PDA

View Full Version : Who is the better PG?


Acreboy
05-24-2007, 10:07 AM
My dad and I have been having this discussion for a while. I think Steve Nash is the better PG and my dad thinks that Magic Johnson was the better PG.

Now Magic does have what Nash doesn't. A ring, but I also think that Magic was surrounded by better talent. My dad told me that Magic was better because he could play other positions but I reminded him that the question was who was the better PG. He still said magic and then proceeded to tell me that I was a product of my generation.

I wish I knew more about basketball but I only a marginal bit so I would like a lot of positive input to strengthen my knowledge on the subject.

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 10:18 AM
Use this thread, it has the poll on it.

LitoSheppard
05-24-2007, 10:21 AM
Same thing with me and my dad. Nash IMO

MaxV
05-24-2007, 10:21 AM
Nash is good, but it's not even remotely close.

Magic is a top 5 player of all time.

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 10:23 AM
Nash is good, but it's not even remotely close.

Magic is a top 5 player of all time.Why? That's the point of the thread to discuss why. top 5 of all time? Who are the other 4 then?

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 10:27 AM
Nash is amazing. I"ve never seen Magic play, so i'll go with Nash.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-24-2007, 10:27 AM
Nash might be the better PURE point guard, but Magic is the better player by a very considerable margin.

-black
05-24-2007, 10:31 AM
Nash might be the better PURE point guard, but Magic is the better player by a very considerable margin.

and there it is


better question

Nash or Stockton

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-24-2007, 10:32 AM
and there it is


better question

Nash or Stockton

Stockton!

Best pure PG ever IMO. Best I've ever seen play.

etk
05-24-2007, 10:37 AM
Who would you rather build your team around? Who is more valuable? Who is the better player?

Magic for all of them.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-24-2007, 10:48 AM
Who would you rather build your team around? Who is more valuable? Who is the better player?

Magic for all of them.

But the question remains "who is the better PG?"

I think it has to be Steve Nash. A bit misleading, because Magic is the better overall player by quite a bit.

RyanLeaf#1
05-24-2007, 10:54 AM
Magic its not even close. Could you picture if Magic played now. He would be so much better then everyone else. Magic played when alot of great players were in the league. And he has championships to back it up. Im a big big Nash fan, but I have to go with my head on this one and not my heart.

ncst8fan83
05-24-2007, 10:57 AM
Well, as far as PG's are concerned, Nash is only the 3rd PG in the history of the NBA to win the MVP(Cousy and Magic being the other 2). Magic has 3 MVP's to Nash's 2. Statistically, Magic is superior. Nash, to me, seems a bit out of control at times, whereas Magic just looked SO graceful out on the court. In my opinion, it has to be Magic although I think it's closer than most want to admit.

dabears10
05-24-2007, 10:58 AM
Why? That's the point of the thread to discuss why. top 5 of all time? Who are the other 4 then?

Magic, Bird, Jordan, Russell are the top 4 in my mind with no other possibilities.
The 5th could be debated for a long time I'd probably go Wilt but not by any large margin and have yet to be a fan of Chamberlain.

ncst8fan83
05-24-2007, 11:01 AM
^someone is forgetting the 6-time NBA MVP Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-24-2007, 11:02 AM
I still think people who are answering Magic by a mile do not grasp the subject of this thread.

This isn't about who is/was the better player. Everybody knows that would be Magic by a mile. When discussing the better pure PG, it's very close and debatable. I give the edge to Nash. You can give the edge to Magic. I don't wan't to hear anybody say that it's not even close, because it is.

dabears10
05-24-2007, 11:02 AM
And to answer the question,
The better player and better Point Guard is Magic. Magic could pass from any position he is in, you could argue that Nash always allows himself to pass from where he is, but also another HUGE factor is time. Nash has only been doing his thing for about 5 years and before that he was not a breakout star. The point of a point guard or any star is to win the game, and Magic did it better. So the length of top play, fun to watch, and Wins go to Magic.

However, I think the big question is if I had Magic in his prime and Nash in his prime would I start Magic or Nash

It would be Magic. I would not want either Magic or Nash in without control of the ball and so I could not even play them both, well I could but it would be wasting the talents.

dabears10
05-24-2007, 11:04 AM
^someone is forgetting the 6-time NBA MVP Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

No, no I wasn't. I like my players to have a killer instinct, not a pansy one. He would be in the discussion for 5 but Wilt has better prime numbers and more people get scared of him.

Scar
05-24-2007, 11:11 AM
Nash is good, but imagine what he could do if he were 6'9". Magic could dribble and pass every bit as well as Nash can, and that's why he played PG instead of posting up. He was a matchup problem every time he stepped on the court. Magic was the better PG, it's not even close. BTW, this is coming from a guy that grew up a Celtics fan hating Magic Johnson.

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 11:29 AM
The point of a point guard or any star is to win the game, and Magic did it better.
I think thats false.

Nash is good, but imagine what he could do if he were 6'9". Magic could dribble and pass every bit as well as Nash can, and that's why he played PG instead of posting up. He was a matchup problem every time he stepped on the court. Magic was the better PG, it's not even close. BTW, this is coming from a guy that grew up a Celtics fan hating Magic Johnson.How is it not even close?

Vikes99ej
05-24-2007, 11:32 AM
I like Nash better.

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 11:42 AM
To make this thread more interesting pick one of the two

Kobe Bryant / Michael Jordan
Lebron James / Magic Johnson
Steve Nash / John Stockton
Shaq O'neal / Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem / Tim Duncan

Try to look at this talent wise, rather than accomplishment wise.

