Top 10 players in NBA History

no, i dont just take espn's word for it. i think and analyze too. i know you're a laker fan, and you're sick and tired of your favorite player between criticized, but it's the truth. kobe did break them up, and it cant be denied. people didnt start hating him for nothing.

what do you mean by better player? that's too vague. do you mean athleticism or skill or finesse or what? because saying nash is just the most valuable on his team is not true. he has plently of skills. did you see him dribble pass defenders and throw a behind the back pass to his teammate, or make a spin move combined with a double crossover to create his open shot? he may be a pass first pg, but he scores a lot too. yeah, kobe can hit the fadeaway 3, because hes more athletic, and lebron and wade can drive dunk, because they're more athletic, and duncan can hit the bank, because hes the only one who practices it, but when you say "more ability," there are millions of abilities in basketball. you cant just say that kobe is better because hes more athletic or he can drive to the basket better. steve nash and kobe are completely different, but in my opinion, steve nash is more skilled than kobe. now, dont disagree and say kobe gets more rebounds or more points or more blocks or steals. thats because hes more athletic and taller and bigger and longer. if steve nash had kobe's body with the same skills, he would completely dominate.

btw, those laker members you mentioned all had career years, because they got more minutes, not because they played with kobe. smush parker, for instance, didnt play at all in detroit or phoenix, but STARTED for the lakers. mihm, too. you tell me, how does kobe trying to reach 81 points by himself make his teammates better? it makes them worse. they lose their confidence and hope. i bet if smush parker started for a different team, his stats would be even higher.

Not true i watch every Laker game and most of Smush Parker's points came from Kobe drawing the defense and kicking out to him for wide open threes. Brian Cook's pet play is the pick and pop which he runs with Kobe for a wide open jumper. Chris Mihm has got plenty of open looks from the attention Kobe draws, last season he improved his hands and finishing skills and averaged more pts as a result. Kobe would have averaged a whole lot more assists if he had better shooters than Sasha Vujacic to pass to, this season hopefully that will change with the addition of Vlade Rad.

Im not saying Kobe is a better player because he is more athletic, im saying it because he has a more complete game. His athleticism gives him an advantage but that could be said for Jordan, Dr J, Baylor, Wade, Bron, KG etc to. You cant just discount athleticism, its part of their game. Thats why Jordan will always be looked at as a better player than Bird. Kobe plays great defense, Nash doesnt. Nash may be a better and more willing passer but he also needs teammates who can convert, otherwise whats the point?

I have seriously done the Shaq and Kobe feud thing to death and i cant be bothered going over it again. I would suggest getting hold of the book "The Show" by Ronald Lazenby, it tells a very different story by someone who was there through the whole drama. Not some media hack who just wants to start controversy. Kobe is not blameless but to act like he was the only factor is naive.

Good to have a civil discussion about hoops though, even if we do have different views. Hopefully people dont mind that its off topic from the thread title.

Peace.

i know you cant just omit athleticism, but most of kobe's advantages come from pure athleticsm. kobe is not a better defender because of more knowledge of defense and better fundamentals or something...hes more athletic and can stay in front of quicker players. he has longer arms to steal the ball...he has more height to block the shot. Its like saying lebron is better than iverson because he gets more blocks more rebounds or even points, hypathetically. in my opinion, if iverson had lebron's body, he would be the most dominant player alive. on the contrary, if some centers were a little shorter and a little lighter, then they wouldnt even be in the nba. so you have to factor in all that. in my opinion, nash dribbles more efficiently and skillfully, passes to the right teammate at the right time with style, and shoots a better fg and 3pt fg and ft percentage than kobe. dont believe that stat? then check both their last seasons online. those are the only stats you can really compare between them, because height and athleticsm dont factor into it.

so if you're thinking, "who could win one on one," ok then kobe's better. but who's better 5 on 5 in a real nba game, nash. otherwise, you cant really compare apples to oranges. nash is pg, and kobe's a sg.

ok, i'll stop talking about the kobe vs. shaq thing.

nice debate man, and peace: no hard feelings between our arguments.

Kobe is one of the most fundamentally sound players in the league, offensively and defensively. For example look at his footwork on most of his post moves before he has to rely on his athleticism to get the shot off. That coupled with his athleticism makes him the best player in the league imo.
You cant say "if Nash was more athletic he would be the best" because he isnt. Like i said thats why its Jordan >>> Bird, because Bird was great fundamentally but Jordan was great fundamentally and athletically.
You may think that Nash is more valuable in a 5 on 5 game because he shares the ball more but thats his job, Kobe's is to score. If you put all the factors into what makes the best player in the NBA, Nash would not come out tops. He is a great player in the right system to maximise his skills.

