Which players get too much/little credit for their teams success?

[Colbinii]

You are missing the most important part here Chuck--Having Top 30 players of all-time in Steve Nash and James Harden.

didn't realize we were ignoring the rest of MDA's career or all of the other coaches who used his system?

His system definitely emphasized and modeled what the current NBA requires to be a strong offensive team--Pace and Shooting 3's--but every team is doing that now-a-days. For the record, he carbon-copied Doug Moe's offensive system from the 1980s Denver Nuggets, however we don't see any drastic changes in individual players performances or team performances under D'Antoni. In fact, I would argue what D'Antoni is great at is maximizing the rosters he is given. Nothing more.

[penbeast0]

And Moe got his style from Larry Brown (more his defensive schemes) and the Harlem Globetrotters (for the motion/weave halfcourt offense).

[Texas Chuck]

You are missing the most important part here Chuck--Having Top 30 players of all-time in Steve Nash and James Harden.

didn't realize we were ignoring the rest of MDA's career or all of the other coaches who used his system?

His system definitely emphasized and modeled what the current NBA requires to be a strong offensive team--Pace and Shooting 3's--but every team is doing that now-a-days. For the record, he carbon-copied Doug Moe's offensive system from the 1980s Denver Nuggets, however we don't see any drastic changes in individual players performances or team performances under D'Antoni. In fact, I would argue what D'Antoni is great at is maximizing the rosters he is given. Nothing more.

I guess I'm confused the issue here? I say two things: Nash is unquestionably great offensively and point out accurately that MDA had a system ahead of the league offensively and the Suns had a great offense as a result.

I feel like sometimes people are so sensitive about any perceived criticism of a player they love, they don't really read what's being said. Because MDA having a good system takes nothing away from Nash being an offensive genius. Most teams who are as successful as those Suns were have more than one contributor. And acknowledging that takes nothing away from Nash.

[Colbinii]

didn't realize we were ignoring the rest of MDA's career or all of the other coaches who used his system?

His system definitely emphasized and modeled what the current NBA requires to be a strong offensive team--Pace and Shooting 3's--but every team is doing that now-a-days. For the record, he carbon-copied Doug Moe's offensive system from the 1980s Denver Nuggets, however we don't see any drastic changes in individual players performances or team performances under D'Antoni. In fact, I would argue what D'Antoni is great at is maximizing the rosters he is given. Nothing more.

I guess I'm confused the issue here? I say two things: Nash is unquestionably great offensively and point out accurately that MDA had a system ahead of the league offensively and the Suns had a great offense as a result.

I am too. The most successful [and really only] MDA led offenses were led by Harden and Nash. I simply added this to your original point as--to me--it was the biggest aspect of maximizing any coaches offensive strategy--even MDA--which is a superstar offensive talent.

This is true league wide--typically all-time great offenses are led by all-time great offensive players--regardless of the coach.

I feel like sometimes people are so sensitive about any perceived criticism of a player they love, they don't really read what's being said. Because MDA having a good system takes nothing away from Nash being an offensive genius. Most teams who are as successful as those Suns were have more than one contributor. And acknowledging that takes nothing away from Nash.

I agree. Also acknowledging that players--not coaches--lead all-time great offenses is something that needs to be said more. Nash is quite literally the only offensive superstar [and superstar in general] where many people mention his coach and system to somehow take away some of his achievements or impact. Keep in mind I am not insinuating you specifically are doing this, but this is a common trend among this board.

Hardly anyone mentions Sloan with Stockton, Westhead/Riley with Magic, Doc/Monty with CP3, ect.

[Texas Chuck]

Nash is quite literally the only offensive superstar [and superstar in general] where many people mention his coach and system to somehow take away some of his achievements or impact.

Yeah for me I do think we have to acknowledge that Nash played in near ideal offensive circumstances for the bulk of his career. Nellie and MDA. Dirk and then that perfect roster around him in Phoenix.

But its like I say about Mike going 6-0 or Russell winning all the rings. It's only an issue to have good circumstances if you don't maximize it. But Nash literally has the best offense every year for a decade.