P-L
05-24-2007, 11:53 AM
Michael Jordan is better than Kobe Bryant by a lot. Jordan shot nearly 50% from the floor over the span of his career. Kobe is shooting just under 44% for his career. Jordan had six season where he shot over 50%, while Kobe has three seasons shooting over 45%. Jordan averaged 30 PPG for his career while Kobe is averaging 23. Not to mention Jordan was a superior rebounder, passer, and free throw shooter.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 11:55 AM
Moses Malone is the most under rated player in NBA history. I'd consider him number 6 on the all-time center list. Behind The Dream, Shaq, Russell, Kareem, Wilt.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-24-2007, 11:55 AM
To make this thread more interesting pick one of the two

Kobe Bryant / Michael Jordan
Lebron James / Magic Johnson
Steve Nash / John Stockton
Shaq O'neal / Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem / Tim Duncan

Try to look at this talent wise, rather than accomplishment wise.

I'm a huge, HUGE Kobe fan, but he hasn't yet done enough to be considered better than MJ. He has to win a championship without Shaq.

Kobe Bryant / Michael Jordan - see above.
Lebron James / Magic Johnson - I think in 10-15 years, this will change.
Steve Nash / John Stockton - In my opinion, Stockton was the best pure PG to ever play the game, no doubt about it.
Shaq O'neal / Wilt Chamberlain - Toughest one to choose; both were so dominant in their prime. I'll go with Wilt, I suppose.
Kareem / Tim Duncan - Why is this even on here? Kareem is a 6-time NBA MVP and he's got 6 rings. The man completely mastered the skyhook, the hardest shot to defend in basketball. Most points scored in NBA history, and still he is somehow underrated. Greatest center of all-time, IMO.

MaxV
05-24-2007, 11:58 AM
Why? That's the point of the thread to discuss why. top 5 of all time? Who are the other 4 then?

Ok here are the reasons Magic was great:

- Constant triple-double threat.

- Matchup Nightmare with his speed/size combination.

- Great open court vision.

- Can make any shot and a knock for making clutch shots.

- Ability to play ANY position.....including Center.

- Good defender.

- Great leader.


As far as top 5 players of all time:

1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Wilt
4. Magic
5. Russell

-black
05-24-2007, 11:59 AM
Nash
Jordan
Magic
Shaq
Duncan

what a lineup that would be

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 12:01 PM
Michael Jordan is better than Kobe Bryant by a lot. Jordan shot nearly 50% from the floor over the span of his career. Kobe is shooting just under 44% for his career. Jordan had six season where he shot over 50%, while Kobe has three seasons shooting over 45%. Jordan averaged 30 PPG for his career while Kobe is averaging 23. Not to mention Jordan was a superior rebounder, passer, and free throw shooter.
I believe that Kobe is the most talented scorer to ever play the game. His 81 points were absolutely amazing. He can completely take over a game anytime he wants, which is demonstrated by his many 50+ point games. Now Jordan was a team player, but he also had more talent around him IMO. Jordan is also better when you look at them accomplishment wise, but I believe Kobe is the most talented scorer ever. Whether he'll ever be able to demonstrate his full potential is questionable due to the fact that his team refuses to give him a decent running mate. Give Kobe a point guard like Jason Kidd or Steve Nash and he will be completely unstoppable.

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 12:01 PM
To make this thread more interesting pick one of the two

Kobe Bryant / Michael Jordan
Lebron James / Magic Johnson
Steve Nash / John Stockton
Shaq O'neal / Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem / Tim Duncan

Try to look at this talent wise, rather than accomplishment wise.

Kobe Bryant / Michael Jordan
Lebron James / Magic Johnson
Steve Nash / John Stockton
Shaq O'neal / Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem / Tim Duncan

I believe that Kobe is the most talented scorer to ever play the game. His 81 points were absolutely amazing. He can completely take over a game anytime he wants, which is demonstrated by his many 50+ point games. Now Jordan was a team player, but he also had more talent around him IMO. Jordan is also better when you look at them accomplishment wise, but I believe Kobe is the most talented scorer ever. Whether he'll ever be able to demonstrate his full potential is questionable due to the fact that his team refuses to give him a decent running mate. Give Kobe a point guard like Jason Kidd or Steve Nash and he will be completely unstoppable.If Jordan didn't pass as much he could have easily put up 81

bored of education
05-24-2007, 12:01 PM
Here is a lineup:

Oscar
Duncan
Barkley
Moses
Worthy

bored of education
05-24-2007, 12:02 PM
Oscar is in my top 5 all time EASILY, he put up numbers lebron creams about

-black
05-24-2007, 12:02 PM
Here is a lineup:

Oscar
Duncan
Barkley
Moses
Worthy

my lineup would crush them (although two Tim Duncans would be fun to watch)

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 12:03 PM
Here is a lineup:

Oscar
Duncan
Barkley
Moses
Worthy
That's old school.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 12:03 PM
ho in your lineup would cover Oscar? nash LOL! i'll replace Duncan with the Dream

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 12:05 PM
If Jordan didn't pass as much he could have easily put up 81
I will say that overall, Jordan was a more rounded player than Kobe. Kobe however is a better scorer, and that is why i'd take him.

ncst8fan83
05-24-2007, 12:07 PM
give me...

Magic
Jordan
Barkley
Kareem
Wilt

draftguru151
05-24-2007, 12:07 PM
I will say that overall, Jordan was a more rounded player than Kobe. Kobe however is a better scorer, and that is why i'd take him.

Why because he put up more points in one game? Look at the stats PL posted.

ncst8fan83
05-24-2007, 12:08 PM
I will say that overall, Jordan was a more rounded player than Kobe. Kobe however is a better scorer, and that is why i'd take him.

while i agree that kobe is an excellent scorer, jordan would shut him down defensively as well as hang 40+ on him any given night. jordan>>>>>kobe

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 12:08 PM
Ok here are the reasons Magic was great:

- Constant triple-double threat.

- Matchup Nightmare with his speed/size combination.

- Great open court vision.

- Can make any shot and a knock for making clutch shots.

