Does Shai have "it"?

[Jamaaliver]

He's well on his way to being the second best shooting guard ever...

[ShootersShoot]

Oh come on, Nash is one of my all time favorite players, but this is no contest.

FTA is a great player, but he's going to need some hardware to get to Nash's level. And he's nowhere close to being as good as a true PG. It's a bit premature to make such a declaration, so let's give it some time and re-evaulate. I will say that he's off to a good start though.

For now:

https://stathead.com/basketball/versus-finder.cgi?player_id2=nashst01&player_id1=gilgesh01&request=1&utm_id=gilgesh01&utm_medium=sr_xsite&utm_campaign=2023_01_wdgt_player_comparison&utm_source=bbr

He doesnt have to be better as a point guard lol. Much better defensively and as a scorer already gives him a huge advantage over nash.

[dhsilv2]

He's well on his way to being the second best shooting guard ever...

And? Kobe was never on this level imo. Kobe's 06 offensive peak didn't come along while he was also at an actual all defensive team level defender.

For context in 2006 by XRAPM Kobe was in the 56th percentile on defense. Shai is in the 98th.

But once again...this OKC team seems to continue to get slept on both for how good Shai is and how good historically they are.

[SkyBill40]

Oh come on, Nash is one of my all time favorite players, but this is no contest.

FTA is a great player, but he's going to need some hardware to get to Nash's level. And he's nowhere close to being as good as a true PG. It's a bit premature to make such a declaration, so let's give it some time and re-evaulate. I will say that he's off to a good start though.

For now:

https://stathead.com/basketball/versus-finder.cgi?player_id2=nashst01&player_id1=gilgesh01&request=1&utm_id=gilgesh01&utm_medium=sr_xsite&utm_campaign=2023_01_wdgt_player_comparison&utm_source=bbr

He doesnt have to be better as a point guard lol. Much better defensively and as a scorer already gives him a huge advantage over nash.

Interesting. They play the same position, so why not hold them to the same criteria? And there's a lot more to the game than just scoring and defense, but your specific value set is your own.

[UcanUwill]

FTA is a great player, but he's going to need some hardware to get to Nash's level. And he's nowhere close to being as good as a true PG. It's a bit premature to make such a declaration, so let's give it some time and re-evaulate. I will say that he's off to a good start though.

For now:

https://stathead.com/basketball/versus-finder.cgi?player_id2=nashst01&player_id1=gilgesh01&request=1&utm_id=gilgesh01&utm_medium=sr_xsite&utm_campaign=2023_01_wdgt_player_comparison&utm_source=bbr

He doesnt have to be better as a point guard lol. Much better defensively and as a scorer already gives him a huge advantage over nash.

Interesting. They play the same position, so why not hold them to the same criteria? And there's a lot more to the game than just scoring and defense, but your specific value set is your own.

They are different style players, SGA is not even really a point guard, but he is so good that he can be point guard, and he is. in 2006 he would have been true SG and would be right up there with Kobe and Wade, whom I think were better than Nash.

Nash has two MVPS, not like he was a slouch, I understand how this is a debate, but I personally think you getting a bit cute here, SGA is just better (my opinion).

[SkyBill40]

He doesnt have to be better as a point guard lol. Much better defensively and as a scorer already gives him a huge advantage over nash.

Interesting. They play the same position, so why not hold them to the same criteria? And there's a lot more to the game than just scoring and defense, but your specific value set is your own.

They are different style players, SGA is not even really a point guard, but he is so good that he can be point guard, and he is. in 2006 he would have been true SG and would be right up there with Kobe and Wade, whom I think were better than Nash.

Nash has two MVPS, not like he was a slouch, I understand how this is a debate, but I personally think you getting a bit cute here, SGA is just better (my opinion).

First one: That's highly debatable, obviously, and I don't know if I would be inclined to agree given the value of Nash to the Suns. Take him off that team and they aren't anywhere close to how well they ran. Although, looking at the 05-06 rosters for LA and PHX, it could be a wash as both would suffer if their key player were absent. MIA far less so.

Second one: Not trying to be cute, but subjectivity and opinion are just that.

[UcanUwill]

Interesting. They play the same position, so why not hold them to the same criteria? And there's a lot more to the game than just scoring and defense, but your specific value set is your own.

