RealGM

Do they do better or worse and why?

About the same. Curry draws more defensive attention, but Nash's vision, ability to maestro an offense and create for others with the ball in his hands really made those teams go. I don't know that Curry could do those things to the same extent, although like I said, he'd make up for it in other ways.

A lot beter because they'd shoot a lot more 3s. In the modern NBA the 2005 Suns would be towards the bottom of the league in terms of 3 point attempts at only 24 a game. Throw Steph Curry on that roster and they can up that to 30+. No team in 2005 would be prepared to handle an offense shooting 30-40 3s a game at a high percentage.

Better because Curry is better than Nash.

Worse. Nash is a better playmaker and their offense was fine. They needed defense.

what about 2005 Nash playing in 2017 era with that team. He used to shoot a lot of midrange jumpers that he wouldn't know.

Steph and Booker would be cool. They would be better because Steph instantly creates space on the floor for everyone he plays with. It's not a mere coincidence.

Nash was insane passer, I would say worse

These Suns teams had offense as efficient as today's Warriors, but it was centered on Nash's ability to orchestrate and create for others. I think they would be worse but it's only a matter of fit, as Curry wouldnt be able to replicate that, not him being a lesser player.

Nash was a better passer, but I think some here are really underestimating Curry's passing ability. He isn't just a Westbrook type passer. He's very good at passing with either hand, drawing the defence like Nash did, throwing flashy passes etc.

Nash didn't turn the ball over as much as Curry did in 2004-05 but his usage rate wasn't as high as Curry's.

Curry is still a very good passer, and right as he has matured as a player and more specifically a passer Kerr came and implemented an offence that leads to a lot more hockey assists from Steph rather than actual assists.

Steph's scoring is also far better than Nash's and defensively he's better than Nash.

Steph makes that team better.

Worse

Do people remember that same Suns team with Marbury instead of Nash went 29-53 the previous year with the same team?

Nash's all-time great playmaking and passing was EVERYTHING for that team. Even when they missed Amare the next year they hardly missed a beat.

And people forget Nash was one of the greatest shooters ever in his own right. If he played today, he would be averaging in the 20s for sure and taking at least twice as many threes.

Nash is one of my all time favs but I can't even imagine what DAntonie would do for Curry

We know what he did for
Nash
Lin
Harden

Worse, The offense relied on Nash's play-making almost exclusively.

Better.

Much better.

Not only is curry better than nash, he is also much younger than nash was.

Well LeBron with the Bulls team would have been better

Curry is no where near the passer Nash was. Nash is a top 3 passer ever at worst. That teams problem was not offense at all. Nash spoon feed his teams. I am being literal here. They may as well have worn bibs. Every single player during that time who left the suns never had close to the production they had with Nash. Joe Johnson is the exception since he left with one year with Nash having his best season to that point and his most efficient of his career and was a young player but never had as much team success. Best case is they stay even because you take away all time great play making for all time great shooter. Defense was their issue and Curry does not help with that.

TMoney99 wrote:Do they do better or worse and why?

Worse, Curry is no where the distributor Nash was.

Nash - legendary passer and shooter

Curry - legendary shooter

The gap between their shooting/scoring is a hell of a lot smaller than their passing.