- Ability to play ANY position.....including Center.

- Good defender.

- Great leader.




- Constant triple-double threat.Well, Nash isn't that good but he can go for a double double every night.

- Matchup Nightmare with his speed/size combination.I'll give this to Magic.

- Great open court vision.Nash is just as good or even better.

- Can make any shot and a knock for making clutch shots.Nash has done that too.

- Ability to play ANY position.....including Center.Talking about what makes him a better PG. This has no bearing on it.

- Good defender.Magic is better, Nash is decent.

- Great leader.Nash is just as good a leader as Magic was.

-black
05-24-2007, 12:09 PM
whose team is better?

Jordans Bulls his first three years in the league

or

Kobe's Lakers the past three without Shaq

Shiver
05-24-2007, 12:09 PM
This isn't even a discussion in my books. Earvin "Magic" Johnson is by far the better player than Steve Nash. Unfortunately, perspective is jaded due to Nash playing in the 'here and now.' Even though the quality of competition in Johnson's era blows this current crop away.

Magic has the most playoff triple doubles, by far. Magic could play any position on the court. Magic averaged 19, 11, 7 in the regular season, and was only better in the post-season. He was the better defender. He actually had success in the play-offs. He actually had prolonged success, whereas Nash has only thrived as a "great" player in his brief stint in Phoenix's wide open offense.

13 time All-Star
3 time NBA finals MVP
3 time NBA MVP
9 time 1st team all NBA

P-L
05-24-2007, 12:11 PM
Kobe may very well be a better pure scorer, but Jordan is better in every other asset of the game by a pretty large margin. I also feel that if Jordan shot the ball almost 50 times and went to the line 20 more in a game, he could come close to or get 81 points. Jordan had the ability to be a better scorer than he was, but he was more of a team player. Putting up 50 points is really impressive, but last year (when the majority of his 50 point games came) he had more games under 20 than he did over 45. Even if you believe that Kobe is the best scorer of all-time, that doesn't make him better than the best all around player of all-time and the guy who most consider to be the greatest player of all-time.

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 12:11 PM
Why because he put up more points in one game? Look at the stats PL posted.
Part of it may be that I'm 18 years old and I only caught the latter part of Jordan's career. But watching Kobe, I simply can't imagine how anyone could be a better scorer. I also tend to live with a bias that everything in the past is overrated and that the overall talent that Kobe plays against nightly is much greater than what Jordan faced nightly.

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 12:12 PM
This isn't even a discussion in my books. Earvin "Magic" Johnson is by far the better player than Steve Nash. Unfortunately, perspective is jaded due to Nash playing in the 'here and now.' Even though the quality of competition in Johnson's era blows this current crop away.

Magic has the most playoff triple doubles, by far. Magic could play any position on the court. Magic averaged 19, 11, 7 in the regular season, and was only better in the post-season. He was the better defender. He actually had success in the play-offs. He actually had prolonged success, whereas Nash has only thrived as a "great" player in his brief stint in Phoenix's wide open offense.
Yet too bad this isn't even the question at hand.

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 12:14 PM
Kobe may very well be a better pure scorer, but Jordan is better in every other asset of the game by a pretty large margin. I also feel that if Jordan shot the ball almost 50 times and went to the line 20 more in a game, he could come close to or get 81 points. Jordan had the ability to be a better scorer than he was, but he was more of a team player. Putting up 50 points is really impressive, but last year (when the majority of his 50 point games came) he had more games under 20 than he did over 45. Even if you believe that Kobe is the best scorer of all-time, that doesn't make him better than the best all around player of all-time and the guy who most consider to be the greatest player of all-time.
I'll agree that Jordan was a better all around player, but I like fast paced basketball with lots of flash and lots of scoring. That's why I like Kobe better. I hate gritty basketball and the finals I was hoping for was the Nets vs. the Suns. The Pistons vs. the Spurs will be a boring series.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 12:15 PM
Give me Oscar before Kobe.


Oscar is gully

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 12:16 PM
I'll agree that Jordan was a better all around player, but I like fast paced basketball with lots of flash and lots of scoring. That's why I like Kobe better. I hate gritty basketball and the finals I was hoping for was the Nets vs. the Suns. The Pistons vs. the Spurs will be a boring series.
Yeah, actual basketball will be being played. You know, real strategical basketball.

Shiver
05-24-2007, 12:16 PM
Yet too bad this isn't even the question at hand.

Of course it is. You cannot punish him for his unbelievable versatility. The total package is the end all, be all. It's irrelevant to separate "player" and "point guard." Johnson is better in both regards. Besides he averaged more "assists." He was the better leader, defender, scorer, etcetera. He had prolonged success, not just a three year stint of great play. What more can you ask for?

ncst8fan83
05-24-2007, 12:17 PM
Part of it may be that I'm 18 years old and I only caught the latter part of Jordan's career. But watching Kobe, I simply can't imagine how anyone could be a better scorer. I also tend to live with a bias that everything in the past is overrated and that the overall talent that Kobe plays against nightly is much greater than what Jordan faced nightly.

you are not qualified to post on this subject if you think that is the case. the 80's and EARLY 90's had MUCH MUCH greater all around talent than the pitiful excuse for basketball the NBA now displays.

-black
05-24-2007, 12:19 PM
Part of it may be that I'm 18 years old and I only caught the latter part of Jordan's career. But watching Kobe, I simply can't imagine how anyone could be a better scorer. I also tend to live with a bias that everything in the past is overrated and that the overall talent that Kobe plays against nightly is much greater than what Jordan faced nightly.

uh ohhhhh....

