JPHiP Radio (16/200 @ 128 kbs)     Now playing: Crystal Kay - Make You Mine

Author Topic: Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?  (Read 2062 times)

Offline ahcheungape

  • Member+
  • Posts: 1153
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« on: May 12, 2006, 10:25:06 PM »
I was reading this argument on another bball forum. there are ppl that actually rank Nash over Payton and Stockton. I was just think those guys must be nuts because i think Nash right now just isnt on par wit the two of them in their primes. i like Nash cuz he's good and he's a Canadian. but what seperates him from the other two great pgs were DEFENCE and toughness those two brought. i think until Nash has defence and lead his team to Finals, he shouldnt be consider a better pg than Payton and Stockton.

So what do u guys think? Does Nash having two MVPs make him a better pg?

Offline JFC

  • Miki's Birthday Twin
  • ecchi
  • Member+
  • Posts: 26635
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2006, 02:55:27 AM »
Not necessarily. Nash having two MVP's shows how important he specifically has been to the success of his particular team during these particular season. To use an analogy, Nash is clearly the conductor of the orchestra in Phoenix (like he was in Dallas).  Without his influence, Phoenix would still have the potential to sound really good, but they would have just been a lot of noise. They need a conductor to guide them through. That's what Nash does. Stockton and Payton, as great as they both were, weren't that BIG of an individual influence on their respective teams, IMHO.

Stockton has, and will be one of the greatest point guards in NBA history, however, was he THE playmaker that Nash is? Stockton had Malone (two of them in fact for a few seasons, if I remember correctly), as well as numerous other teammates over the seasons who were natural offensive guys while he was playing in Utah.  And yes, like Nash, he helped to create plays that utilized their skills as best as they could. The difference between the two, is that (at least IMHO), Stockton had a lot more to work with in terms of potential offensive weapons. The Jazz would have been able to get along and still do quite well without Stockton in the lineup, whereas in Phoenix, it's pretty clear that the team literally NEEDS Nash to hold them together.  Even without Stoudamaire this year, Nash has still been able to orchestrate a team dynamic that got them into the playoffs. Had the tables been reversed, if it was Nash, not Stoudamaire that was injured, I don't think that Phoenix would have had a chance in hell of doing as well as they did.

This however, does not mean I'm willing to say that Nash is better than Stockton or Payton were. I'm just saying that individually, Nash has been much more of an ESSENTIAL element (a key, if you will), to he success of his team.  Nash still needs to grow and develop his game for a few more seasons the way that Stockton and Payton did before I'd consider comparing them together in that manner.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2006, 02:59:11 AM by JFC »

JPH!P :heart:'s Fushigidane, ChrNo, Jab & marimari. Always.

Offline ytl

  • ecchi
  • Member+
  • Posts: 368
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2006, 09:00:20 AM »
It's hard to determine...... especially between Payton and Nash.  The rule changed so the comparison is not fair to the ex-players.  Stockon probably was better than Nash now, but he never can bring consistent offence on his own.  Payton has the best defence, but he wasn't really helping the team to be better like Nash does.

Offline ahcheungape

  • Member+
  • Posts: 1153
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2006, 11:40:29 AM »
i personally think stockton is best outa the 3. he was a tough little guard. most steals in history of nba is example of how good he was back then.

payton was also one of the best defensive pg ever. watching him play again jordan during the 96 finals was amazing. payton was WAY undersized, but he managed to front and bump jordan outa the post. too bad he cant do shit on D now.

Offline Mugen

  • Chan Ho Nam Jr.
  • Member+
  • Posts: 3511
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2006, 08:56:22 PM »
I'd rank Nash 2nd to Stockton and on top of the PAyton right now. I would've rank Payton on top if he was as good as he was before.

Offline Thimas X

  • I eat Jailbaits for breakfast
  • Member+
  • Posts: 2510
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #5 on: May 14, 2006, 02:13:17 PM »
Nash can't stop anyone. He tries...but he can't stop anyone. I would rank both Payton and Stockton above of Nash.

I dont think Nash has played that different from what he played in Dallas except that he is hitting more of his shots. The Sun's style of play fits Nash so well, but he is still the same PG from Dallas. We depended on Nash too, but he was never close to being mentioned MVP. MVP doesn't mean much to me in this argument. If I had to choose one pg from the three it would probably be Stockon then Payton.

Offline ahcheungape

  • Member+
  • Posts: 1153
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #6 on: May 14, 2006, 08:24:12 PM »
Quote from: Mugen
I'd rank Nash 2nd to Stockton and on top of the PAyton right now. I would've rank Payton on top if he was as good as he was before.



well i think i said a prime payton. it is obvious that nash is better at this point. but however payton can still D better than nash.

Offline Mugen

  • Chan Ho Nam Jr.
  • Member+
  • Posts: 3511
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #7 on: May 14, 2006, 08:57:41 PM »
well there's no point of comparing Nash to the prime Payton because that was back then.

Offline ahcheungape

  • Member+
  • Posts: 1153
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2006, 02:46:15 AM »
Quote from: Mugen
well there's no point of comparing Nash to the prime Payton because that was back then.



well, so u think its fair to compare prime nash vs aging payton?

Offline Mugen

  • Chan Ho Nam Jr.
  • Member+
  • Posts: 3511
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2006, 04:01:08 AM »
Yes, because it's present. hehe

Offline scrock7

  • Member+
  • Posts: 82
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #10 on: May 20, 2006, 05:21:47 AM »
all three of them doesn't have a ring, therefore... they are not better than one another
Life is so much fun when you are able to find and piss someone off everyday and watch them make a fool out of themselves... thatz Life for ya

Offline ahcheungape

  • Member+
  • Posts: 1153
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2006, 10:55:19 AM »
haha so Nash is better than stockton and payton due to his 2 mvps?

Offline JFC

  • Miki's Birthday Twin
  • ecchi
  • Member+
  • Posts: 26635
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2006, 11:34:12 PM »
Quote from: scrock7
all three of them doesn't have a ring, therefore... they are not better than one another

Having a ring doesn't mean anything, as the thread is discussing the individual play of the 3 players.  When a team with the championship, even the shittiest players will get a ring. Having a ring doesn't make you a good player.

JPH!P :heart:'s Fushigidane, ChrNo, Jab & marimari. Always.

Offline scrock7

  • Member+
  • Posts: 82
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #13 on: May 21, 2006, 01:33:20 AM »
Quote from: JFC
Having a ring doesn't mean anything, as the thread is discussing the individual play of the 3 players.  When a team with the championship, even the shittiest players will get a ring. Having a ring doesn't make you a good player.


if having a ring doesn't mean anything, why is everyone pursing it... why hasn't gary payton retired yet? why did stockton and malone retire with regret, of course the ring means everything to a player

none of these players have reached the final destination, win the championship and title and Finals MVP, therefore, it shows they aren't capable of leading the team to victory..

therefore, all 3 of them have not reached that goal, technically they are still all losers in this game :D individually, they aren't really better than one another cuz they haven't reached the ultimate goal yet

so i dont see how they are better than one another if they aren't able to come through for the team @ critical time... such as the championship game... therefore getting a ring

so wat steve nash dish out 10 assists per game and have 2 mvp titles? so wat gary payton is good defender with the nickname "The Glove" and so wat John Stockton holds the record in total assists... they still can't win!
Life is so much fun when you are able to find and piss someone off everyday and watch them make a fool out of themselves... thatz Life for ya

Offline JFC

  • Miki's Birthday Twin
  • ecchi
  • Member+
  • Posts: 26635
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #14 on: May 21, 2006, 11:18:41 PM »
Quote from: scrock7
if having a ring doesn't mean anything, why is everyone pursing it... why hasn't gary payton retired yet? why did stockton and malone retire with regret, of course the ring means everything to a player
Getting the ring is a team goal. As I said before, this thread is talking about the individual abilities of the players. Read the previous posts. They all discuss the players, NOT the teams that they played on or whether or not they won a championship ring. YOU were the one who was misguided enough to bring that up.  Having a ring is good because means that the team did well enough to win the championship. It is not, however, a reflection of the INDIVIDUAL skills and abilities of the INDIVIDUAL players, which is what this thread is about. If you want to dilute yourself and believe that the only thing that shows that you're a good player with skills is that you have a ring,then go ahead. You'll still get people who'll debate you and say that you're mistaken.

Oh, and use proper grammer (i.e. capitalization and punctuation marks) in your posts. You'll be taken more seriously that way.

EDIT: If you're convinced that the three players here, as you put it, "suck", just because their teams haven't yet won a championship, then who would YOU say should be included in the discussion? Which point guard(s), in your opinion, should be included in this discussion. Contribute another option, instead of just saying that "these guys suck" over and over again.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2006, 11:31:52 PM by JFC »

JPH!P :heart:'s Fushigidane, ChrNo, Jab & marimari. Always.

