Where would Peak Steve Nash rank today?

[Matt15]

Where would Peak Nash rank in todays league overall?

[One_and_Done]

Top 5. Might be top 3 tbh.

[jalengreen]

Think I'd lean putting him 4 behind jokic shai giannis

[lessthanjake]

I think he would be knocking on the door of top 3, but am not certain he would be. Offensively, he’d be up there with Jokic, but a lot would depend on how bad his defensive impact would be. In his own era, he gave back considerable impact on that end. If he did that in this era too, then someone like Giannis would probably be above him. But maybe his defense would translate better (or less badly) to this era?

[Texas Chuck]

His defense is a much bigger problem today than it was then, and Mike Bibby owning him 3 years in a row in the playoffs shows its was already more of a problem than we discuss here because we love him.

Can he be more effective offensively today than Luka? If yes, okay he's a top 5 guy. I have some doubts about that, and he'd be notably worse on defense than Luka. Luka is big, rebounds great, and in the playoffs gives consistent effort. Nash? Big question mark.

Now, Nash has talked in recent years about how if he had it to do again, he'd be much more aggressive as a scorer. So if we got super helio Nash also looking to use his elite shooting more? Makes a much more interesting debate. The question is how physically capable of that he would be? His back might not allow that kind of workload.

IDK, I'd lean top 10, but not top 5, but I mean potentially he's the best offensive player not named Jokic in the league. That's definitely a possibility.

[Peregrine01]

I think Nash, like Curry in the mid-2010s, was ahead of his time which was a reason for his outlier offensive impact during that era. If he was transplanted to today, I don't think he'd have the same level of impact. But his GOAT-level shooting and GOAT-level vision and passing will have him vying for the best offensive player in the league title next to Jokic. His defense would be more glaring though so I think overall I'd have him in the top 10 compared to the top-5 level player that he was in his prime.

[Hook_Em]

His defense is a much bigger problem today than it was then, and Mike Bibby owning him 3 years in a row in the playoffs shows its was already more of a problem than we discuss here because we love him.

Can he be more effective offensively today than Luka? If yes, okay he's a top 5 guy. I have some doubts about that, and he'd be notably worse on defense than Luka. Luka is big, rebounds great, and in the playoffs gives consistent effort. Nash? Big question mark.

Now, Nash has talked in recent years about how if he had it to do again, he'd be much more aggressive as a scorer. So if we got super helio Nash also looking to use his elite shooting more? Makes a much more interesting debate. The question is how physically capable of that he would be? His back might not allow that kind of workload.

IDK, I'd lean top 10, but not top 5, but I mean potentially he's the best offensive player not named Jokic in the league. That's definitely a possibility.

Depends on the team. See his impact on Dallas vs his impact in Phoenix. Ideally you have 1-2 high level defenders that can help him out. Tony Parker’s defense didn’t stop the Spurs from winning multiple titles because Duncan and Bowen were high level defenders. Later Kawhi.

[lessthanjake]

I think Nash, like Curry in the mid-2010s, was ahead of his time which was a reason for his outlier offensive impact during that era. If he was transplanted to today, I don't think he'd have the same level of impact. But his GOAT-level shooting and GOAT-level vision and passing will have him vying for the best offensive player in the league title next to Jokic. His defense would be more glaring though so I think overall I'd have him in the top 10 compared to the top-5 level player that he was in his prime.

IMO, this is the best argument that people make against Nash. I think there’s definitely truth to it. When it comes to evaluating him in general, I tend to not care about this, because my view is that being ahead of your time is part of being great. But in a time-machine discussion, it becomes a lot more relevant. What I will say, though, is that Nash wasn’t *that* ahead of his time. While those Suns were ahead of the curve, they were definitely still working within the artificial constraints of the era. If Nash played today, I think he’d shoot *a lot* more threes (which is great, since he was one of the best shooters ever), and his team would have far more spacing for him to operate in. In other words, if he played today, I think he and his team would still play *far* more optimally than they did in Nash’s own era, and Nash would be essentially a perfect fit for today’s offenses. I don’t think we can assume he’d be ahead of his time today (and we naturally don’t even know what that would involve), but he definitely would squeeze much more out of his own playstyle than he did back then, and would definitely be an extremely good fit for today.

In fact, I actually think there’s an argument that he might fit more optimally in today’s era than he did in his own era, even without having the ahead-of-his-time advantage. And that’s due to team-building constraints being different. He was definitely ahead of his time offensively in his own era. But the problem back then was that, in order to play the style of offense Nash wanted to play, you really had to give up a lot defensively. This is because Nash wanted to have as many shooters as possible on the court, but very few big men in that era could shoot. And the ones that could shoot were generally very bad defenders. So there wasn’t really a realistic option to build a team around Nash’s optimal offensive style, without opening up gaping defensive flaws. In this era, that’s not really the case. Nash could actually pretty easily be provided with offensive spacing *and* good defensive big men. In that sense, even if he might not be ahead of the curve as much on offense in this era, I think it would probably be easier to build a great team around him overall.

[Texas Chuck]

I don’t think we can assume he’d be ahead of his time today.