They are different style players, SGA is not even really a point guard, but he is so good that he can be point guard, and he is. in 2006 he would have been true SG and would be right up there with Kobe and Wade, whom I think were better than Nash.

Nash has two MVPS, not like he was a slouch, I understand how this is a debate, but I personally think you getting a bit cute here, SGA is just better (my opinion).

First one: That's highly debatable, obviously, and I don't know if I would be inclined to agree given the value of Nash to the Suns. Take him off that team and they aren't anywhere close to how well they ran. Although, looking at the 05-06 rosters for LA and PHX, it could be a wash as both would suffer if their key player were absent. MIA far less so.

Second one: Not trying to be cute, but subjectivity and opinion are just that.

I understand what a big jump Suns made after acquiring Nash, and do not get me wrong, he is one of my all time favorites, but putting all their success on Nash is a bit disingenuous. Those later Suns teams were stacked, Nash was catalyst that put it all together, they badly needed a playmaker, but man, Amare, Marion, Barbosa, Diaw, Bell. That team was great, not like Nash was dragging some bums. They were just not ready before Nash and they needed a playmaker.

SGA already has MVP, he will likely win the title, and he carried his team to one of the best regular seasons ever. He is putting insane amount of points and playing good defense, play making etc etc.

[LascelleL]

Best NBA Canadian player in history.

Who would be better? Nash? I would say SGA has the edge tbh you cant go wrong with either.

[SkyBill40]

They are different style players, SGA is not even really a point guard, but he is so good that he can be point guard, and he is. in 2006 he would have been true SG and would be right up there with Kobe and Wade, whom I think were better than Nash.

Nash has two MVPS, not like he was a slouch, I understand how this is a debate, but I personally think you getting a bit cute here, SGA is just better (my opinion).

First one: That's highly debatable, obviously, and I don't know if I would be inclined to agree given the value of Nash to the Suns. Take him off that team and they aren't anywhere close to how well they ran. Although, looking at the 05-06 rosters for LA and PHX, it could be a wash as both would suffer if their key player were absent. MIA far less so.

Second one: Not trying to be cute, but subjectivity and opinion are just that.

I understand what a big jump Suns made after acquiring Nash, and do not get me wrong, he is one of my all time favorites, but putting all their success on Nash is a bit disingenuous. Those later Suns teams were stacked, Nash was catalyst that put it all together, they badly needed a playmaker, but man, Amare, Marion, Barbosa, Diaw, Bell. That team was great, not like Nash was dragging some bums. They were just not ready before Nash and they needed a playmaker.

SGA already has MVP, he will likely win the title, and he carried his team to one of the best regular seasons ever. He is putting insane amount of points and playing good defense, play making etc etc.

I don't put it all on Nash but he is the focus of this particular discussion, not the others. And without him, that team doesn't do as well. I was surprised as anyone to see Nash spurn the Mavs and come back.

And don't get me wrong here and perceive a dislike for SGA: He's a Kentucky guy after all, so I've got to cheer for him at least a little bit. It just sickens me to see him on OKC since I have a particularly strong distaste for their owner and what all transpired. No need for me to get into that.

I personally feel that he's got a bit to go to be anointed this early as the league's "best Canadian NBA player ever." And that was the crux of it. I'm sure he'll get there and winning a league title will obviously help his case and especially in the comparo to Nash seeing he sadly never won one.

[ShootersShoot]

FTA is a great player, but he's going to need some hardware to get to Nash's level. And he's nowhere close to being as good as a true PG. It's a bit premature to make such a declaration, so let's give it some time and re-evaulate. I will say that he's off to a good start though.

For now:

https://stathead.com/basketball/versus-finder.cgi?player_id2=nashst01&player_id1=gilgesh01&request=1&utm_id=gilgesh01&utm_medium=sr_xsite&utm_campaign=2023_01_wdgt_player_comparison&utm_source=bbr

He doesnt have to be better as a point guard lol. Much better defensively and as a scorer already gives him a huge advantage over nash.

Interesting. They play the same position, so why not hold them to the same criteria? And there's a lot more to the game than just scoring and defense, but your specific value set is your own.

