was nash a better 3 poont shooter then steph curry

[Real14]

Curry better.

[Milbuck]

child please.

None of what you bolded is really debatable if you watched one Warriors game last year.

[joe]

Lol stop trying to change the question. Curry is a better shooter. Curry broke an NBA record of most 3 pointers made in a single season with Nash's efficiency and doing it in front of peoples grills and u here like "well... Nash can shoot open ones"

I will take Nash's style and approach as a 3 point shooter over Curry's, no questions asked. Curry is obviously a ridiculous shooter. But I don't think that style of play is sustainable. I think Curry would be easier to shut down than Nash.

[Milbuck]

I will take Nash's style and approach as a 3 point shooter over Curry's, no questions asked. Curry is obviously a ridiculous shooter. But I don't think that style of play is sustainable. I think Curry would be easier to shut down than Nash.

Except that he has sustained it

We're not talking about a week or month long shooting tear...this dude is setting records for 3s made on Nash-like efficiency...over entire seasons.

Nash has never in his career reached 180 3s in a season...Steph just hit 261 on 42% 3PT shooting this year and 272 on 45% 3PT shooting the year prior...all while taking visibly tougher shots. You can have your own opinion but Steph is statistically just a better long range shooter when you factor in volume to go along with efficiency, and degree of difficulty. Steph didn't have the luxury of playing on an elite offensive system that played to his strengths almost perfectly. And he's still putting up GOAT-level shooting seasons from long range.

[steve]

The thing about Nash is that he was like a more aggressive Johnny Stockton...he doesn't take a lot of bad shots. He's probably not better considering the shots Curry takes while still shooting a high percentage. I remember people saying Nash was a better shooter than Ray Allen around the mid 00s...you have to take into account difficulty of shot.

The shots Curry takes are bad shots in a vacuum because you'd never what a player on average to take those shots but in Curry's hands they become good shots once you take into account Curry's release and shot mechanics (which are better than just about anyone currently playing and among the best ever).

Personally I think Curry is a better shooter than Nash. But really isn't it just splitting hairs? Their overall percentages are so close that you have to put them among the 10 or 15 greatest shooters ever without even blinking.

Nash couldn't quite take the same shots that Curry takes but then, those wouldn't be shots Nash would ever be taking (and I don't mean in terms of shot selection either, those kinds of shots would never materialize for Nash) and speaks volumes for how different they were as shooters. Very few players have Curry quick release nor do many shooters get into their shooting motion as quickly as Curry does (very few shooters across NBA history basically shoot on their way up the way that Curry does, so that when he reaches the peak of his jump shot, the ball is already coming out, this one of the things that made Ben Gordon such an effective shooter). This is why so many of Curry shots look like they're being contested but really have no chance of ever being blocked.

Nash didn't have that ability but at the same time, he was so much better at creating space for himself than Curry is able to. Okay, so I've been watching a lot of Nash highlights since I got home last night and one of the most strikes things that people rarely touch on is how good of a ball handler Nash was (it's one of those obvious things, which is why it probably doesn't get mentioned). But one of the aspects that he was so good at were quick little moves when he needed to get his shot off and distance himself from the defender. If he had a defender on him tight, it was difficult for him to get a good shot off (although he was phenomenal at fading away regardless of range) but he was adept creating space with a dribble and should feint that it didn't really matter where the defender was, he could get free long enough for him to release his shot.

It's so hard to determine who the better shooter was because it's largely subjective, especially if you go outside of hard numbers (and even then, a lot of that has to do with offense and role and so many other factors). I couldn't really argue with anyone who would take one over the other but it does frustrate me to no end when someone tries to be hyperbolic and state that it "isn't even close" between one of them because that is just pure ignorance.

[Cold soul]

Curry is a better 3 point shooter than Nash ever was. Overall... a lot closer as far as pure shooting goes. However, basketball has more to it than shooting. Nash was a way better player than any version of Curry I've seen so far.

