share

Is Billups vs Nash a close argument?

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
Is Billups vs Nash a close argument?

You read this and laugh. Think about this, Billups was drafted in 1998, Nash in 1996. Let's look at this

Career numbers

  • Nash: 14.6ppg, 8.4apg, 3.0rpg and 0.8spg
  • Billups: 15.5ppg, 5.6apg, 2.9rpg and 1.0spg

Both had late stars to their careers ( Billups being tossed around the league like Salad, Nash with two seasons behind Jason Kidd)

The biggest thing to me is Billups, from 2002-2009 led all teams he was on to the conference finals, got to two Finals and even got a Finals MVP. I'm not knocking Nash, but the hand-checking rule benefitted him the most AND it took Shawn Marion (ppl forget he was a top 30 guy in the NBA for about 4 years) Amare Stoudmire (No surgery yet) and Joe Johnson ( who always had the talent) for him to shine. Whereas, I look at Billups, he played with Richard Hamilton ( not better then Johnson), Wallace (not better then Stoudmire), Prince ( not better then Marion). Ben Wallace was the x-factor, but he was 6-8/6-9. Does he give the Suns a title in 2008? I don't know.

So I leave it up to you, is Nash-Billups a close argument?


gone
Registered User
Joined: 01/20/2010
Posts: 2066
Points: 4583
Offline
"tossed around the league

"tossed around the league like Salad"

You must know anybody in jail or you wouldnt have said that.....

Nash easy his court vision is top 5 alltime, the system plus Nash made Marion not sure about it but Im sure Rip and JJ had similar stats at the time

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
I disagree because Marion in

I disagree because Marion in the 3 years pre Nash

  • 17-10-2
  • 19-9-2
  • 21-9-2

iguapops420
iguapops420's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 2374
Points: 1771
Offline
Nash didn't mae the Matrix.

Nash didn't mae the Matrix. Athleticism and a perfect suited system made him. But I must say Billups is no Nash. he's good, but he's not THAT good. He was a leader of a team with Prince,The Wallace's, and Rip in what was the weaker East. Being full of Vets and practically the only team in the conference who played D got them to the Finals all those times. And it wasn't like Chauncey was the be-all end-all undisputed Finals MVP IMO, as there was so much team play. Sheed, not Ben was the X-Factor IMO.

Switch scenes, Nash on DET and Chauncey being on PHX and you gotta think that realistically those Pistons teams probably STILL remain atop the EAST for part of the decade. PHX, I'm not so sure that you don't just get a replay of Starbury with STAT and The Matrix with less explosiveness. Not to mention Being under Larry Brown is what really brought the "Big Shot" out in Chauncey so it's possible if you switch scripts that we're not even questioning this.

Nash with all of his defensive shortcomings, he's still tough as nails, a memeber of the 50% 40% 90% club, who managed to lead the league in assists while being one of the most clutch players in the league for several years.

Nash over Chauncey by a landslide IMO.

sheltwon3
sheltwon3's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/30/2009
Posts: 6584
Points: 2608
Offline
Detroit played in the East

Detroit played in the East and I am sure If Suns were in the East, they would have gone deeper in the playoffs.

trueone313detroit
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 104
Points: 119
Offline
Disagree with you Iguapops420

Billups guarded 2's and points where as Nash was hiding defensively game in and out. Put Billups on a team that was only made for scoring and He would average simalar if not better stats then nash offensive. The Pistons didnt play small ball and just run you to death, they made it to the Finals games 3 or 4 times where as Nash could even break the first round. Plus Billups is one of the toughest guards as NAILS.... Billups may have average 10 - 13 shots a game while Nash averaged almost 20 shots. Give Billups 3 more shots and he is in the MVP standing for you. The Years Nash won MVP there where Far Better players those years then him. Hell he Robbed Dirk and Kobe for those MVP awards. I was happy kobe didnt get it but dirk was performing better and billups did too those years. I respect you opinion But I disagree with you. But I still give you a tumbs up for you statement. But what marks a great career stats for a few years or championships with stats for a few years. Nash will be like Stockton, and Amare will be like Malone to great offensive players to never see a ring. They may never see a finals again either.

iguapops420
iguapops420's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 2374
Points: 1771
Offline
One title where he wasn't the

One title where he wasn't the only main guy. It was a team effort. Billups was never really the guy who could do it on his own. Skip past a few years where Nash has had some of the worst put together teams and has consistently made playoffs and far exceeded expectations. Put Nash in the East where defense wasn't as needed and he would put up better %,Ast, similar scoring, and would have probably won more than once. Probably could have beaten SAS and gone back to back. Billups is a great player, but Steve Nash is a superstar for crying out loud. Nash has never had the talent surrounding him as Billups did on that ONE championship team, I just don't see it. Billups has always been more of a combo guard and has never had the passing skills or vision that Nash owns.