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 12:19 PM
Yeah, actual basketball will be being played. You know, real strategical basketball.
The reason I hate gritty basketball: It's more like football, too much contact, too much questionable calls. The way the refs call the game has a major impact on the outcome. In European style of basketball (Suns style), it's simple, just outscore the opponent. It's all about skill rather than intimidation and size. It's much funner to watch that way also.

ricky bobby
05-24-2007, 12:21 PM
uh ohhhhh....
*ducks for cover* lol

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-24-2007, 12:23 PM
Point Guards:

1. John Stockton
2. Oscar Robertson
3. Walt Frazier
4. Bob Cousy
5. Steve Nash
6. Magic Johnson
7. Jason Kidd
8. Isiah Thomas
9. Jerry West
10a. Lenny Wilkens
10b. Nate "Tiny" Archibald

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 12:29 PM
Of course it is. You cannot punish him for his unbelievable versatility. The total package is the end all, be all. It's irrelevant to separate "player" and "point guard." Johnson is better in both regards. Besides he averaged more "assists." He was the better leader, defender, scorer, etcetera. He had prolonged success, not just a three year stint of great play. What more can you ask for?Nash is gaining on Johnson and his career isn't even close to over yet.

He could have 4 maybe 5 MVP's before he retires.

It's arguable if Magic or Nash was the better leader. He was the better defender. In 2 of those 3 years he was MVP. Not too bad. Nash's numbers will continue to grow. AS will his success.

Point Guards:

1. John Stockton
2. Oscar Robertson
3. Walt Frazier
4. Bob Cousy
5. Steve Nash
6. Magic Johnson
7. Jason Kidd
8. Isiah Thomas
9. Jerry West
10a. Lenny Wilkens
10b. Nate "Tiny" Archibald
Jason above Isiah?

Shiver
05-24-2007, 12:36 PM
Nash is gaining on Johnson and his career isn't even close to over yet.

He could have 4 maybe 5 MVP's before he retires.

It's arguable if Magic or Nash was the better leader. He was the better defender. In 2 of those 3 years he was MVP. Not too bad. Nash's numbers will continue to grow. AS will his success.

He is 33 years old. It isn't as if he is just entering his prime. Besides, it's impossible to say that he will ever have one NBA Finals MVP; I guarantee you you he won't have three. He may beat Johnson's accumulative regular season MVP awards, however, his competition for the award is a joke compared to Johnson's era.

soybean
05-24-2007, 12:52 PM
people tend to forget that nash's defense isn't too good, so when you match him up against a faster point guard (tony parker) he tends to struggle in those matchups. Also, nash has a lot of turnovers. He may make some incredible passes but he also will make a couple lousy ones too.

NickBam
05-24-2007, 01:03 PM
whose team is better?

Jordans Bulls his first three years in the league

or

Kobe's Lakers the past three without Shaq

They're fairly similar, actually. Jordan and the Bulls never made it out of the first round of the playoffs in first 3 years and never had a .500 record. While the Lakers have been above .500 two of the years and were in the lottery one of the years. Like Jordan's Bulls, they never made it out of the first.

However, if you throw away Jordan's second season (where he only played 18 games due to injury), Jordan's 3rd full season the Bulls went 50-32 and lost in the Eastern Conference Semi-Finals. So, if the questions changed to Jordan's first three FULL seasons, Jordan's Bulls were better.

soybean
05-24-2007, 01:05 PM
while i agree that kobe is an excellent scorer, jordan would shut him down defensively as well as hang 40+ on him any given night. jordan>>>>>kobe

realistically, they're both nba defensive 1st teamers, yet nobody can stop either of em. So jordan would have scored 40+ on kobe but kobe would have scored in that range as well.

-black
05-24-2007, 01:06 PM
They're fairly similar, actually. Jordan and the Bulls never made it out of the first round of the playoffs in first 3 years and never had a .500 record. While the Lakers have been above .500 two of the years and were in the lottery one of the years. Like Jordan's Bulls, they never made it out of the first.

However, if you throw away Jordan's second season (where he only played 18 games due to injury), Jordan's 3rd full season the Bulls went 50-32 and lost in the Eastern Conference Semi-Finals. So, if the questions changed to Jordan's first three FULL seasons, Jordan's Bulls were better.

were they better or did Jordan make them better...whose team was more talented (i wasnt even born yet so im askin for discussion purposes, not to antagonize)

NickBam
05-24-2007, 01:14 PM
were they better or did Jordan make them better...whose team was more talented (i wasnt even born yet so im askin for discussion purposes, not to antagonize)

Lamar Odom is better than anyone MJ had during those first 3-4 years. The 4th year is the rookie year of Scottie Pippen, but he was still growing as a player and only averaged 7.9 PPG. Charles Oakley, John Paxson, Dave Corzine, George Gervin (for one season, Jordan's injury season) and Orlando Woolridge were his best teammates during that stretch.

Now, I don't know a whole lot about guys like Corzine and Woolridge, but Woolridge's stats looks pretty decent. Oakley and Paxson were never anything more then roleplayers. The Bulls did take off when Pippen came into his own.

I think MJ is the better player and I'm a Chicago kid who can't stand MJ and the Bulls.

dabears10
05-24-2007, 01:23 PM
Part of it may be that I'm 18 years old and I only caught the latter part of Jordan's career. But watching Kobe, I simply can't imagine how anyone could be a better scorer. I also tend to live with a bias that everything in the past is overrated and that the overall talent that Kobe plays against nightly is much greater than what Jordan faced nightly.

Watch on Classic the 63 Point game Jordan had against the Celtics on April 20, 1986.

No one talks about Kobe like Bird did that day.

"I didn't think anyone was capable of doing what Michael has done to us," marveled Celtics ace Larry Bird. "He is the most exciting, awesome player in the game today. I think it's just God disguised as Michael Jordan."


Edit: It was also against Arguably the greatest NBA team of all time.

ccB
05-24-2007, 01:24 PM
Magic Johnson and its not even close.

sweetness34
05-24-2007, 01:27 PM
To make this thread more interesting pick one of the two

Kobe Bryant / Michael Jordan
Lebron James / Magic Johnson
Steve Nash / John Stockton
Shaq O'neal / Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem / Tim Duncan

Try to look at this talent wise, rather than accomplishment wise.

Talent wise? Michael, LeBron, Nash, Wilt, and a tie for the last one.

Oh and about Nash/Magic. Go back and watch Magic play in his prime, then come back to me. It's Magic going away hands down IMO.

fenikz
05-24-2007, 01:31 PM
i went with nash because he is a better true point guard, but Magic is an all time great and top 10 all time

sweetness34
05-24-2007, 01:35 PM
i went with nash because he is a better true point guard, but Magic is an all time great and top 10 all time

Better true PG? I don't think so. Nash is a combo guard. Magic was a true PG who looked to pass first and score 2nd. Like I said, go back and watch him play and tell me who the better PG was. It's Magic.

dabears10
05-24-2007, 01:36 PM
To make this thread more interesting pick one of the two

Kobe Bryant / Michael Jordan
Lebron James / Magic Johnson
Steve Nash / John Stockton
Shaq O'neal / Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem / Tim Duncan

Try to look at this talent wise, rather than accomplishment wise.

Duncan is the most underrated player in the History of the NBA.

-black
05-24-2007, 01:52 PM
garbage.......huh

dabears10
05-24-2007, 01:54 PM
oh stop it. duncan is garbage once the refs stop calling fouls for him (witness: western conference semi-finals game 7 overtime last season).

Has any team he's been on underachieved? Can you say that about any other team in the NBA the past 10 years.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
05-24-2007, 01:55 PM
Titles talk, and Magic has them. I think Magic got everyone including himself involved better than Nash. When Nash is dishin it out, his points go down, but when Magic was throwin out 14 assists, he would combine that with 20+ points as well.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 02:05 PM
I refuse to have a conversation with people who have no respect for the past greats and think modern day players are so great, this discussion is painful to read.

Shiver
05-24-2007, 02:32 PM
I refuse to have a conversation with people who have no respect for the past greats and think modern day players are so great, this discussion is painful to read.

I know, I cannot believe this can even be a discussion.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-24-2007, 02:46 PM
I refuse to have a conversation with people who have no respect for the past greats and think modern day players are so great, this discussion is painful to read.

The game has progressed in certain areas and regressed in others. Players today are far superior athletes... but for the most part, guys aren't really concerned with anything other than being a scorer and a star; as a whole, nobody really cares about defense anymore. The past was more fundamentally sound, with players who actually cared about things such as team play and defense, and as a result the game was better to watch... but the overall talent was not what it is today. It is equally idiotic to write off the few truly great players in today's game as it is to completely ignore the greats of the past.

Steve Nash is a top 10 point guard, past or present. He makes everybody around him better, he's got great court vision and can make any pass, he's the best weak hand player in the league, and he's probably the best shooter, too. He shot over 50% from the field, 90% from the FT line, and 40% from 3 last season, and fell 0.001% shy on the FT line from doing it again this season. Only three other players have done that in NBA history, and Nash basically did it in back to back seasons. He's the perfect blend of a scorer/passer, and there's no denying that he is a great point guard.

Of course he's nowhere near Magic's league as an overall player, but within just about every aspect of what makes a point guard great he can go toe-to-toe with Magic. If you find that painful to think about, maybe you're a little bit stuck in nostalgia.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 02:57 PM
In his time period alone Jason Kidd and Gary Payton are better than him.

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-24-2007, 03:05 PM
In his time period alone Jason Kidd and Gary Payton are better than him.

Kidd is debatable, but I also see Kidd as a top-10 all time PG. I think Gary Payton is either overrated or underrated because you definitely don't hear his name enough; he was probably the second best defensive PG after Walt Frazier and he could definitely score, but I don't think he had as nearly as much of an impact on the guys around him as Nash, or Kidd. Nash is the only one out of that group who can single handedly FORCE teams to play a style of basketball that HE excels at. Says a lot about him IMO.

Moses
05-24-2007, 03:34 PM
Nash's pathetic defence takes him out of any of these discussions in my opinion. He's one of the worst in the league in my opinion.

ShutDwn
05-24-2007, 03:50 PM
Nash's pathetic defence takes him out of any of these discussions in my opinion. He's one of the worst in the league in my opinion.

So Ben Wallace shouldn't have won defensive player of the year because he isn't good on offense.

Kidd is debatable, but I also see Kidd as a top-10 all time PG. I think Gary Payton is either overrated or underrated because you definitely don't hear his name enough; he was probably the second best defensive PG after Walt Frazier and he could definitely score, but I don't think he had as nearly as much of an impact on the guys around him as Nash, or Kidd. Nash is the only one out of that group who can single handedly FORCE teams to play a style of basketball that HE excels at. Says a lot about him IMO.

I agree

Moses
05-24-2007, 03:51 PM
So Ben Wallace shouldn't have won defensive player of the year because he isn't good on offense.

What? The defensive player of the year award is awarded to the best DEFENSIVE player. That has nothing to do with all-around play.

Nash is not an MVP-type player in my opinion because as great as he is on offence, he's a big liability on defence.

Phrost
05-24-2007, 03:57 PM
Ok here are the reasons Magic was great:

- Constant triple-double threat.

- Matchup Nightmare with his speed/size combination.

- Great open court vision.

- Can make any shot and a knock for making clutch shots.

- Ability to play ANY position.....including Center.

- Good defender.

- Great leader.


SO basically LeBron and he is only 23?

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:00 PM
Anyone who wants to call LeBron a great now should hide their face in public.

Phrost
05-24-2007, 04:02 PM
Anyone who wants to call LeBron a great now should hide their face in public.