Nash is fundamentally sound in a different way. he dribbles like his hands are ball magnets. he never puts his head down like kobe sometimes does and never tries to force a shot over a double team. instead, he knows where everybody is and when the defender thinks he has him cornered, nash, in the blink of an eye, is either wide open, or his teammate has the ball wide open. so, nash has great footwork, too. and his shooting stroke is almost flawless. you have to think about the position. nash doesnt guard the players who have the ball the most. but kobe, he guards guys like lebron, vince, wade, who are known for going one on one. so that factors into getting more steals, blocks, etc. nash is a pretty good defender too, but nobody sees him defend much.

you also have to look at the efficiency. nash's percentages are higher and turnovers are lower. he is also more consistent with his #s, while kobe scores 81 shooting at 50% one time and scores 51 at 27% another.

also you cant say that team success has nothing to do with who's the best player. that's why you and many others think jordan was the best, because he won 6 championships. teamwise, nash's crushes kobe's, and in terms of leadership, nash is 100x better. nash's teammates excel and follow his footsteps. kobe's however are on one path while hes on another. that's when he doesnt play well, his team bombs.

nash doesnt make fadeaways, because he doesnt need to shoot them. he finds a way to get either himself or his teammate open. also if you're going to omit nash's assists and say its his job is to dish and assist, im going to omit kobe's rebounds and blocks and say, with his athleticism, its kobe's job to rebound and block. if you dont want that then, oh yeah i forgot, nash kills kobe in assists.

First off defensively im not talking about steals and blocks, im talking about basic defense. Moving your feet and keeping your man in front, Nash has terrible lateral quickness and that will always make him a poor defender. Kobe is an elite perimeter defender due in part to his athleticism plus his skill level and desire to defend. If it was just athleticism then Bron, Wade, T-Mac and Carter would be lock down defenders to.

Nash actually averaged a shade over Kobe in TO's last year, but im not trying to use stats to prove my point. I personally think the best player should be determined by skill level and thats why i chose Kobe.
Im not denying Nash is a better teammate and looks to pass more or babysits Raja's kids, in terms of skill and ability he isnt in the top 5 players in the league imho.

The Suns are better than the Lakers, thats why they crush us. In the playoffs our gameplan was working until the Suns made a few adjustments to nullify our advantage in the post. In the end the better team wins in a seven game series and thats what happened. This all happened with Kobe playing more like Nash and distributing the ball, in the end the Suns had more potent weapons.

To me your argument is solid as to why Nash won the MVP, he lead his team (which is strong btw) to a great record and deep playoff run. But so did Brand, Dirk, Bron and especially Wade.
I just cant see how he is a better player than Kobe though, they both have their strengths offensively but defensively it isnt even close.

If you dont want me to use stats, team success, or leadership skills in my argument, then how do i prove that nash is better. previously you mentioned "better" player meaning more complete. if you asked me, i wouldnt say kobe is more complete, because there are millions of intangibles that go in nash's favor. you cant just say "kobe is good at offense and defense while nash is only good at offense, that makes kobe better." thats too simple and naive. then you said better means more skillful. again, i would go with nash. why? because your definition and my definition of "better" player are totally different. thats the only reason we're arguing right now. you have not admitted yet, but basically, your standard of "better" is "one on one" and yeah kobe would kill nash one on one. he has quicker feet to stay with his "man," only one man. and he has the skill and athleticsm to score. but to me, "most valuable player" and "best" player are interchangable. because real basketball is a 5 on 5 team sport, not one on one. so, team success and leadership must be included under my criteria.

i'll give kobe defense over nash, but your treating this one factor like it counts for 60% of your opinion. plus, nash is just as knowledgable and skillful as kobe at team defense. and why are the suns better than the lakers? where did the chemistry come from? not from marbury...yep, nash. talent wise, lakers=suns. but chemistry and unity wise, suns>lakers. to me, defense is the forgotten half of basketball when you're talking about team philosophy, but when you compare two players, its not nearly half. you said it, its about who has more skill. defense doesnt take much skill. its about quickness and desire. (thats why bruce bowen is great defender) and yep kobe is quicker and stronger and longer to keep up with his opponent. but if you're implying that kobe has more desire than nash, we're in for a LONG argument. nash's stats, team success, and respect didnt only come from talent and skill. no way jose. nash is one of the most determined, focused, and no-nonsense players in the nba.