Agreed. Nash was way better player in his prime.

[inclinerator]

curry is a better shooter, nash is better at open shots, maybe

[Timmy D for MVP]

I think we need a bigger sample size:

But I see no reason why Curry won't end up the greatest 3pt. shooter of all time. He hits shots off the dribble that other guys struggle to hit catch and shooting. That's what sets him apart.

[Cali Syndicate]

3 poont shooter? Curry

Pure shooter? Nash, slightly.

Scorer? Curry.

Playmaker, facilitator, court vision? Nash.

Passing ability? Nash.

Defender? Curry. Neither are really good man defenders by any means but curry does have quick hands which at least leads to steals.

Player? Nash. Curry is getting there though.

[Le Shaqtus]

I don't think I've ever seen Nash miss a wide open 3.

[BrownEye007]

Steph is the best 3pt shooter in history. His 2013 season blows any season away and even 2014 beats almost all

Steph is also a better overall player now than Nash ever was

Steph is a better shooter than Nash ever was but Steve was a better player than Curry is or ever will be.

[DoodleDa]

this discussion is becoming boring.

In 20 years Nash name will show up every time a player wins a back to back MVPs. The probability is extreme high that no one would remember Curry's name, even in the 3 point shooters category. Every 2-3 years there is a new "best 3 shooter in history" guy. Jason Kapono says hi.

Except Nash's name comes up for "who's the least deserving back to back MVP?"

Yup, Kapono definitely holds the all time single season three point record, is on pace to obliterate the all time three point record, and is an established Top 10 player in the league.

Oh wait.

On topic: Nash is the better overall player and PG, but Steph is the better scorer and shooter.

[Dro]

Except that he has sustained it

We're not talking about a week or month long shooting tear...this dude is setting records for 3s made on Nash-like efficiency...over entire seasons.

Nash has never in his career reached 180 3s in a season...Steph just hit 261 on 42% 3PT shooting this year and 272 on 45% 3PT shooting the year prior...all while taking visibly tougher shots. You can have your own opinion but Steph is statistically just a better long range shooter when you factor in volume to go along with efficiency, and degree of difficulty. Steph didn't have the luxury of playing on an elite offensive system that played to his strengths almost perfectly. And he's still putting up GOAT-level shooting seasons from long range.

[oarabbus]

As a huge warriors fan and Steph homer, no, Curry is not better than MVP Nash. Nash getting severely underrated, one of the best PGs EVER. Steph can be in that category but he has a long ways to goo and some more winning to do.


But, Curry IS the greatest 3pt shooter the league has ever seen. EVER. BY FAR.


Ray Allen? Nash? not even close

[joe]

Except that he has sustained it

We're not talking about a week or month long shooting tear...this dude is setting records for 3s made on Nash-like efficiency...over entire seasons.

Nash has never in his career reached 180 3s in a season...Steph just hit 261 on 42% 3PT shooting this year and 272 on 45% 3PT shooting the year prior...all while taking visibly tougher shots. You can have your own opinion but Steph is statistically just a better long range shooter when you factor in volume to go along with efficiency, and degree of difficulty. Steph didn't have the luxury of playing on an elite offensive system that played to his strengths almost perfectly. And he's still putting up GOAT-level shooting seasons from long range.

We will see where that gets him as the best offensive player on a team. My guess is he will have to change his game big time to be on an actual contender.

Edit: This is not meant to say Curry is not an awesome player! Not at all. But to me, you are comparing him against one of the great wizards in the history of basketball. Curry is a bomber, he has incredible shooting skills, and he hits sickeningly tough shots. I just don't think that style of shooting is fit for the best player on a serious contender. It is comic book basketball. Looks great but at the end of the day, the Spurs, the Heat (or Cavaliers), the Clippers, the Thunder, the true contenders.. will not be defeated by someone hurling fade-away 3s. We will see what type of effect Kerr has on Curry's game.