RealGM

I think most of us agree to an extent that chris paul is the best point guard in the league today, but this comparison is not about him.

I would take Nash right now and probably next year, but after that it will be Deron as it should be.

And as a side note, how long do you guys think Nash can play at a high level?
I think Nash can continue playing at high level for the next 2 years, then a noticeable drop-off in production will gradually be noticed.

Seeing as how good shooters tend to stay effective as long as they're still able to move, and how Nash is having (yet another) historical shooting season, I'd give him another five years. Even at the twilight of his career, he'll still be a dead-on shooter and won't forget how to pass. He'll go out still effective. Maybe not as effective as he is now, but still someone you can't leave open at the end of games.

Optimism Prime wrote:Seeing as how good shooters tend to stay effective as long as they're still able to move, and how Nash is having (yet another) historical shooting season, I'd give him another five years. Even at the twilight of his career, he'll still be a dead-on shooter and won't forget how to pass. He'll go out still effective. Maybe not as effective as he is now, but still someone you can't leave open at the end of games.

This is a good point. Look at Sammy C, he was never the shooter or ball-handler Nash is now and he is still a valued commodity at age 200.

How long Nash plays will largely be up to him. He will be valuable as a guy that can hit half of his 3s and bring the ball up (not to mention, he'll be a great mentor to a younger pg and a de-facto assistant coach) but he might not want to do that considering his back condition and competitiveness.

Optimism Prime wrote:Seeing as how good shooters tend to stay effective as long as they're still able to move, and how Nash is having (yet another) historical shooting season, I'd give him another five years. Even at the twilight of his career, he'll still be a dead-on shooter and won't forget how to pass. He'll go out still effective. Maybe not as effective as he is now, but still someone you can't leave open at the end of games.

5 more years as an effective PG, or 5 more years as a better PG than Deron? I agree that he'll be effective for 5 more years, but I think Deron overtakes him next year as the #2 PG in the league (he's extremely close already).

This is probably as good of a place as any to get some proponents of Deron. Can someone tell me why his +/- is negligible? I've got a tough time really looking at him as an MVP candidate level player when his team isn't dropping off when he's on the bench.

So yeah, Nash.

Doctor MJ wrote:This is probably as good of a place as any to get some proponents of Deron. Can someone tell me why his +/- is negligible? I've got a tough time really looking at him as an MVP candidate level player when his team isn't dropping off when he's on the bench.

So yeah, Nash.

Thats the Jazz having a terrific bench. Nothing less.

The only thing Nash has over Deron right now veteran knowledge of the game.

I honestly think Deron is as good or better at every other aspect of the game.

Batronuj wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Thats the Jazz having a terrific bench. Nothing less.

The only thing Nash has over Deron right now veteran knowledge of the game.

I honestly think Deron is as good or better at every other aspect of the game.

Okay well dude you realize the Jazz don't have light years better record than the Suns right? That's because despite the fact that the Jazz are doing way, way better with Deron off the court than the Suns are with Nash off the court, the Suns are doing a lot better with Nash on the court than how the Jazz are doing with Deron on the court.

You may have a good explanation for this, but what you've offered thus far most definitely isn't it I'm afraid.

Nash is still better as of now. Dwill should be better pretty soon.

OP had it right.

Nash for the rest of the season, but I'll probably take Deron next season

Batronuj wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Thats the Jazz having a terrific bench. Nothing less.

The only thing Nash has over Deron right now veteran knowledge of the game.

I honestly think Deron is as good or better at every other aspect of the game.

How is Deron a better shooter than Nash?

The thing you have to realize about Deron's +/- rating is that the Jazz's play doesn't really drop off when any of their starters, except for AK (for some reason), are out. That's because, a lot of games, they create or build upon a lead when their bench, which is a lot better than most second units in the league, is in. I'm not sure I'd read too much into Deron's +/- rating, since if you've ever watched him, you know that he's really, really good and, if you've ever watched the Jazz play without him for a whole game, you know that they're really bad without him.

Let me be clear: Deron's a great player. I don't mean to imply anything less.

Now look, I know that Jazz do well with the bench in general. This is why we've heard so many people say they have the best bench in the league. I think people need to understand then that there's only so much credit to go around. If the Jazz bench is doing more than other team benches, then Jazz starters are doing less than other team starters on comparably successful teams. This doesn't mean that the stars of the Jazz aren't great players, but concluding that they aren't quite as impressive as their counterparts on comparable teams shouldn't be considered anything like a surprise.

As I've said, there may be an explanation for this stuff I'm not aware of, but the answer has not been given. Fact of the matter is that virtually every MVP candidate you can think lifts his team glaringly when he's on the court, and Deron's difference is not so obvious statistically. There has to be a reason, and simply saying his backups are better than other people's won't cut it.

Here's a hypothesis that Jazz experts can speak to: Does Sloan play his players in extremely chaotic combos? If not, can you think of anything weird about Deron's rotation?

Well... Boozer, Brewer, and AK stay longer, and AK can run the offense at a very high precision.

The Jazz sans Deron are no one, and big part of the big time bench production is because Deron starts usually the last quarters with almost all the bench loaded with the exception of Okur.

I would say Deron is doing much better. Nash is detrimental to their team on Defense while Deron is definetly top 5 guard defender with Billups, Bryant, Davis, and Ginobli.

Doctor MJ wrote:L]

Here's a hypothesis that Jazz experts can speak to: Does Sloan play his players in extremely chaotic combos? If not, can you think of anything weird about Deron's rotation?

One reason could be that Sloan likes to take Deron out of the game fairly early, and put him back with many of the bench players early in the 2nd quarter to run that unit. I would say he spends the most time out of any of the Jazz starters playing with bench players as opposed to other starters.

Nash certainly has the better on court +/- . but Deron actually has a better Production +/- .

I would take Dwill at this point in time.

I'd take Deron.

Deron's a bigger guard, better defensively, an almost equal shooter, and younger.

I also think he could duplicate the success of Nash if he was in phoenix. Not from day 1 but i mean if you swapped the two today i don't think Phoenix would miss a beat.

Man_Up wrote:I'd take Deron.

Deron's a bigger guard, better defensively, an almost equal shooter, and younger.

I also think he could duplicate the success of Nash if he was in phoenix. Not from day 1 but i mean if you swapped the two today i don't think Phoenix would miss a beat.

I cant get how you can say that Williams is an almost equal shooter to Nash however you spin it....

They shoot the same FG% even though Nash takes twice as many 3-pointers in a per minute basis making them in an extremely higher clip than Deron (.479% -leading the league with that- while Deron shoots a pretty good .396%).Moreover , Nash makes his FT's in an almost equally impressive clip (898%) while Deron is plain average for a guard in that aspect of the game (.799%).Ultimately Nash has a huge scoring efficiency advantage over Deron (.649% TS% to .599%)

So to say that Deron is an almost equal shooter to Nash is extremely biased.Nash is one of the best shooter in the history of the game while Deron is just a pretty good shooter.



Nash's MUCH superior shooting and much better playmaking skills put Nash over the top for the time being..

Moreover, the Deron Williams is "bigger" argument doesn't hold a candle in the discussion since Nash is actually a better rebounder (5.5% TRB% to 4.9 TRB%).You can rightfully argue that Jazz is a better rebounding team so this partly neutralizes Nash's rebounding advantage.But still since none of them is blocking shoots to write anything about Deron William's size advantage should show in his scoring efficiency which doesn't.Nash is still the better finisher around the rim(Even though he takes less shoots inside because of his shooting advantage i was talking before).

This is like saying Bargnani is Bigger than Josh Smith,yeah he is but is his size advantage reflected on the court?

So the size advantage that Deron Williams has can be reflected only in their defensive efficiency.This is up to debate since Nash's defense is pretty underrated IMO.This shows in his defensive net number which again trump Deron's.Still defensive stats are not enough to determine the defensive efficiency of these players but it is a starting point.Even if Deron is the better defender i can't see how this makes his shortcomings to the other facets of the game compared to Nash...

P.S : If this discussion is about the 2nd best PG in the league Billups should be considered as well.It just amazes how underrated he is even though he is leading Detroit year-in and year-out to an elite record and to very respectable playoff action while posting great stats and playing the best defense amongst these PG's.In my book he is the clear-cut third best PG after CP and Nash while Deron comes fourth.

^ damn good post.

I'd also take Nash for now. Deron is catching up but he's not there yet.

Nash isn't a better finisher around the rim then Deron is. That's a false statement completely.

Not only does Deron shoot a higher percentage on the inside then Nash does, he gets fouled more often and he has more then three times as many and 1's as Nash. You can't ague that. Deron crushes Nash there. He is also a far better finisher above the rim.

Also, as far as FG% Deron shoots 1/100 of a percentage less then Nash, that's nothing. Nash is a better free-throw shooter, but shoots 2 less per game, meaning Deron is better at getting to the line.

Deron gets a little over 4 points a game from the line, Nash gets a little over 2.5. Nash misses 1 free throw every 6 attempts, Deron misses one every 5 attempts. Not really a huge difference, especially considering Deron gets there more often.

Nash is a better three point shooter, his 48% is unreal. But Deron is shooting 40%, it's not like Deron is a liability by any stretch of the imagination. Nash is #1 among starting PG's in the league, Deron is # 4.

Rebounding like I have always said is the most overrated stat for PG's ever. If you can grab over 5 like Kidd or Oscar, then great, otherwise it's as much about the system as anything.

Nash averages .7 more assists per game then Deron, so he has him there, but again realize he has much better shooters and finishers around him, but he still has the advantage.

Then it comes to defense, I am not going to say that Deron is some lock down defender because he isn't. But the only time he gets lit up defensively is when he is playing against a team who has the green light to jack three's all night. Nash regularly gets burned by average PG's, and even more so by the better PG's in the league. On the other end of that Deron relishes the big games against the better PG's in the league.

So basically, Nash is a better shooter from deep and at the line, but it's not like Deron's 80% from the free-throw line and 40% from 3 is anything to shake your head at. Nash's assists are due in large part to the players around him, and even if you disagree, it's less then one assist per game. Deron's a better finisher up close, is better at getting into the paint, and is better at getting to the line. It shows from his 2 point per game higher average.

And on the other end Deron is a far better defender, there should be no argument there.

I guess it comes down to what you want in your PG.

Nash:
Finesse
Elite Shooter
Great Passing
Veteran Knowledge
Game changingly bad Defense

Deron:
Power
Great Shooter
Great Passing
Learning the Ropes
Average defense

Okay, responding to people saying that Deron does indeed have a weird rotation. I should then expect he plays a lot less percentage of minutes with the other top players on his team than Nash does with his right?

And his top teammate is Boozer, while Nash's is Amare right?

And his top 3 teammates are Boozer, AK, and Okur, while Nash's are Amare, Marion or Shaq, and Hill, right?

Well Deron plays a greater fraction of his time with Boozer (79.3), than Nash does with Amare (78., and Deron plays a greater fraction of his time with his top 3 (71.2) than Nash does with his (70.6). If you want to call those numbers about even rather than "greater than" that's fine, the point is that Deron's not playing with scrubs all the time compared to Nash.