Back to the OP, the Nash vs Paul question is more interesting that I expected (just looking at numbers).

Nash - 18 seasons
Paul - just finished his 18th

Nash - 1217 games
Paul - 1214 games

Nash - 7x all NBA
Paul - 11x all NBA

Nash - 8x all star
Paul - 12x all star

Nash - 2x MVP
Paul - 0 MVPs

Nash - 5x assist leader (all after turning 30)
Paul - 5x assist leader (once after 30)

Nash - 0 all defensive team
Paul - 9x all defensive team

This is why I give Paul the edge. But prime Nash was pretty amazing to watch. Paul hit the league running, while Nash's career started with a slow burn, then took off when he went back to the Suns. It's tough to overlook his amazing shooting percentage (49% fg, and nearly 43% from 3!), but again, defense.

Nash was a much better shooter, but he was a matador on defense. Paul has 9 All-D teams plus was steals champ a half dozen times. One of only 11 players to average 2.0spg for their career and is 3rd all time in steals (can overtake Kidd for 2nd all time in a couple seasons, assuming he stays healthy.)

Nash had two seasons over 18.0ppg (max 18.8) and Paul had 9 seasons over 18.0 (max 22.8) so while Nash was the better shooter, save to say Paul was the better scorer.

Nash's main advantage is the two MVPs, but I think those are more of a fraud that he shouldn't have won and he won it because he was a great system PG for DAntoni. But despite how fun those Suns teams were, it was kind of like Moneyball - win a lot of regular season games, put up big numbers, and never do **** in the playoffs. That's DAntoni's teams in a nutshell.

Nash's numbers were actually better the season AFTER his MVPs than during either MVP year.

2005: Best player on best team in the East: Shaq. 59 wins and Shaq finished 7 votes behind Nash for MVP, despite it being part of Shaq's decline (22.3/10.4/2.5 season). Nash put up 15.5/11.5 and the Suns finished 3 games ahead of the Spurs in the West. Dirk finished 3rd and Duncan 4th. Lebron put up 27/7/7 but came in 6th as Cleveland missed the playoffs. That Cavs team was so bad. Jeff McInnis and Ira Newble were the starting guards.

2006: Nash improved his stats, but the Suns finished 3rd behind Dallas (2nd) and SA (1st) Suns actually finished 9 games behind the Spurs that year. Pistons finished with the best overall record at 10 games over Phoenix. LeBron finally made the playoffs at 31/7/7 and came in second. Kobe had the 2nd most 1st place votes after putting up 35/5/5, but winning just 45 games, but came in 4th overall. Dirk in both those years was probably better than Nash, and Dirk probably deserved it more in those years than the one he won for being best player on the best team in 07. Billups got 15 first place votes (4th overall) for his 19/9 with great defense season.

I didn't think Nash should have won either away then and I don't think he should have won them now in hindsight. Product of a system and easily the worst defensive player of anyone finishing in the top ten in MVP voting each season.

Paul is just a better overall player than Nash.

I think Nash v CP3 is the classic case of better career vs. better season/highest point.

Nash's best was better than CP3, but CP3 has the better career, IMO

Iowaggie said:

---

I think Nash v CP3 is the classic case of better career vs. better season/highest point.

Nash's best was better than CP3, but CP3 has the better career, IMO

---

I don't even agree with that. Even at his best, Nash was awful on defense. His best was also system-based and I would imagine that Chris Paul would have also been elite in SSOL.

CP3's 07-08 season should've won him MVP and I'm saying that as a Kobe stan. 21/11/4 plus 2.7 steals per and 55 wins. Kobe should've won over Nash in either of Nash's MVP seasons.

Lol no shot. The Lakers were atrocious in both those seasons but especially '05. The Suns won 62 games while the Lakers won 34. No MVP is getting awarded to a player on that bad of a team.

i feel like so many fans like to argue on spreadsheets that we forget how "winning" happens. Nash led the Suns to a top 10 offense IN HISTORY. Kobe was great but he was playing like a gunner as opposed to Nash who was an engine. Nash coulda averaged 25 if he wanted but that wouldn't correlate to winning.

The obvious problem here is that Nash won the second MVP despite being 10 games back from 1st place it the league.

It was a gimmick offense and they never made the Finals.

16th and 17th in defense per possession in the league, so bottom half both years. Last and 3rd to last in opponents PPG.

