2012 CB Historical Draft Board (New News, Check It Out)

[indeedproceed]

Yeah whatever. Statistically can't really defend Nash > Paul. I stand by my comments of him as a leader, but Paul's 08-09 season was a world-beater.

[Kane3387]

Lol man there is one guy out there that no one wants to touch hahaha

Bullseye!

[Kane3387]

Yeah whatever. Statistically can't really defend Nash > Paul. I stand by my comments of him as a leader, but Paul's 08-09 season was a world-beater.

You mean until he played Denver in the playoffs and they lost by almost 100?

[Fafnir]

Yeah whatever. Statistically can't really defend Nash > Paul. I stand by my comments of him as a leader, but Paul's 08-09 season was a world-beater.

You mean until he played Denver in the playoffs and they lost by almost 100?

He hurt his knee late that year, was a shell of himself in the playoffs and couldn't move.

[Celtic Fan Forever]

Chris Paul > Steve Nash

i agree.

Also wrong.

To add my two cents in the Nash/Paul debate, I believe Chris Paul is the better all around player, but I like Nash better as a leader. With Scottie Pippen, a guy who for his entire career was always the second star, I like the 2 time MVP in Steve Nash leading the show. Plus with Scottie Pippen around, you can deal with Nash's lack of defense.

Is Nash really more of a leader then Paul? Neither has ever even played in the Finals let alone lead a team there.

I think Nash makes people around him better to a larger extent than Paul. Also, he's a better shooter and passer. Really, I think the only thing Paul has on him is defense and athleticism. However, for my team, I would have selected Chris Paul. In IP's case, I think Nash works better with Pippen than Paul would. To me, Nash and Pippen will be a very effective combo, and I just see Nash as a more natural fit on his team.

[indeedproceed]

Chris Paul > Steve Nash

i agree.

Also wrong.

To add my two cents in the Nash/Paul debate, I believe Chris Paul is the better all around player, but I like Nash better as a leader. With Scottie Pippen, a guy who for his entire career was always the second star, I like the 2 time MVP in Steve Nash leading the show. Plus with Scottie Pippen around, you can deal with Nash's lack of defense.

Is Nash really more of a leader then Paul? Neither has ever even played in the Finals let alone lead a team there.

He's been farther along, had more playoff success, and has more experience as a leader.

How is he not better? Just because he's never been to the Finals, that makes him only as good as the guy who has also never been to the Finals?

[StartOrien]

Yeah whatever. Statistically can't really defend Nash > Paul. I stand by my comments of him as a leader, but Paul's 08-09 season was a world-beater.

Paul's better than Nash. No question about it.

BUUUUUT, with Pippen already on board, in this particular format, it's open for debate. I think Nash was probably the right selection for you.

[Fafnir]

Yeah whatever. Statistically can't really defend Nash > Paul. I stand by my comments of him as a leader, but Paul's 08-09 season was a world-beater.

Paul's better than Nash. No question about it.

BUUUUUT, with Pippen already on board, in this particular format, it's open for debate. I think Nash was probably the right selection for you.

I'm not so sure, in this stacked team format it is going to be a lot harder to hide Nash.

[wdleehi]

Yeah whatever. Statistically can't really defend Nash > Paul. I stand by my comments of him as a leader, but Paul's 08-09 season was a world-beater.

Paul's better than Nash. No question about it.

BUUUUUT, with Pippen already on board, in this particular format, it's open for debate. I think Nash was probably the right selection for you.

With Pippen and Paul, you have two of the stronger wing defenders.  

[Who]

Why does Pippen effect the Nash vs Paul debate? I mean, how does he change it?

Pretty much every team is going to have scoring threats across their three perimeter positions and most of their bench perimeter players too. It's not like you can hide Nash anywhere. He's going to be pitted against a tough offensive player.

So what does Pippen do for Nash that he doesn't do for Chris Paul? Why is a Pippen/Nash combo more effective than a Pippen/Paul combo?

[Kane3387]

Yeah whatever. Statistically can't really defend Nash > Paul. I stand by my comments of him as a leader, but Paul's 08-09 season was a world-beater.

You mean until he played Denver in the playoffs and they lost by almost 100?

He hurt his knee late that year, was a shell of himself in the playoffs and couldn't move.

Do injuries like that count for this game? If a guy had an injury the year you picked him does that factor in to deciding the outcome of how a team finishes?

Example:

Player X is killing it the first sixty games of the year in his best statistical season of his career. He then gets hurt and misses the rest of the year. How does that impact a team in this game?

[Fafnir]

Why is a Pippen/Nash combo more effective than a Pippen/Paul combo?

The one thing that Nash will do that CP3 can't is to run, CP3 likes his 85 to 86 possession games.

[Celtic Fan Forever]

Why does Pippen effect the Nash vs Paul debate? I mean, how does he change it?

Pretty much every team is going to have scoring threats across their three perimeter positions and most of their bench perimeter players too. It's not like you can hide Nash anywhere. He's going to be pitted against a tough offensive player.

So what does Pippen do for Nash that he doesn't do for Chris Paul? Why is a Pippen/Nash combo more effective than a Pippen/Paul combo?

Shooting. Pippen wasn't an amazing three point shooter by any means, and Nash has been over 40% for nearly every season of his career.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Yeah whatever. Statistically can't really defend Nash > Paul. I stand by my comments of him as a leader, but Paul's 08-09 season was a world-beater.

Paul's better than Nash. No question about it.

BUUUUUT, with Pippen already on board, in this particular format, it's open for debate. I think Nash was probably the right selection for you.

this is just me, but since Nash is not a good defender, if he goes against all star PG's, Pippen has to slide down there and take care of it.

Paul would be able to do what Nash does offensively while not as better. But he does not need Pip to defend other PG's. Pippen can stay and guard wings.

By the way, who's up?

[Kane3387]

Chris Paul > Steve Nash

i agree.

Also wrong.

To add my two cents in the Nash/Paul debate, I believe Chris Paul is the better all around player, but I like Nash better as a leader. With Scottie Pippen, a guy who for his entire career was always the second star, I like the 2 time MVP in Steve Nash leading the show. Plus with Scottie Pippen around, you can deal with Nash's lack of defense.

Is Nash really more of a leader then Paul? Neither has ever even played in the Finals let alone lead a team there.

He's been farther along, had more playoff success, and has more experience as a leader.

How is he not better? Just because he's never been to the Finals, that makes him only as good as the guy who has also never been to the Finals?

Yeah. I mean there are guys who are legends, were the best players on their team, but didn't win a ring. And because they never won a ring they are looked at as less. The fact Nash has never even gotten his team to or lead his team to a finals with way more talent then CP3 ever had makes me wonder how you can say he is a better "leader"