March 1, 201016 yr Greatest Shooters of All - Time Larry Bird: FG: 50% 3 Pt.%: 38% FT: 89% Reggie Miller: FG: 47% 3-Pt %: 40% FT: 89% Ray Allen: FG: 45% 3-Pt %: 40% FT: 89% Steve Nash: FG: 49% 3-Pt %: 43% FT: 90% Steve Nash also leads the league in assists this year with 11 APG. What about Steve Kerr? I thought that he retired as the greatest three point shooter of all time? That is all he did though, but still.
March 4, 201016 yr Are you serious; did Nash even get there? Kidd took the Nets to the Finals in back to back years- this isn't even a discussion I'm interested in having. ANYONE that claims Nash had had a better post-season career than Kidd or even tries to insiuate that those guys are close when it comes to the post-season knows NOTHING about basketball. Kidd has more finals appearances. That's true. It's also true that the eastern conference resembled a JV league during that time. Case in point...New Jersey was 23-7 vs. the eastern conference during those playoff runs. In the finals they won 2 games. They were swept by LA and lost in six to San Antonio. Those New Jersey teams wouldn't have finished high enough to get home court advantage for the first round in the west, much less compete. With both players at their best, I'd take Jason Kidd. But, championships count for something, not finals appearances...especially finals appearances when your team doesn't look like it belongs on the same court with its opponent.
March 4, 201016 yr I'll take a stab... 1. Nash is not the best shooter of all time. To name one, I'll take Larry Bird. 3. Better than Magic? Are you kidding me? 2. Obviously, I don't think he's the best PG of all-time. If I took the time to really think about it, I doubt Nash would make the top 10. Off the top of my head, Magic Johnson, Isaiah Thomas, and John Stockton are three retired players that I'd place ahead of Nash. Additionally, there's at least two more active players I'd put there...
March 5, 201016 yr Kidd has more finals appearances. That's true. It's also true that the eastern conference resembled a JV league during that time. Case in point...New Jersey was 23-7 vs. the eastern conference during those playoff runs. In the finals they won 2 games. They were swept by LA and lost in six to San Antonio. Those New Jersey teams wouldn't have finished high enough to get home court advantage for the first round in the west, much less compete. With both players at their best, I'd take Jason Kidd. But, championships count for something, not finals appearances...especially finals appearances when your team doesn't look like it belongs on the same court with its opponent. If you want to call evrything else equal (and I don't, but for the sake of argument lets say I did), I want the PG that wins in the playoffs more consistently. Kidd took a team, where his second and third best players were Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin, to the Finals. He made those guys all stars and the have not looked as good since they left his side. So Kidd has to apologize for losing to Kobe and Shaq and Tim Duncan and David Robinson? Say whatever you want; Kidd got there, Nash didn't- end of story.
March 5, 201016 yr I'll take Kidd before Nash 8 days out of the week no matter the time period. I'd take Rondo, Rose, CP3 and Deron Williams over Nash today as well. Nash is and always will be a great point guard who had a great career. To keep it even more real, I'd take John Stockton over Nash as well.
March 5, 201016 yr As for the original list of shooters..... I'd say Nash has better percentage numbers than those guys but I would think that those 3 guys have taken way more shots than Nash which would contribute to his higher percentage for Nash. Not to mention, Nash has always been a smart shooter. He doesn't take "bad shots" which is another factor in his higher percentage. Larry, Reggie and Ray Ray will shoot it more often when in the triple threat position than Nash. Those 3 guys can shoot my last second 3 for the championship before I'd pick Nash to shoot it.
March 5, 201016 yr If you want to call evrything else equal (and I don't, but for the sake of argument lets say I did), I want the PG that wins in the playoffs more consistently. Kidd took a team, where his second and third best players were Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin, to the Finals. He made those guys all stars and the have not looked as good since they left his side. So Kidd has to apologize for losing to Kobe and Shaq and Tim Duncan and David Robinson? Say whatever you want; Kidd got there, Nash didn't- end of story. I have zero doubt that Nash's Phoenix teams would have owned the eastern conference that Kidd lead New Jersey through. I also believe you can make a similar comparison with some of the players who played with Nash...like Shawn Marion. Perhaps the finals appearance would impress me more had the Nets actually been competitive, or faced better competition to get there. Regardless, at their respective peaks, I'd take Kidd. Not because he made it to an NBA finals, but because he's the better player. Other than shooting, I don't see where Nash has an advantage...and even with that, their scoring averages are similar. The biggest difference is on the defensive end...Nash was a liability, Kidd wasn't.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.