And I do agree Chauncey deserved MVP the first year Nash won it. Kobe has deserved far more than one.

trueone313detroit
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 104
Points: 119
Offline
Okay

We go agree to disagree, but Nash was on quality teams in Phoenix and could get off the bench with Kevin Johnson and J.Kidd. And lets look at his Phoenix teams during he great yrs. Marion, Stat, Joe Johnson Later Boris D. , Q. Richardson, LeAndro, Raja Bell, for his main people. Averaged 100 points during season to only get shout out of the First Round Consistantly,

Take billups and Detroit, R. Hamilton, T. Prince, Sheed and Ben Wallace and Darko for Laughs, They get a ring. Switch nash and billups to each other teams do the still make it out of the first round maybe and definitely put out of the second round with nash leading. But bigshot on the Phoenix team and I see at least conference and may championship finals.

Bigest difference in these to is Competive Edge, Nash lacks that determination needed to get his team that extra boost to get them over the edge. Plus Nash is such a Liability on Defense it neutralizes his offensive abilities. For every point Nash scores the guard he scores matches or is - 1 at best.

The8thDeadlySin
The8thDeadlySin's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/02/2008
Posts: 4457
Points: 5834
Offline
Lets make this simple...Nash

Lets make this simple...

Nash = 2 MVP, 0 Rings, 0 Finals MVP, 7 Time All-Star, 3 All-NBA First, 2 All-Second, 2 All-Third

Billups = 0 MVP, 1 Ring, 1 Finals MVP, 5 Time All-Star, 3 All-NBA First, 2 All-Defensive

Nash is the individual and Billups is the team..

What do you prefer?

Chrischi
Registered User
Joined: 06/22/2010
Posts: 557
Points: 796
Offline
Billups was a way better

Billups was a way better defender. But I think Nash's offense outclassed that deficit.

Billups has a 42 FG% and a 38 3P%.

Nash has a 49 FG% and a 43 3PT%.

Of course Billups low FG% is caused by a slower paced game, but Nash's shooting numbers are simply outstanding and unreached. He is averaging almost 50-40-90 over his career!!! Only five players have ever averaged 50-40-90 in one season! Nash is almost averaing it over his career.

Easy pick: Steve Nash.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1631
Points: 741
Offline
They're Both Fantastic!

This is an interesting thread because they're both great players and class acts. If I had to choose, I would go with Nash because he's one of the greatest passers in NBA history. Nobody in the game of basketall sets up his teammates better than Nash!

I also love PGs who set up their teammates but still have the offensive arsenal to score themselves and Nash qualifies in that category big time.

Chauncey Billups has a long history of providing great leadership and key plays at the end of a game. He's fantastic during crunch time and a winner in every way imaginable.

You can't go wrong with either one. I think both of these guys cannot be measured using stats. They bring so much in terms of intangibles that using stats to win your argument isn't appropriate.

Steroid
Steroid's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/13/2010
Posts: 842
Points: 1053
Offline
iquapops40

I'd pick Billups because of what's stated in the OP. I think Billups is the more coveted PG right now in his career also because of his leadership, defense, and he'd fit right into any offense as opposed to Nash.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
Here's my question: What

Here's my question: What changed.

Go look up Nash's numbers where he was a 7apg guy in Dallas before moving to the Suns and the new hand checking rule. If we kept that rule, I don't think Nash is as efffective.

Plus, we have to mention he had better teammates.

gone
Registered User
Joined: 01/20/2010
Posts: 2066
Points: 4583
Offline
Your acting like the hand

Your acting like the hand check rule didnt help Billups either

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
I didn't say it didn't help

I didn't say it didn't help Billups, I feel it helped Nash more.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1631
Points: 741
Offline
BKKnicksFan and Flawed Logic

BKKnicksfan was guilty of drawing a false conclusion by assuming two simultaneous actions had an impact on each other. He believes Nash's assist per game rose after he left Dallas because of a new hand checking rule. His conclusion was nothing more than a coincidence.

I have no idea how hand checking has any impact on one's ability see the court and execute outstanding passes. In my opinion, the assists per game changed because of new teammates and a very different style of basketball in Phoenix.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
BKKnicksfan was guilty of

BKKnicksfan was guilty of drawing a false conclusion by assuming two simultaneous actions had an impact on each other. He believes Nash's assist per game rose after he left Dallas because of a new hand checking rule. His conclusion was nothing more than a coincidence.

So I can't say that not having the ability to put your hands on a player on the baseline didn't help a 180 point guard who was believed to have peaked in 2003....with a bad back? To say it didn't help him is a travesty in it's own right. It helped Billups for sure, but not as much as it helped Nash.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1631
Points: 741
Offline
BKKnicksFan and Flawed Logic

As I stated before, you're guilty of assuming two idependent actions had an impact on Nash's game without any proof. You're also guilty of assuming Nash's career peeked in 2003. I didn't see any slow down in his career after he was traded to Phoenix, in fact, he played at an even higher level.

If you want to claim that hand checking helped open up Nash's scoring, I can see the logic in that argument. However, hand checking has nothing to do with court vision, passing, and hitting the open man.

