan benefiting from the best coach in the business and a very disciplined team. We can go on and on.

If I remember correctly, the Suns without Nash weren't good at all. He did a world of a difference in that team. He was the difference maker there, he made things run as they should. When he wasn't around, things weren't the same for them. You could've taken out pretty much anyone in the team, and Nash would have still had the team winning games.

[nickagneta]

But he did play for the Suns and he did put up much better numbers than 14/9.5 and he did win those MVPs and he did lead that team deep into the playoffs a bunch.

He's put up great all-time total numbers in assists, the leading stat for PG election into the HOF and his career as a whole has been exceptional.

As I have said before my criteria for making the Hall is answering this question. Was he one of the best of his generation and in his case yes, he was one of the two best PGs of his generation. So for me, the answer to that question, his stats and his MVPs make his case undeniable in my opinion.

[EarthBall]

I guess the high octane offense also accounted for his shooting accuracy. We can also rationalize how others have benefited from their regarded systems. Kobe for playing with a bad team in which he had to do everything (and Jackson's triangle offense), same as LeBron. Duncan benefiting from the best coach in the business and a very disciplined team. We can go on and on.

Of course, Steve Nash is a great shooter. You know who else was? Mark Price, Dale Ellis and Steve Kerr.

And you can't argue against Kobe, Lebron and Duncan being HOFers. Their careers were stellar. Nash's career wasn't stellar. He had a few stellar seasons, but he has 14 and 8 for career numbers. His assist average is right between Mark Jackson and Stephon Marbury.

He's put up great all-time total numbers in assists, the leading stat for PG election into the HOF and his career as a whole has been exceptional.

As I have said before my criteria for making the Hall is answering this question. Was he one of the best of his generation and in his case yes, he was one of the two best PGs of his generation. So for me, the answer to that question, his stats and his MVPs make his case undeniable in my opinion.

See above regarding career assists.

Is a generation 4 years long? Maybe if we were guinea pigs.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I guess the high octane offense also accounted for his shooting accuracy. We can also rationalize how others have benefited from their regarded systems. Kobe for playing with a bad team in which he had to do everything (and Jackson's triangle offense), same as LeBron. Duncan benefiting from the best coach in the business and a very disciplined team. We can go on and on.

Of course, Steve Nash is a great shooter. You know who else was? Mark Price, Dale Ellis and Steve Kerr.

And you can't argue against Kobe, Lebron and Duncan being HOFers. Their careers were stellar. Nash's career wasn't stellar. He had a few stellar seasons, but he has 14 and 8 for career numbers. His assist average is right between Mark Jackson and Stephon Marbury.

Which is weighted down by a poor career start. Are you going to blame him when his career started behind players like Kevin Johnson, Jason Kidd, Sam Cassell?

After his breakthrough season he's put up around 17 points a game, with 9 assists, which is quite near what he averaged during the playoffs since he went to Dallas. All of this while shooting near 50% from the field, 43% behind the arc, and over 90% FT%. A span of 9 years, and he isn't done yet (though his numbers are coming down). Very few people in the history of the NBA has put up a package like that, while having the amount of responsability he has in running a team. Efficiency, while getting the best out of your team and your teammates HAS to count for something.

Anyways, you're too focused on the stats. None of the people you have mentioned could run a team like Nash has.

Also, it's not like Joe Dumars has stellar stats, and he's in the hall. Let's see also how John Stockton does next year, though he's going against David Robinson and Michael Jordan.

[RebusRankin]

Short answer, yes.

Don't forget he's Canadian and will earn votes for being one of the first really successful international players in the NBA.

[EarthBall]

After his breakthrough season he's put up around 17 points a game, with 9 assists, which is quite near what he averaged during the playoffs since he went to Dallas. All of this while shooting near 50% from the field, 43% behind the arc, and over 90% FT%. A span of 9 years, and he isn't done yet (though his numbers are coming down). Very few people in the history of the NBA has put up a package like that, while having the amount of responsability he has in running a team. Efficiency, while getting the best out of your team and your teammates HAS to count for something.

Anyways, you're too focused on the stats. None of the people you have mentioned could run a team like Nash has.

I'm too focused on stats? When a player is only efficient on the offensive side of the ball (he was a liability defensively), what else is there? Sure he made his teammates better, but that should also be reflected in his assist total.

Therefore, let's look back at the stats. Compare Nash's career with the other great Phoenix PG Kevin Johnson. Both had 4 year spans where they were arguably among the top 3 point guards in the league. Nash averaged a 18 and 11 and KJ averaged a 21 and 11. Excluding those 4 years (and the first 4 years of Nash's career and 2 years of KJ's career before their breakthrough seasons), Nash averaged 16 and 8 and KJ averaged 18 and 8.5. Remarkably similar stats. Furthermore, both led their teams deep into the playoffs. Remember the Suns pre-Barkley were actually really good. Yet KJ played some defense. 

So just because Nash won 2 MVPs (when KJ would be as deserving or more of them if he played in a PG-depleted era), he is a shoe-in for the HOF and KJ isn't even mentioned for the HOF?