Offline scrock7

  • Member+
  • Posts: 82
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #15 on: May 22, 2006, 01:36:37 AM »
Quote from: JFC
Getting the ring is a team goal. As I said before, this thread is talking about the individual abilities of the players. Read the previous posts. They all discuss the players, NOT the teams that they played on or whether or not they won a championship ring. YOU were the one who was misguided enough to bring that up.


oh of course, so wait, getting a ring isn't an individual goal as well? as an accomplishment in life? wow it shows how much u know about basketball and also saying "the ring doesn't mean anything?" of course it means everything. their individual skill aren't good enough to carry the team, their individual contribution isn't able to lead their team to victory, therefore, their individual ability is not good enough to be talked about.

Quote from: JFC

Having a ring is good because means that the team did well enough to win the championship. It is not, however, a reflection of the INDIVIDUAL skills and abilities of the INDIVIDUAL players, which is what this thread is about. If you want to dilute yourself and believe that the only thing that shows that you're a good player with skills is that you have a ring,then go ahead. You'll still get people who'll debate you and say that you're mistaken.


really? so why is it a fact they always remember who is the guy that took the last shot to win the game? but not the whole team? I am pretty sure a lot of young people remember Michael Jordan but not Dennis Rodman. If a player isn't able to come through for the team at critical times, how is he better than another player in the game of basketball... this is why Michael Jordan is the greatest of all time cuz he always come through for the team

so gary payton, john stockton, steve nash hasn't come through for the team "yet", therefore they are not better than one another, in order to better than another player, he has to win a NBA championship which is getting a ring which none of them has one

its like someone would say "Peyton Manning is one of the best quarterback in the history of NFL?" ER WRONG! because he broke the TD record in a single reason? SO WHAT! he chokes at every single playoff game in this career... so according to your definition of a "better" player, is someone who is better at individual play like having awesome plays in his career and having the greatest season in that season to acquire MVP but chokes in playoff and critical game?

Quote from: JFC

Oh, and use proper grammer (i.e. capitalization and punctuation marks) in your posts. You'll be taken more seriously that way.


you know grammar doesn't exist on internet forums? by bringing the fact up, it shows that you don't belong on internet? and its totally unrelated to the topic whatsoever cuz you are trying to make yourself look smarter but instead.... just another person to be laughed at

Quote from: JFC

EDIT: If you're convinced that the three players here, as you put it, "suck", just because their teams haven't yet won a championship, then who would YOU say should be included in the discussion? Which point guard(s), in your opinion, should be included in this discussion. Contribute another option, instead of just saying that "these guys suck" over and over again.


please point out where i stated all these players suck? i don't remember ever stating that fact, i remember saying they are all losers in this game but that doesn't mean they suck, i remember saying they are not better than one another, which doesn't mean they suck

well if u really want my opinion, currently in the league Tony Parker (who i really hate) is already better than all 3 of them in critical games, Chauncy Billups who isn't the best PG around is able to help the team to victory

lastly... man go play ur fantasy nba, cuz the facts that you are bringing up all related to fantasy, not reality...
Life is so much fun when you are able to find and piss someone off everyday and watch them make a fool out of themselves... thatz Life for ya

Offline JFC

  • Miki's Birthday Twin
  • ecchi
  • Member+
  • Posts: 26635
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #16 on: May 22, 2006, 03:24:12 AM »
Quote from: scrock7
really? so why is it a fact they always remember who is the guy that took the last shot to win the game? but not the whole team? I am pretty sure a lot of young people remember Michael Jordan but not Dennis Rodman. If a player isn't able to come through for the team at critical times, how is he better than another player in the game of basketball... this is why Michael Jordan is the greatest of all time cuz he always come through for the team
People remember the last shot to win a game because IT WAS THE LAST SHOT. Being the most recent thing to happen in one's memory, of course it's going to stick. That's something you learn in first year university Psychology. Also, when it's a last shot to win a game, there will be a lot more drama and tension surrounding it. Again, this contributes to the fact that this particular shot will be more easily remembered. Again, simple Psychology.

People don't remember Dennis Rodman? :lol: Maybe if you're 16 and under and you're a novice at the game, but anyone who's a serious NBA fan, regardless of their age, will know who Rodman is. Never mind that he's one of, if not THE greatest rebounder in NBA history, but there's also his outlandish behaviour off of the court (like the cross-dressing, the marriage to Carmen Electra, the affair with Madonna, the bad movies, the funky hair, the tatoos, etc.).  

And just for the record, I agree with you on Jordan being the best in history.  I don't know what criteria you personally use to base it on, I do it on the basis that his individual skills and his individual play as an individual player were BEYOND compare. I don't base it on the fact that he's got a bunch of championship rings. I'm not saying that as a shot at you, I'm just saying what I personally base that opinon on.