As I stated before, moving to Phoenix with a different type of offense under D'Antoni and new teammates were the real catalyst.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
As I stated before, you're

As I stated before, you're guilty of assuming two idependent actions had an impact on Nash's game without any proof. You're also guilty of assuming Nash's career peeked in 2003. I didn't see any slow down in his career after he was traded to Phoenix, in fact, he played at an even higher level.

Read it again. I said his career was believed to have peaked in 2003 because his back injuries and was getting older. I didn't think he peaked, that was Dallas' thoughts so stop twisting my words.

If you want to claim that hand checking helped open up Nash's scoring, I can see the logic in that argument. However, hand checking has nothing to do with court vision, passing, and hitting the open man.

Are you serious? Yea it does. As good as Nash is, having a 220 guy lean on you from the baseline up and keeping a hand on you could limit your passing and hitting the open man. Court vision is good, but if you stopped Nash in the half court (which teams actually did, as much run and gun as they were, they did get stopped alot in HC) bigger point guards back in the day would have just laid on him.

Thus, the reason Nash was a 7apg guy in Dallas. It wasn't the talent around him, it was the fact the NBA made a rule to open up more offenses.

gone
Registered User
Joined: 01/20/2010
Posts: 2066
Points: 4583
Offline
No the reason his assist went

No the reason his assist went up is because he had better teamates around him in a faster system

Dirk, Twon, Finley, Jamison, J Hov

vs

Amare, Marion, Q, Jimmy Jackson, Joe Johnson, Barbosa

Amare put up 26 that year

Dirk put up 21

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1631
Points: 741
Offline
Twisting Your Logic, Not Your Words

I'm not interested in twisting your words, they speak for themselves. It's your logic that is twisted. I would bet money that if Nash stayed in Dallas during the 2004-2005 season, his assists per game would not have spiked as they did after he moved to Phoenix with a new coach, a new system, and new teammates.

You can claim whatever you want, nobody's trying to stop you from expressing your opinion, that's why we're here. However, your half court logic reference passing is flawed. In terms of playing for Phoenix, many of Nash's assists happen in the open court on fast breaks. Need I say more?

The lake show2
The lake show2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/26/2009
Posts: 6717
Points: 1257
Offline
nope..billups was and is good

nope..billups was and is good but nash was two time mvp. Not close

iguapops420
iguapops420's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 2374
Points: 1771
Offline
I just can not conceed to the

I just can not conceed to the thought that Billups is as good as Nash. And where is this supposed Defense Chauncey plays.Hasn't really been a defender since 05-06. And for the first year in Denver. Chauncey was Mr. Big Shot for a year, or little over. Nash has made countless number of Big Shots himself while rarely making mistakes in the big moments.Not to mention that part of the reason Denver was never able to advance further with Melo beside of Billups was because of the fact that Billups couldn't hand the ball over to the best player on the team in Melo when the game was on the line rather choosing to shoot long jumpers often looking to be the homerun hitter instead of trying to use his talent to create a play for someone else. Not to mention George Karl ket pointong him out in the huddles directing many comments about moving the ball towards Chauncey yet Chauncey looked as if he wasn't even listening. I'll take either guy in their prime, but I'll take the one who takes his team deep in the playoffs year after year whether or not he has a good team or not. I'm just truely amazed that this convo is going on.

Now Jason Kidd vs. Steve Nash would be a much more compelling argument IMO.

trueone313detroit
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 104
Points: 119
Offline
Well this is my last

Well this is my last statement. Year after year Nash supposely takes his team to the playoff and gets booted the first round. How many two time MVP's having an MVP's year never win a ring. So who would you want to lead your team, a two time MVP who stole at least one or the MVP awards, that has a track record or first round losses or one whom has been to the playoffs just as many times in addition to have won multiple titles and playoffs MVP's where the MVP's counted most.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
nope..billups was and is good

nope..billups was and is good but nash was two time mvp. Not close

Yea, but I'd argue both of his MVP were the most debatable of the decade.

iguapops420
iguapops420's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 2374
Points: 1771
Offline
Certainly agreeable.

Certainly agreeable.

Pureshooter
Pureshooter's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/04/2009
Posts: 771
Points: 1046
Offline
The best argument for Nash is

The best argument for Nash is that it isn't necessarily career numbers, but the numbers you put up in your best years that measure your greatness. Nash's 4 or 5 best seasons are considerably better than Billups', but Nash definitely got off to a slower start in his career. The argument against Nash not getting to the playoffs would be more valid if he and Billups were in the same conference, but he was up against much tougher competition than Billups was in the weak Eastern conference. The Suns never played any defense and it always caught up to them in the post season. Which leads me to my next point...

The strongest argument for Billups doesn't show up in stats. He is a MUCH better defender, which is a big deal. He is a true power guard that can play defense against the 1 and 2. He is also clutch, something else that doesn't necessarily show up in the numbers.

Overall, I'd take Nash because he is more of a playmaker and he does a better job making his teammates better, but Billups is right on his heels. If Billups can manage to win another championship with Amare and Carmelo in NYC I would probably move him ahead.

RSS: Syndicate content