at the same time, you're completely ignoring my arguments about efficiency and shooting percentages. and ok nash did average a fraction more turnovers last season, but career wise, nash has turned it over much less than kobe. so, i still dont clearly understand your definition of "better" player. but, from what you explained so far, it clearly shows you're talking about "one on one" and if thats the case, ok kobe's better. but under my standard, real basketball 5 on 5, with leadership, efficiency, team success, fundamentals, cohesiveness, no-nonsense, textbook basketball: nash>kobe

Bryant is a much better player than Nash.

Easy said and done.

Doesnt mean that Nash isnt an great player, just not as good as Bryant.
Nash didnt have an 87 assist game.

So by your definition would you say that Magic Johnson was better than Micheal Jordan? Because he was better in all those categories you mentioned.

No way the Suns and Lakers are equal talent wise, going by the playoffs last season:

Nash > Parker
Kobe > Bell
Diaw > Walton
Odom = Marion
Thomas > Brown

Thats 3 out of 5 going to the Suns and 1 even. The Lakers bench is not even worth mentioning outside of George and Turiaf (who was a rookie).

Its quite obvious that we are using different criteria for judging who is the best player, which is fine as neither of us is an authority on the matter - its just our opinion. For me they have an equal amount of skills offensively albeit different, so if that balances them out i turn to the other side of the ball - defense.
You obviously value contributions to the team more and i can see your point, but Jordan was still a better player than Magic (coming from a Laker fan thats hard to say) before he won his first title in 91 because he was a great defender.

Like i say its all opinions and im not trying to change your mind, the question was raised when you asked me who i thought was the best player in the league - Kobe is still my answer, for the reasons i have gone over.

Nice debate though man, its nice to have another fan around that knows their hoops.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Bryant is a much better player than Nash.

Easy said and done.

Doesnt mean that Nash isnt an great player, just not as good as Bryant.
Nash didnt have an 87 assist game.

what the hell are you talking about? are you drunk? who in the world had an 87 assist basketball game. also, when it comes to assists, NASH BEATS KOBE, end of story. at least kool and i had backup to prove our point. "Easy said and done," no it is not easy said and done, thats the whole point of this thread. its to discuss with facts and evidence, not to be subjective and just say, "kobe's better cause i said so."

this is to koolruningz:

ok, then i guess our opinions cant really be compared. so, to conclude, awesome conversation. it's been a pleasure. and maybe we can begin a new debate.

about magic vs. jordan, it may sound ridiculous to you, but to me its close. i mean jordan to me was the most popular obviously because everyone knows his name. he was the most clutch by far. and ok, i'll give him defense over magic. but as i told you my standard, magic strides under it.

im a person thats not mainstream. (and im not saying that you are) but you know kobe, lebron, jordan, etc. alota mainstream typical fans say they are the best without looking deeper and proving it. and indeed, i do think nash is better, but i totally respect your opinion cause you suplied your evidence and details. i just hate it when people say "A" is better than "B" because of all the hype.

about the lakers vs. suns, ok the suns have more talent, but the lakers have alot more height. you cant deny that.

Nothing would make me happier than Magic to be considered the GOAT, he is certainly my favourite player and the reason i started following the Lakers in the early 80's. That title goes to Jordan though, for the same reasons i pick Kobe over Nash.

Also if i was swayed by the hype bandwagon i'd be singing Wade's praises to whoever would listen, cause he is definitely the media darling right now. Kobe is the opposite, some of that he has brought on himself - some is unwarranted.

Lastly i wouldnt dream of saying the Suns had more height than the Lakers, that was the focus of the Lakers gameplan. But that height advantage means nothing when you dont have big men who can convert (yes Kwame "Stone Hands" Brown im talking about you). Odom was having a great series until the Suns starting sending double teams at him in the post, Mihm was injured and Brian Cook is not an inside player.

Anyway it was fun debating with you, hope to see you around when the season starts up again.

Originally posted by RecSpecs110
what the hell are you talking about? are you drunk? who in the world had an 87 assist basketball game. also, when it comes to assists, NASH BEATS KOBE, end of story. at least kool and i had backup to prove our point. "Easy said and done," no it is not easy said and done, thats the whole point of this thread. its to discuss with facts and evidence, not to be subjective and just say, "kobe's better cause i said so."

