NBA Legends Not Forgotten

Like real basketball, as well as basketball video games? Talk about the NBA, NCAA, and other professional and amateur basketball leagues here.

Postby Gedas on Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:17 pm

air gordon wrote:
Flite_23 wrote:Closest guy to Larry nowadays imo is Dirk, but Larry was a better passer, defender and was just smarter. Charles... well no one plays like Charles nowadays, but PJ Tucker played like him in college as a "watered-down" version of Chuck. I still remember back in primary school getting beat up because I said Charles was better than Mike :lol:

how is someone "close" to Larry Legend if Larry was significantly better then that somebody in 3 facets of the game lol

perhaps the guy who most plays like the Legend (at least offensively) is currently playing in Boston already- Paul Pierce. Pierce, like Bird, isn't exactly physically gifted but is quite fundamentally sound. He's got a great awareness for the game, solid inside-outside game, and great in the clutch


Pierce, not phissically gifted? I would dissagree. He is a great leaper, slasher, has a great first step, is naturally gifted. Besides, as Jae pointed out, he is black, and not that it would matter, its just that hes naturally playing different, because of athletisism and things like that.
Image
Gedas
 
Posts: 638
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:38 am
Location: Lithuania

Postby Joe' on Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:19 am

Thanks a lot for the clips... They made me remember why I love the game of basketball.
Dear Old World, you represent everything that's wrong...
User avatar
Joe'
Sir Psycho Sexy
 
Posts: 2586
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:02 pm

Postby _marsal on Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:02 am

I'd say Dirk is a preety good comparison. I also think Morrison has the potential to be (just a bit) like Bird...
User avatar
_marsal
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:11 am
Location: Slovenia

Postby Axel on Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:16 am

I didn't watch the NBA back when Stockton played, but to say that he's better than Nash simply because he had more assists is ludicrous. Nash can make something out of nothing. He can make some of the most unbelievable passes with astonishing accuracy. His top rated team collapses when he's not on the floor. John Stockton was a better defender (i still think Nash is a bit better than people give him credit for) but offensively, I don't think you can call one the superior just because of stats. Stockton couldn't score like Nash can. How many of those assists were inflated by having Karl Malone on the team? Phoenix doesn't have a one on one post player (amare really doesn't count as one) so Steve Nash has to create basically everything... unlike Malone. Anyway, you see where I am going with this. Doug Collins says he's the best he's ever seen at the pick and roll, and his opinion is valid enough for me. Not to mention the results prove it.

Thanks for posting the links
User avatar
Axel
 
Posts: 2853
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:46 am
Location: North Carolina

Postby Andrew on Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:54 am

Axel wrote:Nash can make something out of nothing. He can make some of the most unbelievable passes with astonishing accuracy. His top rated team collapses when he's not on the floor.


The same could be said of John Stockton. Admittedly the Jazz didn't necessarily collapse when he left the game but that can be attributed to the system and the balance of those Jazz teams rather than Stock's value (or lack thereof).

John Stockton was a better defender (i still think Nash is a bit better than people give him credit for) but offensively, I don't think you can call one the superior just because of stats. Stockton couldn't score like Nash can.[/quote]

Actually, he could and would if the Jazz needed him to.

How many of those assists were inflated by having Karl Malone on the team?


The same could be said for Nash's assists given the up-tempo, run and gun style of the Suns and a roster that boasts the likes of Amare Stoudemire and Shawn Marion. One could even make a similar suggestion about Magic Johnson given the style of the Showtime Lakers and the options available to him. It's pretty easy to discredit anyone's assist numbers that way.

Doug Collins says he's the best he's ever seen at the pick and roll, and his opinion is valid enough for me. Not to mention the results prove it.


Doug Collins also wanted Brad Sellers to take the final shot that Michael Jordan hit to win Game 5 of the 1989 first round series between the Bulls and Cavs; he's not always right. :P Seriously though, if you want to talk about the results then I don't think the Suns being an elite team for a few years - impressive as they have been - isn't equivalent to the Jazz being an elite team for over a decade including multiple 60 win seasons and appearances in the Conference Finals as well as two NBA Finals appearances.
User avatar
Andrew
Retro Basketball Gamer
Administrator
 
Posts: 115127
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
Location: Australia

Postby The X on Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:38 pm

I've seen both play in their primes. I love both players, but let's be honest, here's how it goes.

Comparison:

Offense: Tie. Stockton could turn it on when he wanted to, he just always deferred to others, except when Jazz needed him to step up. Nash has been the same, until recently when he's played in uptempo offense. Jazz were a halfcourt offense.

Passing: Stockton wins this one narrowly. Nash is a brilliant passer, but Stockton could thread a needle & got the ball to exactly the right player at the right time so they could succeed.

Defense: Stockton wins this by a landslide. No contest.

Clutch: Stockton wins this comfortably, although Nash is starting to get better. Stockton use to carry the Jazz regularly as we all know the Mailman was a choker. From memory, I think he was the big reason they got over the hump & made the Finals those 2 years, it was his clutch play.

Toughness: Stockton wins this comfortably.

Flashiness: Nash wins this easily.

Making teammates better: Tie. Stockton made Malone a lot better than he probably was. Without Stockton, Malone's career wouldn't have been as good I don't think. Stockton also made careers out of players like Shandon Anderson and Byron Russell. Nash has done the same out of players like Raja Bell, Boris Diaw and others.

Overall: Stockton wins. Not a landslide, but a sure-handed win. Offensively, they're probably on par, with each having slight advantage. But the difference has to be in clutch, defense & toughness. Until Nash can show that he can be clutch & get his team to the Finals & step up time & time again (which I think I can do all on counts), it's not fair to compare them. Compare them again in 3 or 4 years time for a real comparison.

You also should factor in the teams that each player had. Stockton had Malone, Ostertag, Hornacek, Byron Russell, Austin Carr, Eisley, Shandon Anderson. Nash has Amare Stoudemire, Marion, Barbosa, Diaw, Bell, Jalen Rose.

This is all coming from someone who loves Nash & was glad he won 2 straight MVP's (although I think Dirk should've won last year), & think based on season so far, he should win it all again.

Go Nash!!!
User avatar
The X
is
NLSC Team Member
 
Posts: 11499
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Brisbane

Postby Axel on Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:01 pm

I agreed with almost all of your post, except for the clutch part. I think Nash is one of the most clutch players in the NBA. I've seen him drain so many buzzer beaters, and pull out games right at the end - I don't think he recieves enough credit. Also is FT shooting at the end of the games makes him about as clutch as you can get. Last year in the playoffs he was really fatigued over the course of an extremely strenuous season as I'm sure you probably knew. I think this year with some extra help we'll see Nash pull his team through.

Basically just rehitertaing your PoV that we have to wait a few more years... just some food for thought though.
User avatar
Axel
 
Posts: 2853
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:46 am
Location: North Carolina

Postby air gordon on Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:02 pm

Gedas wrote:
air gordon wrote:
Flite_23 wrote:Closest guy to Larry nowadays imo is Dirk, but Larry was a better passer, defender and was just smarter. Charles... well no one plays like Charles nowadays, but PJ Tucker played like him in college as a "watered-down" version of Chuck. I still remember back in primary school getting beat up because I said Charles was better than Mike :lol:

how is someone "close" to Larry Legend if Larry was significantly better then that somebody in 3 facets of the game lol

perhaps the guy who most plays like the Legend (at least offensively) is currently playing in Boston already- Paul Pierce. Pierce, like Bird, isn't exactly physically gifted but is quite fundamentally sound. He's got a great awareness for the game, solid inside-outside game, and great in the clutch


Pierce, not phissically gifted? I would dissagree. He is a great leaper, slasher, has a great first step, is naturally gifted. Besides, as Jae pointed out, he is black, and not that it would matter, its just that hes naturally playing different, because of athletisism and things like that.

by this era's standard, yes- Paul Pierce is not as "phissically" gifted as the other great players in the league

seldom do you see you him blow by defenders with mind blowing quickness or a killer crossover.. or see him explode to the rim and dunk the ball with both elbows above the rim

he plays a smart game, uses angles and his strength to his advantage- the same things Legend would do

by no means is this Pierce-Bird comparison a perfect fit. but it's sure better then the "he's white and can shoot so he's automatically like Bird"

and Jae- now look what you did :crazy:
Jump.
Scott Skiles answer to the question on how Eddy Curry can become a better rebounder
User avatar
air gordon
 
Posts: 7867
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 4:06 pm
Location: windy city

Postby The X on Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:53 pm

yep, Axel, I agree that Steve Nash is now clutch....he's really stepped it up the last year or two in that respect....now it's time for Nash & the Suns to make the plays when it matters, in the playoffs, for him to be mentioned as an elite pure PG's of All-Time instead of a very good one for his time....