Not saying nash wasnt great. Me personally I would take the guy who can defend the position, is more versatile due to his size and who is an elite scorer. Playmaking is literally the only aspect nash truly has an edge over shai..if thats the only criteria that is necessary to be seen as a better point guard then that logic is flawed imo. Well that and 3 point shooting but even with that, nash is still inferior as a scorer.

By your logic, any point guard who has averaged more assists than steph curry and could score 20ppg would be better at that position?

[SkyBill40]

He doesnt have to be better as a point guard lol. Much better defensively and as a scorer already gives him a huge advantage over nash.

Interesting. They play the same position, so why not hold them to the same criteria? And there's a lot more to the game than just scoring and defense, but your specific value set is your own.

Not saying nash wasnt great. Me personally I would take the guy who can defend the position, is more versatile due to his size and who is an elite scorer.
By your logic, any point guard who has averaged more assists than steph curry and could score 20ppg would be better at that position?

Shai can easily play either guard position. Thats part of what makes him great.

Don't do that. It's rude for one and ignorant for two. If you want to know what I think, don't assume or make presumptions about it based on your perception: ASK ME DIRECTLY.

There is a lot of complexity to playing PG and running an offense. That's not to say SGA is unable to grasp or manage the nuances of the position, but I don't really see him as a traditional fit for the role. There's been loads of them over time and while some might have the position on their player card (Curry, in your example), the way they play on the whole isn't necessarily representative of what a "true" point guard is. Anyone can play the position, as Booker did for a whole season, but that doesn't mean they're suited for it.

[ShootersShoot]

Interesting. They play the same position, so why not hold them to the same criteria? And there's a lot more to the game than just scoring and defense, but your specific value set is your own.

Not saying nash wasnt great. Me personally I would take the guy who can defend the position, is more versatile due to his size and who is an elite scorer.
By your logic, any point guard who has averaged more assists than steph curry and could score 20ppg would be better at that position?

Shai can easily play either guard position. Thats part of what makes him great.

Don't do that. It's rude for one and ignorant for two. If you want to know what I think, don't assume or make presumptions about it based on your perception: ASK ME DIRECTLY.

There is a lot of complexity to playing PG and running an offense. That's not to say SGA is unable to grasp or manage the nuances of the position, but I don't really see him as a traditional fit for the role. There's been loads of them over time and while some might have the position on their player card (Curry, in your example), the way they play on the whole isn't necessarily representative of what a "true" point guard is. Anyone can play the position, as Booker did for a whole season, but that doesn't mean they're suited for it.

Curry and shai have their teams in championship contention as point guards..booker didnt.

And really, this discussion is not about the point guard position, but about overall player. Is playmaking more important than scoring AND defense in the game of basketball? Of course its not.

[SkyBill40]

Not saying nash wasnt great. Me personally I would take the guy who can defend the position, is more versatile due to his size and who is an elite scorer.
By your logic, any point guard who has averaged more assists than steph curry and could score 20ppg would be better at that position?

Shai can easily play either guard position. Thats part of what makes him great.

Don't do that. It's rude for one and ignorant for two. If you want to know what I think, don't assume or make presumptions about it based on your perception: ASK ME DIRECTLY.

There is a lot of complexity to playing PG and running an offense. That's not to say SGA is unable to grasp or manage the nuances of the position, but I don't really see him as a traditional fit for the role. There's been loads of them over time and while some might have the position on their player card (Curry, in your example), the way they play on the whole isn't necessarily representative of what a "true" point guard is. Anyone can play the position, as Booker did for a whole season, but that doesn't mean they're suited for it.

Curry and shai have their teams in championship contention as point guards..booker didnt.

And really, this discussion is not about the point guard position, but about overall player. Is playmaking more important than scoring AND defense in the game of basketball? Of course its not.

That's called subjectivity, my dude.

[ShootersShoot]

Don't do that. It's rude for one and ignorant for two. If you want to know what I think, don't assume or make presumptions about it based on your perception: ASK ME DIRECTLY.

There is a lot of complexity to playing PG and running an offense. That's not to say SGA is unable to grasp or manage the nuances of the position, but I don't really see him as a traditional fit for the role. There's been loads of them over time and while some might have the position on their player card (Curry, in your example), the way they play on the whole isn't necessarily representative of what a "true" point guard is. Anyone can play the position, as Booker did for a whole season, but that doesn't mean they're suited for it.