= HOF PG

[BudweiserCeltic]

And he should be in the Hall of Fame... Nash has 2 MVPs, and again he revitalized the PG position. His impact in the game transcends the numbers, which are still very good. Just this year did the Hall fix the travesty of Adrian Dantley not being in the hall. But facts remain, Nash has put up the numbers AND the resume. Just look at Joe Dumars, and next year with Stockton (which would be quite shameful if he isn't in it).

I think the Hall has shown that their criteria for induction goes beyond the numbers. Nash has been one of the faces of the NBA for his era, and that alone with his stats and resume would get him in easily. Kevin Johnson was sadly ovelooked over his whole career, but that isn't happening with Nash.

Sadly, Dennis Johnson is also overlooked. But I think that in time the Hall will fix this, just like this year it did with Adrian.

What's keeping all these good players off the Hall are not their numbers. And that lack of the mystical thing that is keeping all these off it, Nash has... which is mainly recognition.

[EarthBall]

I think the Hall has shown that their criteria for induction goes beyond the numbers. Nash has been one of the faces of the NBA for his era, and that alone with his stats and resume would get him in easily. Kevin Johnson was sadly ovelooked over his whole career, but that isn't happening with Nash.

The basketball HOF is a joke. Plain and simple.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I think the Hall has shown that their criteria for induction goes beyond the numbers. Nash has been one of the faces of the NBA for his era, and that alone with his stats and resume would get him in easily. Kevin Johnson was sadly ovelooked over his whole career, but that isn't happening with Nash.

The basketball HOF is a joke. Plain and simple.

We both can easily agree on that.

[Hoops]

Responding to the OP, I've said before that I think 20-30 years from now, Nash's career will shine more brightly than Kidd's career. While you say the top 5 PGs are Magic, Isiah, Cousy, Stockton and Kidd, I'd absolutely swap out Kidd for Nash.

Not only did he win the MVP twice, but those two years the Suns were considered by many to be one of the favorites, if not the favorite, to win the championship. It's not unreasonable to say that they would have done it too if not for a couple of high profile screw jobs in the playoffs.

Kidd made it to the Finals, but that was more a function of being in the weak East than anything.

As with others, I say Nash gets in - no problem. And he'll absolutely deserve it.

[BrickJames]

I think the Hall has shown that their criteria for induction goes beyond the numbers. Nash has been one of the faces of the NBA for his era, and that alone with his stats and resume would get him in easily. Kevin Johnson was sadly ovelooked over his whole career, but that isn't happening with Nash.

TP - and great post above about KJ.
The basketball HOF is a joke. Plain and simple.

[EarthBall]

Responding to the OP, I've said before that I think 20-30 years from now, Nash's career will shine more brightly than Kidd's career. While you say the top 5 PGs are Magic, Isiah, Cousy, Stockton and Kidd, I'd absolutely swap out Kidd for Nash.

Not only did he win the MVP twice, but those two years the Suns were considered by many to be one of the favorites, if not the favorite, to win the championship. It's not unreasonable to say that they would have done it too if not for a couple of high profile screw jobs in the playoffs.

Kidd made it to the Finals, but that was more a function of being in the weak East than anything.

As with others, I say Nash gets in - no problem. And he'll absolutely deserve it.

Are you kidding me that Nash is better than Kidd career-wise?

Everyone here seems to be stuck on the fact that Nash only had 4 great years. He was a marginal 3rd team all-NBA PG before and after. If that wins him a place in the all-Pantheon team, then we can't have a rational argument. Kidd was an elite PG for almost a decade. Sure he couldn't shoot like Nash, but he could play infinitely better defense. Furthermore, he never played with an Amare-type inside player. If he had the talent that Nash had a few years ago, then we'd be talking about Kidd the champion.

[nickagneta]

I don't understand how you can say that Nash has only had 4 great years and then say Kidd is such a better PG when Nash's PER every single year that PER has been measured at ESPN is higher than Kidd's. That's seven years in a row or half of Kidd's career Nash has been measured to be a more effective overall player than Kidd.

Also Nash has more years of 10+ assists per game, more years of 15+ points per game, more years with a higher FG%, more years with a higher FT% and more years with a higher 3PTFG%. Also, if you take a look at their career per minute stats, Nash is much better in just about every area except rebounding.

And Nash has more MVPs and like it or not that award means everything when talking Hall of Fame in basketball.

[Finkelskyhook]

I think the Hall has shown that their criteria for induction goes beyond the numbers. Nash has been one of the faces of the NBA for his era, and that alone with his stats and resume would get him in easily. Kevin Johnson was sadly ovelooked over his whole career, but that isn't happening with Nash.

The basketball HOF is a joke. Plain and simple.

We both can easily agree on that.

I third that.  The fact that the concensus among the people who vote for this excursion into silliness would even consider selfish stat-hound team wreckers like Carter and O'Grady, and consider the ultimate in selfishness, Iverson a lock, and would leave champions like Dennis Johnson off of it speaks to what a joke the HOF has become.  Based on their criteria, JR Rider belongs.  The HOF ranks up there with the olympics for legitimacy.

I also second the despising of Nash.  Nash, in spite of playing no defense whatsoever, undisputedly has made every team he's been on better.  If other than DJ, any of the above qualify for the HOF, Nash should also.