I think Dirk is in the same situation....last year he was the real MVP IMHO, & had a superb breakout postseason, but his performance in the NBA Finals kind of put a sour note on it....we've seen him carry Germany, but if he can get Mavs back there & win it, he cements a place ahead of a guy like Kevin Garnett, who is brilliant, but couldn't win enough....both future HOF-ers, but winning matters....


as for Larry Bird, is the comparison now Dirk meets Pierce meets Morrison?!? :lol:
User avatar
The X
is
NLSC Team Member
 
Posts: 11499
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Brisbane

Postby grusom on Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:56 pm

Yoy really can't say Pierce isn't atletic - rather that he doesn't rely on his physical gifts to score. The difference he is that Larry didn't have any physical gifts, but dominated anyway.

Try to take a look at this video, there are some pretty iompressive dunks by Pierce in it that should end the argument.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=864rJmTNuYk

By the way, I'm a big fan of both players, and can't really see the simularity. Bird was a difference maker because of all the little thing he did as well as his scoring - passing, rebounding etc.

Pierce is a great scorer and a decent rebounder, but not much more than that. He is fun to watch though, as he is one of the most physical swingmen in the league. I love how he can play with his back to the basket, and just push people around with his spin moves.
User avatar
grusom
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:22 pm
Location: Denmark

Postby Christopherson on Wed Jan 10, 2007 1:30 am

I think one more thing you have to take into consideration in the Nash-Stockton debate is durability. Stockton played all 82 games in 17 of his 19 seasons in the league. One season he only played 64 because of a knee operation. The other season it was 78. You could always count on stockton day in and day out. Nash has played in 82 games only twice in his ten seasons in the league. He has put up 4 seasons with 70 games or less. So chalk another categorical win for Stockton. Would you rather have Stock for 82 games, or Nash for 70?
Go Zags!
User avatar
Christopherson
 
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:08 pm
Location: Idaho

Postby cklitsie on Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:05 am

Another thing: Stockton played like a HOF'er for so many straight seasons, Nash has only been as good as he currently is for a couple seasons (and he's turning 33 already).
User avatar
cklitsie
 
Posts: 6511
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 3:02 am

Postby Joe' on Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:10 am

Nash will never be like Stockton, end of conversation.

Stockton really made his teammates play better: Malone is now a legend thanks to Stockton; Shandon Anderson, Bryon Russell, Howard Eisley became decent players thanks to Stockton; Antoine Carr and other veterans that played along with Stockton played good basketball thanks to him.

Nash is a great passer, a really good player overall but he doesn't really go further: Shawn Marion, Amaré Stoudamire, Raja Bell, Boris Diaw, etc. play good basketball because of individual achievements, not because of Nash.

On another note, I think there are only a couple of players from this era that will become nearly as good as any of the players listed above by cyanide and grusom. What do you think?
Dear Old World, you represent everything that's wrong...
User avatar
Joe'
Sir Psycho Sexy
 
Posts: 2586
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:02 pm

Postby Gedas on Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:30 am

Well, Stockton is undoutably better. He is an overall better player, also a better passer, defender. Stockton is one of maybe 3 best point guards ever. Nash is really good, the best PG now, but really not Stockton.
Image
Gedas
 
Posts: 638
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:38 am
Location: Lithuania

Postby _marsal on Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:53 am

Joe' wrote:Nash is a great passer, a really good player overall but he doesn't really go further: Shawn Marion, Amaré Stoudamire, Raja Bell, Boris Diaw, etc. play good basketball because of individual achievements, not because of Nash.


Are you serious? I agree that Stockton is above Nash and will remain forever, but to say Nash doesn't make his teammates better (which you just did), is ridicilous. I wonder why Phoenix wasn't a top 3 team while Marbury played, since they had Amare and Marion (and Joe Johnson and Penny etc.). Or why nobody knew who Boris Diaw was while still in Atlanta. I agree that Marion, Amare and the rest of Suns co. have a lot individual talent, but if you take Nash away, you can kiss the top of Western conference goodbye. Besides, if it's true that Nash doesn't make his team(mates) better, why did he win the MVP twice in a row? Stats only (20pts+10as.) are not that spectacular. Shouldn't have someone else won it then?
User avatar
_marsal
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:11 am
Location: Slovenia

Postby Abctest123 on Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:51 am

If someone has mentioned this in the thread already, whatever: How about a Steve Nash with Jason Kidd Defense, is that as close as you're gonna get to somebody resembling Stockton?
Image
User avatar
Abctest123
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:25 pm

Postby grusom on Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:28 am

Joe' wrote:
On another note, I think there are only a couple of players from this era that will become nearly as good as any of the players listed above by cyanide and grusom. What do you think?


