Better overall? I think they're a little too close to say, it depends on what you need from them.
Need a scorer? Isiah
Need a passer? Nash
That's not to say Isiah can't pass, or Nash can't score, but it really depends on what you need. A team with offensive weapons at the other four slots certainly doesn't need 20-25ppg from it's point guard. But if you've got a team with a couple stoppers and a couple jacks of all trades, having that scorer running your team is a seriously benefit.
I think Isiah was a little better at directing the half court offense and Nash is a bit better with the open floor/broken plays/improvisation.
That said, I think Phoenix would’ve been better with Isiah than it is with Nash, just because I think Marion is a little bit better when he’s not relied on to be a scorer, and you can run with players like Diaw and Bell, who while they’re offensively capable, they’re not scorers by trade. I think it’s really tough to say if the Bad Boys era Pistons would be better or worse off with Nash. A convincing argument could really be made either way.
There is not one team in the history of the NBA that would be better served with Nash than Zeke, not one.
[QUOSo the one guy I'd put ahead of Nash on that list is Oscar. If you look at Isiah's best years, they're on par with Nash's. Cousy was a lousy shooter. Tiny had a couple of ridiculous years (30-10), but wasn't as good a shooter as Nash.
from another thread... just goes to show how NAsh is the most overrated player in the league. Nash was never on par with isiah even during nash's MVP years i would rather have Isiah