Quote from: scrock7
so gary payton, john stockton, steve nash hasn't come through for the team "yet", therefore they are not better than one another, in order to better than another player, he has to win a NBA championship which is getting a ring which none of them has one

its like someone would say "Peyton Manning is one of the best quarterback in the history of NFL?" ER WRONG! because he broke the TD record in a single reason? SO WHAT! he chokes at every single playoff game in this career... so according to your definition of a "better" player, is someone who is better at individual play like having awesome plays in his career and having the greatest season in that season to acquire MVP but chokes in playoff and critical game?
You still seem to be basing your entire argument on having a championship ring in order to be considered a good, skilled player. Dude, as I said befoe, you don't have to have a ring to be considered a good player. You say that Nash, Payton, and Stockton nevery "came through" for their teams when they needed to.  There's only SO much that one player can do, even if he's the leader of a team. The rest of the players on that team have to do their part too. They have to step up, and play well in thier own right. The leader leads, but if the rest of the team doesn't follow through and step up their games, that's THEIR fault, not the leaders. You expect the leaders of a team to physically manipulate all their teammates to ensure they play well? Impossible. You can't judge a player just based on the results/successes/failures of his team.  In order to be fair, a player must be judged based on his individual skills and accomplishments, which is what I've been saying all of this time.  Having a championship ring can be counted as an accomplishment, but it isn't the ONLY thing that you should be looking for in a good, skilled player.

Oh, and I personally am not a fan of Peyton Manning. He's an okay QB, and I'll give him props for the TD record. But yeah, as you said so yourself, he chokes when it's crunch time. He needs to learn how to play under real pressure before I'll even consider putting him up amongst the best in the NFL.




Quote from: scrock7
well if u really want my opinion, currently in the league Tony Parker (who i really hate) is already better than all 3 of them in critical games, Chauncy Billups who isn't the best PG around is able to help the team to victory
Cool, that's more like it. See, making contributions like THIS to a discussion is better, and much more interesting. Instead of knocking the choices that are already here, you've provided some new ones to give the discussion an added, new dynamic. It gives you more credibility when you can provide alternate choices like this, compared to just saying that the existing ones are no good.


Quote from: scrock7
you know grammar doesn't exist on internet forums? by bringing the fact up, it shows that you don't belong on internet? and its totally unrelated to the topic whatsoever cuz you are trying to make yourself look smarter but instead.... just another person to be laughed at
I don't need to TRY and make myself look smarter. The people here who know me know that as an English teacher, I have certain standards. However, if you want to bring up the whole "smarter" thing, I'm confident enough that my 5 years of university study, my 2 Bachelor's degrees, my Teaching Certificate, and my 29 years of life experience all speak for themselves.  Using good grammer and punctuation isn't hard.  Look at the threads here. Look at the other sub-forums here. Look at the actual posts. Read them. You'll see that most everyone here has no trouble using good, proper grammer and punctuation. We've got people here from all over the globe, many for whom English is not their first language, and yet they STILL know where to capitalize and where to put their commas and where to put their periods. As I said, it's NOT that hard.

EDIT: Oh, and that crack you made in that last part that I quoted from you was a personal attack. I didn't mind debating with you regarding the players. But what you said there was over the line. It was uncalled for. It wasn't cool.

Consider yourself reported.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2006, 03:41:36 AM by JFC »

JPH!P :heart:'s Fushigidane, ChrNo, Jab & marimari. Always.

Offline scrock7

  • Member+
  • Posts: 82
Will u rank Nash over Payton and Stockton?
« Reply #17 on: May 22, 2006, 06:08:37 AM »
Quote from: JFC

People don't remember Dennis Rodman?
 

Of course people won't remember as much the fact that Dennis Rodman is a big contributing to the Chicago Bulls when they won Championship game as much as they remember Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen and why would I bring up his messed-up life since we are talking about the game of basketball here?

Quote from: JFC

And just for the record, I agree with you on Jordan being the best in history.  I don't know what criteria you personally use to base it on, I do it on the basis that his individual skills and his individual play as an individual player were BEYOND compare. I don't base it on the fact that he's got a bunch of championship rings. I'm not saying that as a shot at you, I'm just saying what I personally base that opinon on.


His individual skills? Jordan is not god of basketball, he is not perfect in everything. He can't shoot threes better than Steve Kerr, he can't rebound as good as Dennis Rodman, he can't make plays and pass as good as Magic Johnson, his scoring skills can be matched by current Kobe Bryant, old Wilt Chamberlain, but what makes Jordan so good?! Of course his abilities can be compared but His ability to win game and able to play in a critical game at critical time can never be matched... that made him better than other player...

