|
>Man, if you think the luck of playing with a coach more
>suited to his abilities and a great supporting cast makes him
>better, I'll just disagree because Paul's offenses, with so
>much less talent (he has plenty, but Nash had Amare, Marion,
>Barbosa, and at various points, Joe Johnson, Q Rich, Dragic as
>backup, Diaw in his best years, Jason Richardson, even Shaq),
>have been ranked almost as high, while his individual defense
>has placed him among the ten or so best defenders most years
>of his career, including this last one. And let's be real; the
>team success isn't that different. Neither has made it out of
>the West, even if Nash went to the next round and won a total
>of 5 games in three visits.
>
>Nash is amazing, likely a top 5, 6, or 7 PG all-time, but he's
>gotten a nice post-retirement sheen that Paul isn't afforded
>yet. CP has been better, and he has played at this level (top
>10 player, occasional top 2-4 player) for much longer than
>Nash did.
>
>As for the at his best argument, Nash never had a year that
>sniffs Paul's almost-MVP campaign that Kobe got in 08-09, and
>Paul's had several seasons that outstrip Nash's best
>statistically (and, uh, watch em. CP3 might be the smartest
>player this league's seen in decades).
___
it is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. - sherlock holmes
|
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Okay Sports
#/media/File:Firefly.png)