Just mad we are still in the playoffs? BTW he is on pace, stat wise, to be a top 5 of all time.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 04:02 PM
Just mad we are still in the playoffs? BTW he is on pace, stat wise, to be a top 5 of all time.


Oscar Robertson laughs at your comments.

Brodeur
05-24-2007, 04:03 PM
Ok here are the reasons Magic was great:

- Constant triple-double threat.

- Matchup Nightmare with his speed/size combination.

- Great open court vision.

- Can make any shot and a knock for making clutch shots.

- Ability to play ANY position.....including Center.

- Good defender

- Great leader.


That's very debatable, but Nash is pretty horrid on defense so it doesn't really matter.

And how is this even a debate? Nash has had 3 great years, but 3 great years doesn't make you even close to an all time great like Magic.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:03 PM
Just mad we are still in the playoffs? BTW he is on pace, stat wise, to be a top 5 of all time.

LeBron is a choker. And stats are BS, he gives a crap about stats. People who think LeBron is an alltime great or think he's a lock to be one have either only watched basketball for 1 year, or their homer goggles are too tight to take off.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:04 PM
And if you wanna talk stats LeBron will never in his wildest dreams touch anything Oscar did.

Shiver
05-24-2007, 04:04 PM
And how is this even a debate? Nash has had 3 great years, but 3 great years doesn't make you even close to an all time great like Magic.

That's what I have been saying. I would take Jason Kidd over Steve Nash, at this point; let alone Magic Johnson.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 04:05 PM
thank you sermon!

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:06 PM
Oscar's stats are rediculous. And I don't want to hear this different era crap because we are in an age right now where you can no longer play defense with your hands and every touch foul puts LeBron on the line. If he didn't get so many ticky tack calls he would average around 20 ppg or less. The stats speak for themself when Oscar averaged 30.5 ppg, 9.7 apg, 10.1 rpg his rookie year, and his second year even improved on that with 30.8 ppg, 11.4 apg, 12.5 rpg.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 04:09 PM
He led the league in rebounds more than once I think, and that was with Kareem, Wilt, Willis and Bill or at least 2 of those 4 in the league

Ewing
05-24-2007, 04:09 PM
Oscar Robertson is better than both of them. As good as Magic Johnson is and he's without a doubt one of the top five players of all-time there's something about Robertson that puts him in a class by himself among point guards.

Michigan
05-24-2007, 04:10 PM
Johnson played crappy defense, Nash plays no defense. Easy choice.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:10 PM
Osacar is my favorite player in NBA history followed by World B Free then Wes Unseld the mack truck.

Brodeur
05-24-2007, 04:11 PM
Oscar's stats are rediculous. And I don't want to hear this different era crap because we are in an age right now where you can no longer play defense with your hands and every touch foul puts LeBron on the line. If he didn't get so many ticky tack calls he would average around 20 ppg or less. The stats speak for themself when Oscar averaged 30.5 ppg, 9.7 apg, 10.1 rpg his rookie year, and his second year even improved on that with 30.8 ppg, 11.4 apg, 12.5 rpg.

The Big O played in a huge offensive era where teams averaged 120+ points a night, and he wasn't even in the top 10 in rebounds. He's a great player but his stats may be slightly inflated because of the era he played in.

Phrost
05-24-2007, 04:11 PM
I would enjoy watching Oscar trying to play in today's league.

EDIT: Brodeur just destroyed your argument.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:16 PM
The Big O played in a huge offensive era where teams averaged 120+ points a night, and he wasn't even in the top 10 in rebounds. He's a great player but his stats may be slightly inflated because of the era he played in.

That's not true at all the top teams averaged around 120 a night but the numbers were not skewed that much, the league average was still around 107 a game which isn't that much more than it is today.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:19 PM
I would enjoy watching Oscar trying to play in today's league.

EDIT: Brodeur just destroyed your argument.

That's a dumb argument, for example do you think Mike Singletary would be a pro bowl LB in today's game, that is a kind of comment a ignorant 13 year old would make. Obviously today athletes are bigger and stronger because of advancements in weight training, vitamins and supplements, and the fact that they are able to from age 5 work on their game while past greats had to work and drop out of school to put food on their table, that is an awful arguement.

remix 6
05-24-2007, 04:21 PM
Jason Kidd.


nuff said

bored of education
05-24-2007, 04:21 PM
I don't care what era someone has played in. To average 25.7 ppg, 9.5 apg, 7.5 rpg at 6'5 TOP more like 6'4 210 LBS. Thats top 5 material

Ewing
05-24-2007, 04:23 PM
Jason Kidd.


nuff said

Do you try to come up with stupid statements or do they just come to you?

bored of education
05-24-2007, 04:24 PM
http://www.nba.com/history/robertson_bio.html

read up kiddos get back to me.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:26 PM
If you actually watch Oscar play he was so ahead of his time, his skill set and body were so unusual for a player his position and even today he would stand out. Slightly inflated stats sure, but he is still IMO the greatest. LeBron is a mediocre shooter, gets more credit for his passing than he deserves because of his flashy passes, and wouldn't score so much if he didn't get BS calls in which he stiff arms the defender and gets the foul for him, not to add he is a horrid defender and needs help on free throws.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 04:27 PM
and he could defend, some nights guarding Cousy, then Havlicheck, Cowens. The guy was the definition of versatile.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:28 PM
I remember seeing gamefilm of him stopping Bob Cousy something not a single NBA player today could do.

Brodeur
05-24-2007, 04:29 PM
That's not true at all the top teams averaged around 120 a night but the numbers were not skewed that much, the league average was still around 107 a game which isn't that much more than it is today.

In his triple double season specifically teams averaged almost 119 PPG, so it was the scoring era of scoring eras. I'm not taking anything away from the Big O, I think he's probably a 25/7/11 guy in any other era and probably the 2nd best PG ever, but I'm just saying his stats are slightly inflated.