There is a lot of very good players around today, that will surely be remembered and refered to as legends once they retire.

We've got Shaq, Kobe, Lebron and Kevin Garnett just to name a few.

Names like Iverson, Kidd, Payton, Nowitzki and Dwyane Wade comes to mind as well.
User avatar
grusom
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:22 pm
Location: Denmark

Postby Jowe on Wed Jan 10, 2007 4:56 pm

Add Tim Duncan to that list.

i"ve not been convinced by Dwayne Wade just yet. All I can think when he is mentioned is the flopping.
Image
Fee Nick's Uns [15-10] says:
i'd suck allen iverson's cock any day -
Fee Nick's Uns [15-10] says:
just so i could say i've met allen iverson
User avatar
Jowe
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 5:46 pm
Location: Paradise City

Postby hova- on Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:24 am

Actually I love Jason Kidd. I think he is on the same level Nash is, I really think that. His shot is weaker, but he is a better defender, kinda compensates that.
And when it comes to flair there is no cooler passer in the league right now.

J-Kidd Mix
User avatar
hova-
Two time Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 5160
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 12:33 am
Location: Augsburg, Germany

Postby cklitsie on Thu Jan 11, 2007 3:32 am

I agree with -hova, the 2001-02 Kidd was definately on the same level as the Nash of now. It may not have been his best year statistically but he really carried his team (which was way worse than the Suns).
He should've gotten MVP that year. Ah well, same could be said for about 4 seasons regarding Shaq.
User avatar
cklitsie
 
Posts: 6511
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 3:02 am

Postby Matt on Thu Jan 11, 2007 3:49 am

We need a Kevin Johnson link. KJ's comparison would probably have to be Gilbert Arenas.
Image
User avatar
Matt
 
Posts: 7236
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 6:48 pm
Location: Australia

Postby Joker. on Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:00 am

Thanks for the cool videos cyanide (y)
Image
User avatar
Joker.
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:44 pm
Location: Lithuania!

Postby cyanide on Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:05 am

Matt wrote:We need a Kevin Johnson link. KJ's comparison would probably have to be Gilbert Arenas.


I was going to put one of KJ up, but there's nothing on YouTube except of him dunking on Olajuwon and someone else (Mutombo?) so I thought putting up a 30 second clip isn't worth it. He's a fantastic player when not injured. He once had a triple double before halftime :shock:
if you were killed tomorrow, i WOULDNT GO 2 UR FUNERAL CUZ ID B N JAIL 4 KILLIN THE MOTHA FUCKER THAT KILLED U!
......|..___________________, ,
....../ `---______----|]
...../==o;;;;;;;;______.:/
.....), ---.(_(__) /
....// (..) ), ----"
...//___//
..//___//
.//___//
WE TRUE HOMIES
WE RIDE TOGETHER
WE DIE TOGETHER
User avatar
cyanide
Dat steatopygous
 
Posts: 9197
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:09 am
Location: US's toque

Postby air gordon on Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:51 am

Matt wrote:We need a Kevin Johnson link. KJ's comparison would probably have to be Gilbert Arenas.

not when you consider that Johnson wasn't a threat beyond 20ft


grusom: i didn't say Pierce is not athletic (boo double negative)... he's probably above average though i don't have bench press scores and 40yrd dashes to prove it lol

Larry did have phyical gifts obviously- great coordination, great footwork, and was ambidextrous. let's not make it out like he was a piece fat, slothing his way around to legend status

it goes without saying that Pierce isn't at Bird's level on many facets of the game (who is anyway).. but i think it's pretty clear he does some things similar to him
Jump.
Scott Skiles answer to the question on how Eddy Curry can become a better rebounder
User avatar
air gordon
 
Posts: 7867
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 4:06 pm
Location: windy city

Postby grusom on Sat Jan 13, 2007 11:36 pm

Just found a fun video of Muhammad Ali and Wilt Chamberlain - apparently Wilt challenged Ali to a boxing match! Too bad it never happened, would have been some sight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCa9oCbj7-U
User avatar
grusom
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 11:22 pm
Location: Denmark

PreviousNext

Return to NBA & Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests