Allen Iverson vs Steve Nash - Build a New Team Around

[big123]

This is a really tough question, but I'd have to take Nash. He just makes everyone around him so much better, and as we have seen, he can make some guys that are virtual scrubs look like superstars.

I agree, but in Dallas we wasn't as spectacular. I don't think scrubs into superstars is valid. We was put in a pretty good run and gun system, in PHO with good finishers and that fits his style of play to a tee.

I think Nash makes players better, but I also think players also make Nash look good as well. I think it's more of a mutual thing.

Iverson can put his team on his back and carry them, while Nash cannot.

[penbeast0]

I think it is more accurate to say that Iverson has carried the main scoring load for his team while Nash hasn't.

I'd be surprised to find that if Nash shot as much as Iverson did in his pre-2003 days (which very few coaches would let ANY player do), that he wouldn't produce better. Iverson has improved a lot since and now is a good producer, but hardly carries the Nuggets on his back even to the degree that Nash does for the Suns.

[Doctor MJ]

-= original quote snipped =-



I think that '05 team would have had a much better chance to beat San Antonio with Iverson over Nash mainly because of Iverson's scoring.

Really don't get the reasoning there. No matter how you look at it, Iverson is not a high percentage shooter, so if you can get the ball to guys like Stoudemire who are, you do so.

To me this is relatively simple: Got good scoring options, pick Nash, he'll utilize them. Don't have good scoring options, pick Iverson, and have the rest of the guys focus on rebounding and defense. Of course where Nash gets the advantage is that there are very few players in the NBA who can't score when given the ball while they're open.

[Malinhion]

Don't have good scoring options, pick Iverson, and have the rest of the guys focus on rebounding and defense.

This is why I pick Iverson. It's much easier to have him as a franchise cornerstone and then add rebounders and defenders around him. They are the type of guys that can usually be found in free agency or added for the MLE.

When you've got money committed to Nash as a franchise player, good luck luring the type of scoring options that will actually help him excel. He's just not the better option to *start* a franchise with.

[Doctor MJ]

-= original quote snipped =-



This is why I pick Iverson. It's much easier to have him as a franchise cornerstone and then add rebounders and defenders around him. They are the type of guys that can usually be found in free agency or added for the MLE.

When you've got money committed to Nash as a franchise player, good luck luring the type of scoring options that will actually help him excel. He's just not the better option to *start* a franchise with.

This is where I'd disagree. You seem to think scoring is the toughest skill to find, I think it's the easiest. Sure it's hard to find someone who can score like Iverson, but it's a lot easier to find a guy who can hit an open shot than find rebounders and defenders. Hence why Iverson has spent most of his career on teams with mediocre success (if it were easy to find rebounders and defenders, the Sixers would have had them at all times).