As seen in the Russell thread, we all make our own assumptions based on what's most logical to us. For me the idea of a player getting to another era via time machine is silly, so I always assume they were born in a year to land them in that new era, thus I have different assumptions from a time machine poster.

As to guys who were basketball geniuses like Steve Nash obviously was, I tend to assume on some level they still will be. Now he has the disadvantage of teams having learned from he and Dirk/Nellie and he and MDA and being further along, but my guess is he still manages to stay ahead of most. In the way we've seen Harden and Paul and Luka all do since Nash in their own ways.

Nash himself talks about how if he had it to do again he would look for his own offense more. I don't know that physically he can handle a massive usage rate the way many of the top lead guards do now, but this was a guy whose offenses were best in the league every single year. I'd guess his offenses in the 20's would be right at the top as well. And could he have more 05 2nd round series if he were looking to score like he did against his old club? That's a game change because that guy can carry you to a title.

My questions would be, would he stop the party lifestyle before 30 in an alt universe? If he does, then the sky is probably the limit. If not, he's not like Luka who can kill you out of shape. Nash wasn't a killer until he finally got his body right. And how does he hold up physically. The back is going to be the back and he was a smaller guy. Curry held up, but he's both thicker and has a different game that requires more cardio and less ability to withstand blows.

[lessthanjake]

I don’t think we can assume he’d be ahead of his time today.

As seen in the Russell thread, we all make our own assumptions based on what's most logical to us. For me the idea of a player getting to another era via time machine is silly, so I always assume they were born in a year to land them in that new era, thus I have different assumptions from a time machine poster.

As to guys who were basketball geniuses like Steve Nash obviously was, I tend to assume on some level they still will be. Now he has the disadvantage of teams having learned from he and Dirk/Nellie and he and MDA and being further along, but my guess is he still manages to stay ahead of most. In the way we've seen Harden and Paul and Luka all do since Nash in their own ways.

Nash himself talks about how if he had it to do again he would look for his own offense more. I don't know that physically he can handle a massive usage rate the way many of the top lead guards do now, but this was a guy whose offenses were best in the league every single year. I'd guess his offenses in the 20's would be right at the top as well. And could he have more 05 2nd round series if he were looking to score like he did against his old club? That's a game change because that guy can carry you to a title.

My questions would be, would he stop the party lifestyle before 30 in an alt universe? If he does, then the sky is probably the limit. If not, he's not like Luka who can kill you out of shape. Nash wasn't a killer until he finally got his body right. And how does he hold up physically. The back is going to be the back and he was a smaller guy. Curry held up, but he's both thicker and has a different game that requires more cardio and less ability to withstand blows.

Yeah, I’m certainly not saying he wouldn’t be ahead of most players or that he wouldn’t be a very high basketball IQ player in this era. I’m essentially certain that he would be. I just mean that I don’t think we can assume he’d be a genuine pioneer of a new and superior style of basketball, like he was in his own era. You need a high basketball IQ to do that and I’m not concerned that Nash lacks on that front, but I also think you need to be a bit fortuitous—since some of it is just a right-place-right-time thing, where the better way of playing at the time happens to align with a player’s skill set.

[OhayoKD]

I don’t think we can assume he’d be ahead of his time today.

As seen in the Russell thread, we all make our own assumptions based on what's most logical to us. For me the idea of a player getting to another era via time machine is silly, so I always assume they were born in a year to land them in that new era.

In which case they're almost certainly not making the league.

I don't really get why "time machine is silly" folks turn around and go full fan-fiction inventing a new human and then assuming they'll turn out the same.

[Elpolo_14]

Nash ability to playmake and Creator of an All time Offense would translate to this Era of NBA. His Scoring Efficiency at that time would Also be more prominent with the new Spacing and new style of more prerimeter offense would benefit how Steve Nash was elite as a mid volume Hight efficiency Scorer.

He would be below
- Jokic ( also all time offense with better ATG Floor. Also a ATG scorer in term of effectiveness everywhere on the floor.
- Below SGA with GOAT tier scoring ability with High volume High efficient with ability to score in any situation and with any teammates on the floor. Also ATG ceiling rising for the OKC
- BELOW Giannis because of his dominance downhill attacker and effective around the rim at All time rate and still being an Elite defensive anchor for his team
- Below Healthy Luka with his VERY VERY HIGH VOLUME SCORING and still ATG Playmaking ability

[One_and_Done]

I don’t think we can assume he’d be ahead of his time today.

As seen in the Russell thread, we all make our own assumptions based on what's most logical to us. For me the idea of a player getting to another era via time machine is silly, so I always assume they were born in a year to land them in that new era.

In which case they're almost certainly not making the league.

I don't really get why "time machine is silly" folks turn around and go full fan-fiction inventing a new human and then assuming they'll turn out the same.

If anything the time machine is less speculative, because with the alternative both the player and the situation are fictional. With the time machine only one is.

[70sFan]

So another time machine discussion.. Well I said it before many times - if you don't like getting too speculative then you either shouldn't participate in such discussions or you should assume that a player would go without any preparation straight to the basketball game. The second assumption would lead us to players failing to do anything relevant, because they don't know the rules, strategies or even his potential teammates, not to mention they'd be shocked by the world surrounding them.

So yeah, every single time machine argument requires a lot of speculation, that's just how it is.