It's sad that history will remember Nash as a better player than Iverson

[JohnnySic]

Iverson was better; in fact, the best small player ever.

Nash is good but has gotten overrated.

[RaininTwos]

Yea but Nash made a lot of these guys better players. Iverson didn't make anyone better. And Iverson's team was whack as f,uck but at the time, the was one of the best squads in the East. Its not like he had to go through the 08 Celtics, 12 Heat, or 04 Pistons to get to the Finals. They beat a past-prime Indiana team, Vince Carter/Antonio Davis, and Bucks team that had a weak ass frountcourt aside from Big Dog.

First of all, Indiana just made the finals the year prior and the Bucks were legit. They had a mini-Big three going on but AI went through them as well. You guys need to stop revising history.

Nash didn't make people better, that''s non-sensical. Joe Johnson improved without Nash in Atlanta and became a 20+ PPG scorer. Marion was already established and Amare is still Amare without Nash. I don't think you realize just how much talent this guy had on his squad those early Suns years. There was no excuse for a player that is supposedly "better than an all time great player like AI" to come up short year after year.

AI's 2001 team that everyone tries to hype and say it was built perfectly for him was so damn flawed. They had no shooters, AI was the best three point shooter on the team. Take that in for a second, AI was the best shooter from three point range on the team. That's a major flaw. Defensively, his teammates were great, but I wouldn't dare call a one-sided team a great team or the best in the conference when Indiana had a great squad that were two wins away from a ring the year prior.

Milwaukee had way more balance and offensive firepower as well with Cassell, Ray Allen and Glen Robinson.

It wasn't anywhere near a cakewalk to get out the East that year, considering AI had to carry the offensive load for his teammates.

[Maniak]

why?? That will only make him stupid and blinded by illusions, like most laker fans

I don't need any bandwagon heat fans agreeing with me, thanks.

[SilkkTheShocker]

First of all, Indiana just made the finals the year prior and the Bucks were legit. They had a mini-Big three going on but AI went through them as well. You guys need to stop revising history.

Nash didn't make people better, that''s non-sensical. Joe Johnson improved without Nash in Atlanta and became a 20+ PPG scorer. Marion was already established and Amare is still Amare without Nash. I don't think you realize just how much talent this guy had on his squad those early Suns years. There was no excuse for a player that is supposedly "better than an all time great player like AI" to come up short year after year.

AI's 2001 team that everyone tries to hype and say it was built perfectly for him was so damn flawed. They had no shooters, AI was the best three point shooter on the team. Take that in for a second, AI was the best shooter from three point range on the team. That's a major flaw. Defensively, his teammates were great, but I wouldn't dare call a one-sided team a great team or the best in the conference when Indiana had a great squad that were two wins away from a ring the year prior.

Milwaukee had way more balance and offensive firepower as well with Cassell, Ray Allen and Glen Robinson.

It wasn't anywhere near a cakewalk to get out the East that year, considering AI had to carry the offensive load for his teammates.

Carried them by being inefficient as f.uck. And Mutombo had some monster games that playoff run. Hell, the 76ers still kept it competitive in game 3 of the ECF when Iverson didn't play with an injury. And don't tell me im re-writing history. The East was at its worst during that time. I don't even care for Nash, but saying he doesn't make players better is beyond retarded. I bet you are a huge fan of streetball

[RaininTwos]

Carried them by being inefficient as f.uck. And Mutombo had some monster games that playoff run. Hell, the 76ers still kept it competitive in game 3 of the ECF when Iverson didn't play with an injury. And don't tell me im re-writing history. The East was at its worst during that time. I don't even care for Nash, but saying he doesn't make players better is beyond retarded. I bet you are a huge fan of streetball

You are an idiot.

You think that going on basketball reference and finding a couple bad games that AI had where the team came through disproves my point? Please try again.

[MetsPackers]

First of all, Indiana just made the finals the year prior and the Bucks were legit. They had a mini-Big three going on but AI went through them as well. You guys need to stop revising history.

Nash didn't make people better, that''s non-sensical. Joe Johnson improved without Nash in Atlanta and became a 20+ PPG scorer. Marion was already established and Amare is still Amare without Nash. I don't think you realize just how much talent this guy had on his squad those early Suns years. There was no excuse for a player that is supposedly "better than an all time great player like AI" to come up short year after year.

AI's 2001 team that everyone tries to hype and say it was built perfectly for him was so damn flawed. They had no shooters, AI was the best three point shooter on the team. Take that in for a second, AI was the best shooter from three point range on the team. That's a major flaw. Defensively, his teammates were great, but I wouldn't dare call a one-sided team a great team or the best in the conference when Indiana had a great squad that were two wins away from a ring the year prior.

Milwaukee had way more balance and offensive firepower as well with Cassell, Ray Allen and Glen Robinson.

It wasn't anywhere near a cakewalk to get out the East that year, considering AI had to carry the offensive load for his teammates.