And he's a lot better than LeBron will ever be Phrost.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 04:29 PM
Closest simliarity player wise might be Scottie Pippen. Similiar skill set, but Big O was better at everything lol

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:31 PM
If I were compare Oscar to a modern player it would probably be Anfernee who people forget could have been a great if he wasn't marred by injuries.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 04:34 PM
Anfernee was nasty for the brief period of time

Phrost
05-24-2007, 04:36 PM
If you actually watch Oscar play he was so ahead of his time, his skill set and body were so unusual for a player his position and even today he would stand out. Slightly inflated stats sure, but he is still IMO the greatest. LeBron is a mediocre shooter, gets more credit for his passing than he deserves because of his flashy passes, and wouldn't score so much if he didn't get BS calls in which he stiff arms the defender and gets the foul for him, not to add he is a horrid defender and needs help on free throws.

WHile keeping your hard grading mind in the equation why don't you grade Gilbert Arenas in those areas.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:40 PM
WHile keeping your hard grading mind in the equation why don't you grade Gilbert Arenas in those areas.

Ok Gilbert is a mediocre distributor, streaky shooter, can get to the line like one of the best in the league, is an average man defender who gets a lot of steals, and is clutch with the game on the line usually. I am more of fan of the game than the Wizards, and I have to much respect for the NBA to degrade it by calling LeBron an alltime great or even perceiving the notion that he is a lock to be one. I am not ignorant and give respect where respect is do, I may hate him but I recognize the fact that Tim Duncan is the 2nd best bigman in the post Hakeem era and is an alltime great.

remix 6
05-24-2007, 04:40 PM
Do you try to come up with stupid statements or do they just come to you?

its the truth. learn to deal with it.

dabears10
05-24-2007, 04:41 PM
Closest simliarity player wise might be Scottie Pippen. Similiar skill set, but Big O was better at everything lol

I would say Scottie was a better defender. Everything else i would say Big O was easily better at. But Scottie in his defensive prime is the image of a shutdown defender.

Ewing
05-24-2007, 04:48 PM
its the truth. learn to deal with it.

Kind of like how Robbie Gould is a better kicker than Adam Vinatieri?

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 04:52 PM
I'd like Phrost to back up some of his comments, that's what debate is you have to actually argue something. All you are doing is giving 3 word insults, and saying LeBron is the greatest human being in the earth, i'd like to actually hear why?

dabears10
05-24-2007, 04:53 PM
uhhh, last year's spurs were, record wise, the best team in the west. they failed to get out of the semis. isn't that the definition of "underachievement"? at least make me think hard if you're going to ask a dumb question.

i mean, further, what the hell do the last ten years of nba history have to do with saying he's the most underrated player EVER?

You mean when he was playing at abbout 60%. He never gets talked about with the greats of today even though he is the most untradeable player in the League, and every team could use his skill set. Because he is not a showtime performer no body gives him credit.

He is a career 22-12 guy compared to Shaq 26-12. Yet Shaq is always put in the discussion of top players while Duncan is always a sidenote.

He is going to be banned to the land of Nate Thurmond while being much more successful. So yes most underrated ever may be strong but i think down the road you could make a strong case.

If you don't have a feeling that Duncan is going to the land of the forgotten with Nate Archibald and

Brodeur
05-24-2007, 04:54 PM
I'd like Phrost to back up some of his comments, that's what debate is you have to actually argue something. All you are doing is giving 3 word insults, and saying LeBron is the greatest human being in the earth, i'd like to actually hear why?

That would require him knowing what he's talking about.

Phrost
05-24-2007, 04:57 PM
That would require him knowing what he's talking about.

I would need someone like BF51(a fellow Cavs fan) to back me up. Though I doubt he would venture into something that he feels like he would possibly not know enough about.

Tobzilla
05-24-2007, 05:00 PM
Magic is much better. It's not even close, IMO. Magic revolutionized the position.

Ewing
05-24-2007, 05:02 PM
Magic is much better. It's not even close, IMO. Magic revolutionized the position.

Even though Roberston already revolutionized it and retired five years before Magic was even drafted. Way to know your history.

Acreboy
05-24-2007, 05:05 PM
Just don't disagree with the guys who have a lot of rep. According to them only they are right and they'll neg rep you telling you that.

dabears10
05-24-2007, 05:05 PM
Even though Roberston already revolutionized it and retired five years before Magic was even drafted. Way to know your history.

I disagree. Robertson was not as selfish as Magic could be. He did everything the way a PG was taught to do for a long time. I think that you could argue Magic as the First combo guard.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 05:06 PM
I disagree. Robertson was not as selfish as Magic could be. He did everything the way a PG was taught to do for a long time. I think that you could argue Magic as the First combo guard.

err.... not sure what you meant by that.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 05:06 PM
Just don't disagree with the guys who have a lot of rep. According to them only they are right and they'll neg rep you telling you that.

Or Oscar Robertson resume will neg rep them

Ewing
05-24-2007, 05:08 PM
Just don't disagree with the guys who have a lot of rep. According to them only they are right and they'll neg rep you telling you that.

That or don't post idiotic things which you have a habit of doing.

Ewing
05-24-2007, 05:09 PM
I disagree. Robertson was not as selfish as Magic could be. He did everything the way a PG was taught to do for a long time. I think that you could argue Magic as the First combo guard.


Explain to me how he was the first combo guard when Oscar Robertson averaged a triple double his second season in the league.

dabears10
05-24-2007, 05:12 PM
Explain to me how he was the first combo guard when Oscar Robertson averaged a triple double his second season in the league.

Because his points were inflated. It was in a league that was running up and down the court that many fast break points were scored.

I will admit that I have had a limited experience of watching Big O play but in the games i saw his assists came out of the half court and his points alot of the time came when things were sped up.

