It's June 16, 2024, 07:18:25 AM
Quote from: Now_I_Know on May 10, 2007, 05:44:56 PM^That's why you've been able to come up with legit arguments, correct? LOL. Come on now...How is Parker not on Nash's level? Dude has rings, he's one of the best offensive small guys in the league, and the most efficient. On top of that, unlike Nash, he plays both ends of the court...Even the media, who is known to ride Nash's dick more than all of Canada combined, wouldn't say it's absurd to compare Nash and Parker...Nash is not a top player in the league IMO. Get over it. I've made valid points. If you wanna counter my points with points of your own, go ahead...But I'll stick to believing Nash did not transform into an MVP caliber player at the age of 31 due to a trade into a system which made Boris Diaw's stats look like he was woth $10 million a year... Again, shh.Parker isn't the reason the Spurs won any titles. A few years ago the Spurs pursued Jason Kidd...and they already had Tony Parker...that should say something.Your opinions don't matter because you take what the guys on PTI or Around the Horn say and mix it together to make your valid opinions. Parker shows signs of greatness, but lacks consistency. Sometimes he just disappears when the Spurs need him...but you wouldn't see that from Sportscenter, so you wouldn't know.Nash's defense is weak, but his offense is more powerful than Parkers by far. Besides, Parker has two guys backing him that some may say are pretty good at defense, Bowen and Duncan. Now, I know these two guys are no Lamar Odom or Smush Parker, but they can hold there own on defense. **Because you are a moron, I will tell you I am being sarcastic, this will stop any confusion on your part**And speaking about rings, you take Duncan away from the Spurs they barely make the playoffs, if they make it all...The first title: Duncan and RobinsonThe second title: Duncan with help from his supporting castThe third title: See aboveParker isn't considered a top tier PG by anybody...except of course, you.Billups, Kidd, Nash are the top three PG's in the league. Everybody in the league would take these three above Parker.And, as is your fashion, let's take a look at stats...PPGNash/Parker - 18.6FG PctNash - 53.2Parker - 52.03 PTNash - 45.5Parker - 39.5FT Nash - 89.9Parker - 78.3AstNash - 11.6Parker - 5.5
^That's why you've been able to come up with legit arguments, correct? LOL. Come on now...How is Parker not on Nash's level? Dude has rings, he's one of the best offensive small guys in the league, and the most efficient. On top of that, unlike Nash, he plays both ends of the court...Even the media, who is known to ride Nash's dick more than all of Canada combined, wouldn't say it's absurd to compare Nash and Parker...Nash is not a top player in the league IMO. Get over it. I've made valid points. If you wanna counter my points with points of your own, go ahead...But I'll stick to believing Nash did not transform into an MVP caliber player at the age of 31 due to a trade into a system which made Boris Diaw's stats look like he was woth $10 million a year...
Quote from: Now_I_Know on May 10, 2007, 05:44:56 PM^That's why you've been able to come up with legit arguments, correct? LOL. Come on now...How is Parker not on Nash's level? Dude has rings, he's one of the best offensive small guys in the league, and the most efficient. On top of that, unlike Nash, he plays both ends of the court...Even the media, who is known to ride Nash's dick more than all of Canada combined, wouldn't say it's absurd to compare Nash and Parker...Nash is not a top player in the league IMO. Get over it. I've made valid points. If you wanna counter my points with points of your own, go ahead...But I'll stick to believing Nash did not transform into an MVP caliber player at the age of 31 due to a trade into a system which made Boris Diaw's stats look like he was woth $10 million a year... Here's the thing: It is NOT about what you "believe", get it? Who care if you refuse to believe Nash got better. And did you watch him in Dallas before he was traded. Obviously he had improved being that Phoenix ( a team who traded him for nothing early in his career) threw a shitload of money at him. As for the turnovers, its not about how many turnovers, its about ASSIST TO TURNOVER RATIO. Even you must know that Nik. Aprox:Nash- 3 to 1Parker 2 to 1HUGE DIFFERENCE.
Quote from: teecee on May 11, 2007, 12:30:28 AMQuote from: Now_I_Know on May 10, 2007, 05:44:56 PM^That's why you've been able to come up with legit arguments, correct? LOL. Come on now...How is Parker not on Nash's level? Dude has rings, he's one of the best offensive small guys in the league, and the most efficient. On top of that, unlike Nash, he plays both ends of the court...Even the media, who is known to ride Nash's dick more than all of Canada combined, wouldn't say it's absurd to compare Nash and Parker...Nash is not a top player in the league IMO. Get over it. I've made valid points. If you wanna counter my points with points of your own, go ahead...But I'll stick to believing Nash did not transform into an MVP caliber player at the age of 31 due to a trade into a system which made Boris Diaw's stats look like he was woth $10 million a year... Here's the thing: It is NOT about what you "believe", get it? Who care if you refuse to believe Nash got better. And did you watch him in Dallas before he was traded. Obviously he had improved being that Phoenix ( a team who traded him for nothing early in his career) threw a shitload of money at him. As for the turnovers, its not about how many turnovers, its about ASSIST TO TURNOVER RATIO. Even you must know that Nik. Aprox:Nash- 3 to 1Parker 2 to 1HUGE DIFFERENCE. The thing is, he DIDN'T improve. HE WAS 31! He got traded into a system that suited his game better. One where he can run, rum, run, dribble, pass, and shoot, without running any real set plays. The media and people who can't see past stats are the ones fooled into thinking he's suddenly an all-time great now...And the thing about the turnovers was to show that Phoenix's system inflates EVERY STAT, not just points, rebounds, and assists. Tony Parker vs. Steve Nash 1-on-1. Do you really think that would be a bad match-up? Come on, now...
Tony Parker is simply the better player. He knows what it takes to win. He's been an MVP candidate. He's been considered the best player on the Spurs. He's led the league in FG% as a point guard. He plays in a real basketball system. None of my arguments are "ridiculous"...IMO, it's ridiculous to think Nash is worthy of being a 3-time consecutive MVP.
Quote from: Now_I_Know on May 11, 2007, 11:43:09 AMTony Parker is simply the better player. He knows what it takes to win. He's been an MVP candidate. He's been considered the best player on the Spurs. He's led the league in FG% as a point guard. He plays in a real basketball system. None of my arguments are "ridiculous"...IMO, it's ridiculous to think Nash is worthy of being a 3-time consecutive MVP.You are a friggin retard man. Why are you trying to make points like "he's been an MVP candidate" when you already know Nash is the 2 time MVP. "Hes been the best player on the Spurs" ...buddy everyone knows that Tim Duncan is the franchise and the best player on the spurs. "He plays in a real basketball system" LMAO you are a fucking joke man
I'd take Tony Parker over Steve Nash for my Lakers.