I think its fair to say if he didn't land in those two spots that he'd still be an elite offensive player leading elite offenses, but maybe not the best offense every year. Like anyone else he does require some help.

But no mistake, MDA and Nellie benefited way more from him than the other way around. And while Dirk ended up just fine running PNR with the likes of JET/Barea, that was obviously the most lethal version.

And listening to Nash talk now where he realizes he should have looked for his own shot more than he did, its scary to think as great as he was, he probably could have been even greater.

[Colbinii]

Nash is quite literally the only offensive superstar [and superstar in general] where many people mention his coach and system to somehow take away some of his achievements or impact.

Yeah for me I do think we have to acknowledge that Nash played in near ideal offensive circumstances for the bulk of his career. Nellie and MDA. Dirk and then that perfect roster around him in Phoenix.

Yeah, just as Magic did next to the best scoring big man ever is Kareem [not to mention Pat freaking Riley as a coach] while Stockton was paired with one of the greatest scoring big men in NBA History for 15+ years with Jerry freaking Sloan.

Yet these get mentioned MAGNITUDES less than Nash/MDA. How is that remotely fair or consistent? It isn't.

But its like I say about Mike going 6-0 or Russell winning all the rings. It's only an issue to have good circumstances if you don't maximize it. But Nash literally has the best offense every year for a decade.

Yeah Nash definitely maximized those rosters. Teams built like that [and often lacking the top-end talent of the Spurs/Lakers] was some bogus calls away from the Finals [and likely winning those finals].

I think its fair to say if he didn't land in those two spots that he'd still be an elite offensive player leading elite offenses, but maybe not the best offense every year. Like anyone else he does require some help.

Sure, but thats true for everyone, so why does it matter? Why bring it up if it also applies to everyone? It's a strawman argument for Nash yet generally speaking, pro-Nash posters don't bring up the same strawman argument for other players.

Its annoying when you read posts on here lambasting Nash for MDA when you don't see the same for other ATG offensive players and their systems/coaches, and that definitely is annoying to see the lack of objectivity starring certain posters right in their eyes but they refuse to admit it. I guess, at the end of the day, we tend to see the world how we want to see the world.

[Texas Chuck]

Its annoying when you read posts on here lambasting Nash for MDA when you don't see the same for other ATG offensive players and their systems/coaches, and that definitely is annoying to see the lack of objectivity starring certain posters right in their eyes but they refuse to admit it. I guess, at the end of the day, we tend to see the world how we want to see the world.

I can't speak for everyone, only me. And I freely acknowledge I bring this up with Nash from time to time. But just to provide context to best offense in the league every year talk. Sometimes his backers, and you know he has some very strong ones here, act like its Nash doing it all alone.

But with Magic, I certainly talk about all the talent he played with. Not just Kareem, but those were very deep and talented teams year in and year out and of course he had one of the best coaches in Riley.

I don't view Malone as a legit great offensive player. A very, very good one, but Stockton imo wasn't playing with loaded offenses or for a great offensive coach. Those were mostly relatively limited offensive rosters. But more importantly for me, Stockton's case for greatness isn't as attached to team offensive success as Nash's is so its simply less relevant.

I don't think that's inconsistent at all.

[Ambrose]

Nash is quite literally the only offensive superstar [and superstar in general] where many people mention his coach and system to somehow take away some of his achievements or impact.

I think its fair to say if he didn't land in those two spots that he'd still be an elite offensive player leading elite offenses, but maybe not the best offense every year. Like anyone else he does require some help.

I do agree that he does require some help, as does everyone, though once he figured things out, he's probably as close to automatic great offense as it gets. Have to remember that 36 and 37 year old Nash led the #4 and #9 offenses in the NBA with his running mates being post prime J-Rich/VC and Gortat/Dudley, which is insane.

Though I believe it was you who pointed out in another thread that he wasn't like this from day one, it took a long time for him to become that guy. He needed to be humbled a little/give up the partying ways, etc. to eventually become the player that he did. Who knows what happens and what doesn't in another scenario, and I think that's important to point out.