Never never should have won either MVP and many players, including Dirk, was more deserving.

It's a regular season award. And in the regular season, the Suns were dominant with Nash on the court.

M.C. Swag said:

---

It's a regular season award. And in the regular season, the Suns were dominant with Nash on the court.

---

The suns were dominant on offense. Their team was not dominant.

A better indicator of dominance is team net rating over the season, and the Suns didn't lead the league in that in 05 or 06. In 2005, they got sent home in 5 games by the team that did lead the league in net rating, and that team went on and won their second title in three years.

Same story in 06. Phoenix ended up 4th in net rating, and they were dismissed from the playoffs in 6 games by a team with a 1-point better net rating.

Phoenix was good on offense. They were below average in points per possession on defense and they were last and 3rd last in the league in opponent's PPG in those two seasons.

Gimmick offense that made for exciting games and pretty stat lines with hollow results.

M.C. Swag said:

---

It's a regular season award.

---

And yet, they still weren't dominant in the regular season. They had a good offense. That's it

Other teams had better net ratings, and they were the dominant regular season teams.

However, they were regularly exposed in the playoffs.

You aren't good at this, Mac. Facts are hard

Wtf are you talking about? I said Kobe never had an edge over Nash especially in '05 and you're the one who is bringing up playoff success to argue a regular season award. Beyond that, I wasn't talking to you. But you can't help but interject in literally every convo on this board. Go touch grass.

Quote:

---

you're the one who is bringing up playoff success to argue a regular season award

---

I brought up that the Suns were 10 games out of the league's best record in one of those years and I used regular season stats to show that the Suns were not as dominant as you claim.

Kobe was closer to Nash in wins in 06 than Nash was to the #1 team in the league.

Quote:

---

But you can't help but interject in literally every convo on this board.

---

I'm sorry you are so triggered by discussing basketball on a basketball board. Maybe you need to take a break. It is not normal to be so triggered by normal, on topic discussion on a discussion board.

Quote:

---

It's a regular season award. And in the regular season, the Suns were dominant with Nash on the court.

---

Your literal quote.

The Suns weren't dominant and the REGULAR SEASON stats prove that. Go reread it slowly so you can understand.

The Suns had a great offense. It was a fun offense. But other teams were more dominant IN THE REGULAR SEASON.

Nash was not the most valuable player in the league in either of those seasons. He was not the most dominant player in the league in either of those seasons. He was a great player in a fun (but flawed) system.

The playoff stuff I mentioned just goes to the point that the Suns and Nash's stats were just a gimmick system to put up regular season numbers, but they weren't actually that great. Again, that was probably clear to anyone else that doesn't have a hard on for Nash.

Your statements are dumb and not backed up by facts. Of course, you show over and over that you only care about stats that help your biased, inane arguments and ignore everything else.

This is just the eye test, stats be damned:

Dame - His allegiance to the Trailblazers has been his downfall. Where would he be if he was in a good organization?

Dirk - Dirk put Dallas on the NBA map and changed the game as a big man who could shoot from anywhere.

CP3 - Although injury prone in critical times, you can't deny his impact on the teams he's played for. Might have been a champ if the trade to the Lakers had gone through.

Kobe - Arguably one of the best scorers in NBA history. There's nothing he couldn't do on the basketball court.

Kawhi - At this point they're about equal in my eyes. Toronto wouldn't have won the Championship without him. Joker will probably surpass Kawhi this year.

Oscar - He's a walking triple double; that's tough to do in any era.

Wilt - I'm gonna go with the better player, yes Bill Russell won all those rings, but he also had better teammates.

Jordan - At this point it's Jordan, but when he hangs in his sneakers it will be Lebron. Lebron did it for far longer than Jordan in the NBA. Highly polarized athlete that still gets it done year after year.

Duncan - The one category that tilts the scale for me was Mr. Fundamentals defense. He was a force on both ends of the court. Magic revolutionized the game and made it popular and that shouldn't go unnoticed, but if we're talking about who's better, that has to be Duncan.

Curry - He's had more impact on today's game than any other player. He will end up being is the best shooter in NBA history when he's done and he's not even done.

All of this is to ignore the contributions he had as a non American. Whether it's Hakeem, Yao, Ginobli, Parker or Giannis....Dirk belongs in the pantheon of players who helped push the NBA borders beyond North America.

Texas teams must love them some foreign players

Dirk and its not even close