http://www.nbaintelligence.com/content. ... Underrated
Despite his prolonged success with so many different teammates, Steve Nash is still bombarded with criticisms of being some sort of “system” player. Some go as far as asserting that Nash’s teams are inherently flawed because of their offensive slant, and as a result they never win.
Look at Nash this year, at the tender age of 116. (Actual age: 37.) He's led a ragtag group to the 7th best offense in the league (110.1 Offensive Rating, 3.1 points better than average). Slightly ahead of his "system" coach, Mike D'Antoni, in New York. According to 82games, his team is about 17 points better with him in the game.
So, unless we think that his mere presence on the court demands a style to be run through him which literally causes his team’s defense to struggle, I don’t understand how
(a) running into better teams (eg Duncan’s Spurs) or
(b) never being given adequate defensive pieces
is an indictment of Steve Nash’s offense.
Besides Nash being on and “running’ the best offenses in NBA history (both in Dallas and Phoenix), we can also simply watch a basketball game and see whether such an assertion is plausible.
Maybe Nash’s great offenses are because he cherry picks and puts his team at a defensive disadvantage? Maybe Nash’s great offenses are because he inherently requires offensive players who aren’t good at defense?
I’ve seen a lot of basketball — too much, according to many — and I see absolutely no indication of any of these negatives when I watch Steve Nash play. To address the big points often levied against him:
