Thorpe Thinks Nash is the best

thats just 1 person’s opinion…

Miller needed to come off picks and screens to get his shot off…Ray Allen is a great ball handler and gets his shots off in places that he’s comfortable in….

Nash might be 1 of the best shooters…What makes him deadly is you never know rather he’s going to shoot or pass it…

Reggie Miller’s clutch status was horrendously overrated, because he clutch against the New York knicks. I believe Ray was the best ever, but Nash is in the conversation.

See, I think Steve Nash may indeed be a better shooter than Reggie or Ray. A lot of people may be. But, where people are not better at Reggie or Ray is in their ability to consistently get and make long distance attempts. Their is a reason Steve Nash does not shoot the volume of Reggie and Ray, which is that it simply would not be the best thing for a team. Reggie and Ray both were incredible shooters for teams that won due to this ability, among other things. So, the percentages usually back up a lot of things, but the numbers do not, if you catch my drift. The ability to create your own shot and make it at a high rate, combined with winning, put Ray and Reggie well above Steve Nash.

My biggest problem with people saying "Reggie and Ray are the best shooters ever", is that they literally act like their are not better shooters out their than those two guys. The NBA is full of good shooters, their are guys in the league who just shoot. What makes guys like Reggie and Ray incredible are their ability to constantly get open shots by constant movement, a lot like Rip Hamilton does from the mid-range. Their play without the ball is far superior to guys who are maybe inferior athletes that can stroke the hell out of the ball. Mark Jackson was saying all of this garbage about a person "being born able to shoot" and such. Ray was not born being a great shooter, and I honestly think their are people who can hit open shots at the same or a better rate than Ray Allen. But, Ray’s ability to shoot mixed with the fact that he moves incredibly well without the ball is the reason why he will be the all-time leader in 3-pointers made. Hope that breaks it down and maybe explains why Thorpe would make the argument. His argument may be right in some ways, but in the context of playing a 48 minute basketball game, I do not believe it is.

Reggie and Ray has played on bigger stages with more light, camers and action when they play so I would def say they are better shooters because of the pressure. The argument he has for nash is on pure skill but that argument can be made for many players that have great shooting form but have not hit that many clutch shots or played on the stage they have played on. If we are going off just skill and technique, we could say tim legler or even mark price were probably the best shooters everm but the stage you are performing on is what really matters the most, you can even add dirk to the conversation. The thing is they try and overhype nash soo much, I know he is a really really good point guard but he is no where near where they rank him at. I still cannot believe he received a mvp when JOHN STOCKTON’s numbers blows steve nash’s numbers out the ballpark and he does not have 1 mvp award.

its hard to judge nash against those players because he has never been used in the same way.

we’d have to see him play the off gaurd and come off screens and look to get open etc.

I don’t know if he’s a better shooter than Miller or Allen, but he’s in the conversation. Nash is an amazing shooter, and from all aspects of the game too.

 I’ll agree with Thorpe. Reason being that Nash can hit the mid range shot better than either of those two. Allen and Miller hit threes ( prolifically mind you) or they finished at the hoop. Nash does both of those but also has a deadly 10-18 footer as well.

When you’re shooting a three, I think people sometimes forget that its always from teh same distance ( give or take an inch or two). It’s just a set shot that requires consistent mechanics to hit it. Keep the same release point, let you muscle memory do the work and if you’re consistent it’ll fall. Whereas with the mid range game, you need to know the proper release from countless positions on the court. You cant just rely on mechanics to make the shot, you need the feel for it as well. 

All three are terrific shooters but Nash doesnt just do it from one distance so he gets the edge imo. 

I agree totally with what mikeyv was saying.

Nash could easily be in this argument if you were gonna talk about who can hit open shots at a better rate, but what makes Ray and Reggie better was their ability to get open and make the shots.

Like even Kapono could be in the argument if it were about making the open shot, he has that video on youtube where he hits 29 straight in a practice 3pt comp. But in game ability to get open and hit the shot seperates him from the great shooters like ray and reggie.

And also when your talking about best shooter, does that mean best 3pt shooter or overall best shooter cause like what bossy13 just said, Nash is probably a better all around shooter than anyone.

50-40-90 says Nash is a pretty dam good shooter.  IMO Allen is the best.. But Nash is def in the Top 5 all time

Steve also has to create his own shots off the dribble, while the other two guys get open and hit spot shots ususally.. Nash just plays a different game then those other two.

Nash is probably the best three point shooter of the dribble to ever play the game and probably even the best PG three point shooter.

But Reggie and Allen are better catch and shoot guys, way faster release and more length.

 What about Larry Bird? I think you could call him the most versitile shooter of all time.  He could shoot of screens, shoot off balance, had 3 point and mid range game and was a master of trick shots, he could really do it all as far as shooting the basketball and at a high percentage for his whole career.

On top of that he could defend and pass the ball.

I think probably Dirk, Nash and Bird deserve those titles, because they are in the 50-40-90 club.

Steve Kerr????

Nash could be argued as a better shooter, it is all a matter of opinion, you really cannot go wrong with either but when you shoot the Promised Land (50, 40, 90) it is really hard to say you aren’t one of the best shooters if not the best shooter of all time, you do need to be consistent with it though and prove season and season out that you can shoot every game (almost every game) and Miller, Allen, Nash, Dirk and Bird have all proved that.

Allen and Miller are moreso catch and shoot guys, who come off screens and step right into their shots whereas Nash, Bird and Dirk can and did create off the dribble, pull up jumpshots, catch and shoot, basically more versatile shooters but Miller and Allen have the quicker releases and have been so consistent knocking down shots, Allen is closing in on Millers record for 3 pointers and it may only be 5-6 games away before he passes it, truly an amazing accomplishment.

Steve Nashs jumper is money

post gif here^

Reggie and Ray has played on bigger stages with more light

————–

This is what i am talking about. What stage was Reggie ever on? The only time he made it to the finals he was semi-washed up and Jalen freakin Rose was leading that team. Nash has been in just as many big games as Miller, but its kind of hard to play the Knicks when you are in the west.

You must have not watched when the Pacers played th Bulls and Knicks in the 90’s…. Those games were intense and high pressure, Miller had to go through arguably the two best teams in the league to make it to the finals (that’s prolly why it took him so long)….

 Yeah, during Reggie’s prime there was guy named Michael Jordan and this team called the Chicago Bulls that were extremely hard to get past.  Reggie was a very good player in his prime, you can’t knock the Pacers too much because the East was by far the stronger conference back then and the Pacers were always a tough and relvant opponent.

Big deal if the Bulls were ther. Its not like Indy ever got through them. Even the 7 gamer was in 98, against a semi washed up/drained MJ and Scottie, a totally washed up Rodman, and a Bulls team that was by far the oldest in the league. And they STILL lost. Nash has basically had the same impact in the west. It has been the superior conference, and he has matched up good with the elite, whether it be San Antonio, Dallas, or LA.