Quote from: JFC

You still seem to be basing your entire argument on having a championship ring in order to be considered a good, skilled player. Dude, as I said befoe, you don't have to have a ring to be considered a good player. You say that Nash, Payton, and Stockton nevery "came through" for their teams when they needed to.  There's only SO much that one player can do, even if he's the leader of a team. The rest of the players on that team have to do their part too. They have to step up, and play well in thier own right. The leader leads, but if the rest of the team doesn't follow through and step up their games, that's THEIR fault, not the leaders. You expect the leaders of a team to physically manipulate all their teammates to ensure they play well? Impossible. You can't judge a player just based on the results/successes/failures of his team.  In order to be fair, a player must be judged based on his individual skills and accomplishments, which is what I've been saying all of this time.  Having a championship ring can be counted as an accomplishment, but it isn't the ONLY thing that you should be looking for in a good, skilled player.


What does the position of point guard means to you? Able to make fancy plays? Able to score? Able to drive in the paint and attack the basket? or play great defense! NO, the position of point guard means leadership, a point guard's job is to run the floor, slow down the pace and carry the momentum when the game goes on. So the individual ability of point guard is best when able to lead the team when necessary (which is winning the championship). So how is all three point guard better than one another?

Nash had Stoudemire, Marion, Richardson, Johnson... can't win, Stockton has the mailman Karl Malone, can't win! Payton had Shaq, Malone, Kobe, can't win... because of silly argument better kobe and malone?! woah, at this point, Payton should step up and tell both of them to shut up and set aside their difference and play like a team, isn't that the leader's job?

You can't blame the teammates for losing the game, it's leader's job to lead the teammate, if the team loses... it's the leader's fault not able to lead them. At least thats what a "TRUE PG" means so how can you compare all three of them and say one is better than another when they have not done what they are supposed to do?

Quote from: JFC

Oh, and I personally am not a fan of Peyton Manning. He's an okay QB, and I'll give him props for the TD record. But yeah, as you said so yourself, he chokes when it's crunch time. He needs to learn how to play under real pressure before I'll even consider putting him up amongst the best in the NFL.


you just proved my point that all three point guard can't be better than one another if they all choke when it's crunch time. They need to learn how to play under real pressure. You just back-uped my argument of how they are not better than one another.


Quote from: JFC

Cool, that's more like it. See, making contributions like THIS to a discussion is better, and much more interesting. Instead of knocking the choices that are already here, you've provided some new ones to give the discussion an added, new dynamic. It gives you more credibility when you can provide alternate choices like this, compared to just saying that the existing ones are no good.


I have been trying to tell you not able to get a ring doesn't make their individual ability better than one another but you were rejecting the fact that it's a true statement and believed "getting a ring doesn't mean anything."

Quote from: JFC

I don't need to TRY and make myself look smarter. The people here who know me know that as an English teacher, I have certain standards. However, if you want to bring up the whole "smarter" thing, I'm confident enough that my 5 years of university study, my 2 Bachelor's degrees, my Teaching Certificate, and my 29 years of life experience all speak for themselves.  Using good grammer and punctuation isn't hard.  Look at the threads here. Look at the other sub-forums here. Look at the actual posts. Read them. You'll see that most everyone here has no trouble using good, proper grammer and punctuation. We've got people here from all over the globe, many for whom English is not their first language, and yet they STILL know where to capitalize and where to put their commas and where to put their periods. As I said, it's NOT that hard.


Really, congratulation, thats why you are teaching English but not basketball. Besides, from the fact you stated that the internet is made up of many people who doesn't have English as their first language which pretty much formed the universal un-written rule that spelling, grammar and puntuation isn't part of the chatting script. And what gave you the right to enforce it on the internet and forcing other people to use your rule? If people want to learn proper English, I am pretty sure they will sign up for your English class or someone else's English class. This is INTERNET FORUM! not your classroom.

Quote from: JFC

EDIT: Oh, and that crack you made in that last part that I quoted from you was a personal attack. I didn't mind debating with you regarding the players. But what you said there was over the line. It was uncalled for. It wasn't cool. Consider yourself reported.


I didn't think stating a fact is a personal attack, such as "A chicken can't fly"... I may be laughing at the fact that chicken has gotten so fat that it can't fly and that's supposed to be a personal attack to the chicken that I am laughing at the fact that the chicken can't fly?
Life is so much fun when you are able to find and piss someone off everyday and watch them make a fool out of themselves... thatz Life for ya

JPHiP Radio (16/200 @ 128 kbs)     Now playing: Crystal Kay - Make You Mine