Ummm yeah, its called a joke. Obviously nonbody had 87 assists, but Bryant had 81 points which is amazing while Nash, in respective stats never had an amazing assits game, which he is known for.

Second, Nash was never considered an great player until 2 years ago. He wasnt even well known in the mainstream fan base until he came onto the Suns. So how would he be considered the Top 10.

Nash is a great player no doubt about it and its worty of being called the Top 10 best players in the league...but in history? Yea right.
He hasnt won any championships and hasnt been dominate all of his career.

I love seeing Nash play and as an Canadian, I'm proud that he won two MVP's, but I dont think he is in the Top 10 of all time and its pretty ridicolous to think he should be in the same league as Jordon and others.

Unless your arguing that he is the best player....which he still isnt. A great player but not the best.

yeah, that joke was so funny i forgot to laugh.

you must be lost or something because we werent talking about nash being the best of all time, what are you crazy? we were talking about who's better: kobe or nash. and no, your simple analysis is not going to convince me. one 81 point game doesnt mean anything to this debate. i already admitted that kobe kills nash in scoring. plus, its alot harder to have an extreme assist night, because your teammate has to make the shot in order for it to count. its alot different from scoring, where you can have an off shooting night, but still go to the line 20 times and score 40 points.

I dont really care if its an simple analysis, its true. Or I can just spout useless stats to make a complex analysis. It doesnt matter.

I didnt realized it was just between both. But it doesnt matter, the fact remains I still think Bryant is a better player.

Better scorer, more dominate, better skilled, better all around basketball player and he has proven himself for the past 10 years as one of the best players. Do I have to go into detail about something that is already an fact?

Nash is the best PG, but until recently, he was just a very good point guard.

Also, you say its very hard to get an extreme assist night, but couldnt you say, its very easy to get an extreme assist night if the team is on fire?

A high scorer is all about the scorer. He makes the plays, he shoots the ball and he beats defenders.

I think Nash is a great player and he deserved the MVP's, but overall, I still think Bryant is the better basketball player.

i think kobe is a better player.... but i tell you what.. you ask players around the league who they prefer on their team? nash.

kobe is far more athletic, better defender and offensively scoring much better. but nash brings amazing passing, decent getting to the basket ability and good shooting to the table.

kobe is a better player, but i'd prefer nash on my team for what he brings and how he improves everyone he plays with

Oh yea, but thats right, but thats not really the issue.

It's who's better at playing basketball.

i guess it depends what you value most as a person. someone who can score on anyone and dominate games with scoring and good defence, or someone who can make any player look good with deft passing and the ability to score if team-mates cant get it going.

If your making an team.

But Nash is pointless to have if he doesnt have a guy like Kobe Bryant to score. The end result in basketball is getting the ball through the hope, and no matter how good the PG is...you still need some decent scorers.

Nash has Stoudmire, Marion and an boatload of good shooters, if he didnt have them, he is useless. Nash is a good scorer, but not good enough to consistently win games with shooting.

Kobe Bryant on the other hand can score any time he wants too.

And that's why I think he is better basketball player than Nash.

And you post didnt really paint a good picture for Nash.

Originally posted by Smasandian
If your making an team.

But Nash is pointless to have if he doesnt have a guy like Kobe Bryant to score. The end result in basketball is getting the ball through the hope, and no matter how good the PG is...you still need some decent scorers.

Nash has Stoudmire, Marion and an boatload of good shooters, if he didnt have them, he is useless. Nash is a good scorer, but not good enough to consistently win games with shooting.

Kobe Bryant on the other hand can score any time he wants too.

And that's why I think he is better basketball player than Nash.

And you post didnt really paint a good picture for Nash.

Not true, nash doesnt need someone like bryant. look what nash did to boris diaw, who in my opinion, is not a really good player. he made him the most improved, and hello? amare didnt play at all last year expect a couple of games. look at the suns without amare last year. only marion was a decent player. the reason the suns were so good at shooting was because nash passed to them at the right time to get an open look. yes, any player shoots better uncontested than contested. so, nash is a better player, and as i said about a million times to kool, my definition of better player and your definition are probably different. "nash is pointless," gimme a break, have you watched his games? he can do alot more than dish the ball. i dont want to explain everything to you that i already explained to kool, so nash>kobe.