Tobzilla
05-24-2007, 05:25 PM
Even though Roberston already revolutionized it and retired five years before Magic was even drafted. Way to know your history.

Yeah, you're right...I know nothing about basketball history and the big O. I probably don't know that he averaged a triple double for a season and that he won a championship with the Bucks.

Let me ask you this: did you ever think that a position can be revolutionized more than once? Think before you talk.

princefielder28
05-24-2007, 05:27 PM
Nash is the better PURE PG, but Magic Johnson could play all over the floor and was multi-versatile.

jballa838
05-24-2007, 05:50 PM
Magic was the better "basketball player," but nash is a better "point guard". Magic is more versitile then just a point guard and could play all 5 on the court, but nash can shoot the lights out and both are extremely tough and great leaders. I went with Nash, but Magic is the greater basketball player and more valuable, but Nash is in his mid-late 30s i believe and Magic was more sucessful in his mid-20s to early 30s.
Nash is the better point guard, and the assists and points per game can prove that over the last 3 seasons.

jballa838
05-24-2007, 05:55 PM
Let me ask you this: did you ever think that a position can be revolutionized more than once?

you didn't ask me this but let me throw this back at you...

OSCAR WASN'T THE FIRST TO REVOLUTIONIZE IN THE FIRST PLACE. LOOK UP A POINT GUARD NAMED PISTOL PETE MARAVICH AND YOU WILL SEE REVOLUTIONARY. HE AVERAGED 40+ PPG IN COLLEGE FOR 3 SEASONS IN A ROW. PISTOL DID MORE THEN ROBINSON. PISTOL SHOWED CREATIVITY AND PIZZAZ IN A LEAGUE WITHOUT A LOT OF IT.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 06:03 PM
you didn't ask me this but let me throw this back at you...

OSCAR WASN'T THE FIRST TO REVOLUTIONIZE IN THE FIRST PLACE. LOOK UP A POINT GUARD NAMED PISTOL PETE MARAVICH AND YOU WILL SEE REVOLUTIONARY. HE AVERAGED 40+ PPG IN COLLEGE FOR 3 SEASONS IN A ROW. PISTOL DID MORE THEN ROBINSON. PISTOL SHOWED CREATIVITY AND PIZZAZ IN A LEAGUE WITHOUT A LOT OF IT.

Pistol was far from the first PG star of the league.

Tobzilla
05-24-2007, 06:27 PM
you didn't ask me this but let me throw this back at you...

OSCAR WASN'T THE FIRST TO REVOLUTIONIZE IN THE FIRST PLACE. LOOK UP A POINT GUARD NAMED PISTOL PETE MARAVICH AND YOU WILL SEE REVOLUTIONARY. HE AVERAGED 40+ PPG IN COLLEGE FOR 3 SEASONS IN A ROW. PISTOL DID MORE THEN ROBINSON. PISTOL SHOWED CREATIVITY AND PIZZAZ IN A LEAGUE WITHOUT A LOT OF IT.

I never said Oscar was the first to revolutionize the position, you went off jumping to conclusions and trashing my basketball IQ again. So whatever you point is...I really don't care anymore.

sweetness34
05-24-2007, 06:36 PM
I would need someone like BF51(a fellow Cavs fan) to back me up. Though I doubt he would venture into something that he feels like he would possibly not know enough about.

You can't put an argument together by yourself? That's pretty sad man

Here I'll go. LeBron is a great talent, there is no denying that. But for a guy with so much hype I expected much more from him. His skill set is absolutely incredible (offensively). He's got the passing skills of a PG, the driving ability of a 2, and the size of a 3. Defensively he's a liability though and needs improvement.

His outside shot needs consistency, as does his free throw shooting. He also needs to extend his range. His athleticism, size, speed, and strength is unmatched right now in the NBA. The only guy who comes close is Stoudemire, possibly Howard. His driving ability is amaizing, and when he burries his head the guy is unguardable. His post up game is pretty much unstoppable as well. On the dribble you have a hard time staying with him because of his speed and power.

LeBron just might be the most talented player of all time on the offensive side of the ball. I just question if he'll ever be able to live up to it.

remix 6
05-24-2007, 06:38 PM
which is why you had so many phenomenal arguments to support it. oh wait, you didn't.

ur still talking? last i remember of you was me shutting you up in that 1 thread that i got banned. ha. peace

Kind of like how Robbie Gould is a better kicker than Adam Vinatieri?

was Gould not the best kicker last season? Yes? Exactly. i never said his 2 years is better than Adams X amount. I just based it off last year.

SeanTaylorRIP
05-24-2007, 06:44 PM
You can't put an argument together by yourself? That's pretty sad man

Here I'll go. LeBron is a great talent, there is no denying that. But for a guy with so much hype I expected much more from him. His skill set is absolutely incredible (offensively). He's got the passing skills of a PG, the driving ability of a 2, and the size of a 3. Defensively he's a liability though and needs improvement.

His outside shot needs consistency, as does his free throw shooting. He also needs to extend his range. His athleticism, size, speed, and strength is unmatched right now in the NBA. The only guy who comes close is Stoudemire, possibly Howard. His driving ability is amaizing, and when he burries his head the guy is unguardable. His post up game is pretty much unstoppable as well. On the dribble you have a hard time staying with him because of his speed and power.

LeBron just might be the most talented player of all time on the offensive side of the ball. I just question if he'll ever be able to live up to it.

Exactly, Phrost was trying to make an argument why LeBron is going to be the greatest player in NBA history and how he has already done enough to justify that he is better than Oscar Robertson.

Phrost
05-25-2007, 11:55 AM
Exactly, Phrost was trying to make an argument why LeBron is going to be the greatest player in NBA history and how he has already done enough to justify that he is better than Oscar Robertson.

Not in history, but of the batch of talent in recent years. Yes, better than Wade.