Stopped reading right here. Nash combined with Phoenix's style of play for so many years did wonders for a lot of players' efficiency and made them a lot of money. Guy made average players look above average, and above average players look like borderline all stars, etc

[kennethgriffin]

iverson was better in his prime

but i would give the career to nash

nash's prime has lasted till age 39 for god sake

dudes still putting up double doubles with 50% fg's, 40% threes, 90% ft's

i've never been more happy to get a 39 year old pg on my team... wouldnt say that about any other player in nba history if they joined at the same age

[RaininTwos]

Stopped reading right here. Nash combined with Phoenix's style of play for so many years did wonders for a lot of players' efficiency and made them a lot of money. Guy made average players look above average, and above average players look like borderline all stars, etc

We are going to act like he's Jesus of the hardwood, making players better. Did you ever think that this works both ways? Don't you think that his strong, all-time strong cast helped him play better as well?

[Derrick]

We are going to act like he's Jesus of the hardwood, making players better. Did you ever think that this works both ways? Don't you think that his strong, all-time strong cast helped him play better as well?

You can argue that. Look at this recent season, still averaged 10.7 assists second to only Rondo. You're going to say Jared Dudley and Gortat helped Nash play better?

[Sarcastic]

Iverson doesn't make people better?

Without Iverson on the team in 2001, Larry Brown likely does not with COY, and Aaron McKie likely does not win 6th Man of the Year.

[StateOfMind12]

Nash didn't make people better, that''s non-sensical. Joe Johnson improved without Nash in Atlanta and became a 20+ PPG scorer. Marion was already established and Amare is still Amare without Nash. I don't think you realize just how much talent this guy had on his squad those early Suns years. There was no excuse for a player that is supposedly "better than an all time great player like AI" to come up short year after year.

I suggest you take a look at how much more efficient players were playing with Nash than without him. Amare and Marion were much more efficient when they were playing with Nash than without him. Those two were capable of putting up 20+ ppg without him but they were pretty inefficient at it. I also suggest you take a look at the 3 point shooters that played with Nash like Barbosa, Bell, etc. and look at how much better and more efficient they shot with him than without him when they left Phoenix.

There is no question that Nash makes his teammates better, it is practically an indisputably fact.

[dunksby]

We are going to act like he's Jesus of the hardwood, making players better. Did you ever think that this works both ways? Don't you think that his strong, all-time strong cast helped him play better as well?

Because he is a PG and the main ball handler, he makes plays, he decides the pace and dictates his game on the opponent and his own team. Get it or should I simplify it even more?

[RaininTwos]

Because he is a PG and the main ball handler, he makes plays, he decides the pace and dictates his game on the opponent and his own team. Get it or should I simplify it even more?

So playing with Shawn Marion,Joe Johnson and Amare Stoudemire didn't make his play improve? Are you guys this slow?

You dont think teams fearing Amare off the pick and roll helps Nash make plays for his team?

[RaininTwos]

I suggest you take a look at how much more efficient players were playing with Nash than without him. Amare and Marion were much more efficient when they were playing with Nash than without him. Those two were capable of putting up 20+ ppg without him but they were pretty inefficient at it. I also suggest you take a look at the 3 point shooters that played with Nash like Barbosa, Bell, etc. and look at how much better and more efficient they shot with him than without him when they left Phoenix.

There is no question that Nash makes his teammates better, it is practically an indisputably fact.

Of course they were more efficient with him, just like Nash had his best years with them. My point is that it's not a one sided thing like you guys try to make it.

You can argue that. Look at this recent season, still averaged 10.7 assists second to only Rondo. You're going to say Jared Dudley and Gortat helped Nash play better?

His play would take a hit if those guys weren't in the lineup. Just like his play took a hit when Amare left. When you lose good teammates and get surrounded with lesser ones, parts of your games are going to be more difficult.

When Kobe lost Shaq, it was harder for him to score. You can tell by watching the games and seeing the spacing on the floor, it was easier to double him with Smush on the floor than it would be with Derek Fisher. You wouldn't hesitate to help off Kwame, but leaving Gasol/Bynum alone would be stupid. During those rough Pre-Gasol days, Kobe had to carry his so much offensively that his defense slipped a bit. Now while that's something that wont show up in the stat sheet, we can still see that having help around him made him a better player.

[SilkkTheShocker]

You are an idiot.

You think that going on basketball reference and finding a couple bad games that AI had where the team came through disproves my point? Please try again.

LOL at this f.aggot with a Justin Bieber avatar calling me an "idiot". Its revisionist history to act like Iverson carried that team. He scored the most points but he was ineffecient the whole playoffs and got some help from Mutombo, especially closing out Milwaukee. You made yourself look like a drooling retard already by saying Nash doesn't make players better. Why don't you go put on your And 1 shirt and watch some streetball, clown.