Curry and shai have their teams in championship contention as point guards..booker didnt.

And really, this discussion is not about the point guard position, but about overall player. Is playmaking more important than scoring AND defense in the game of basketball? Of course its not.

That's called subjectivity, my dude.

So you believe that playmaking is more important than both scoring and defense, and also versatility?

[dhsilv2]

First one: That's highly debatable, obviously, and I don't know if I would be inclined to agree given the value of Nash to the Suns. Take him off that team and they aren't anywhere close to how well they ran. Although, looking at the 05-06 rosters for LA and PHX, it could be a wash as both would suffer if their key player were absent. MIA far less so.

Second one: Not trying to be cute, but subjectivity and opinion are just that.

I understand what a big jump Suns made after acquiring Nash, and do not get me wrong, he is one of my all time favorites, but putting all their success on Nash is a bit disingenuous. Those later Suns teams were stacked, Nash was catalyst that put it all together, they badly needed a playmaker, but man, Amare, Marion, Barbosa, Diaw, Bell. That team was great, not like Nash was dragging some bums. They were just not ready before Nash and they needed a playmaker.

SGA already has MVP, he will likely win the title, and he carried his team to one of the best regular seasons ever. He is putting insane amount of points and playing good defense, play making etc etc.

I don't put it all on Nash but he is the focus of this particular discussion, not the others. And without him, that team doesn't do as well. I was surprised as anyone to see Nash spurn the Mavs and come back.

And don't get me wrong here and perceive a dislike for SGA: He's a Kentucky guy after all, so I've got to cheer for him at least a little bit. It just sickens me to see him on OKC since I have a particularly strong distaste for their owner and what all transpired. No need for me to get into that.

I personally feel that he's got a bit to go to be anointed this early as the league's "best Canadian NBA player ever." And that was the crux of it. I'm sure he'll get there and winning a league title will obviously help his case and especially in the comparo to Nash seeing he sadly never won one.

If we were to just take "peak season" from every guy ever. One season per player, so we don't count like 10 MJ seasons as the top 10. Where do you think realistically SGA would rank? Top 10, 20, 30? I can't imagine he doesn't make the top 30. Like, I think fans need to step back and really think about the question. I haven't got a clear answer, but I unquestionably have this over peak Kobe. I have it over West and Oscar. I think he'd be over Wade though that finals run in 2006 was pretty crazy so maybe we wait to see these finals play out.

But this is a legendary season, the kinda stuff people will talk about in 20 years. People will tell their kids about the 2025 SGA/OKC run.

[canada_dry]

Yes. Very clearly.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[SkyBill40]

Curry and shai have their teams in championship contention as point guards..booker didnt.

And really, this discussion is not about the point guard position, but about overall player. Is playmaking more important than scoring AND defense in the game of basketball? Of course its not.

That's called subjectivity, my dude.

So you believe that playmaking is more important than both scoring and defense, and also versatility?

I didn't say that. I feel it's equally important. And opinion being what it is, neither you nor I are any more "right" than the other.

Sent from my SM-F936U using RealGM mobile app

[Tim_Hardawayy]

I guess depends what you mean by "it". I don't think he has superstar charisma, and even if he wins he'll be more Kawhi than Kobe. So he doesn't have "that". I do think he has superstar impact, so he does have "that". And as for how he performs when the lights are brightest, well we'll find out real soon. To this point he's been more of a playoff dropper than riser but that's true of a lot of great players as the playoffs are typically tougher defensively, he hasn't been a choker though.

This series will definitely do a lot to define him. If he is clearly the best player and they run away with it, or win a hard fought series with him leading the way, it will do a lot for him. If he has a Steph Curry like Finals, where maybe he's the best player but other guys routinely out perform him... that doesn't mean he doesn't have "it", but it does mean maybe he doesn't have certain types of "it".

And no it has nothing to do with him being American or not (most people who don't closely follow probably don't even know he's Canadian), it's entirely his style of play. Being free throw heavy already docks you a bit and is held as a negative in some fans minds, but on top of that, when he isn't at the line, the way he scores isn't super sexy. People do like the midrange, but they like it as a weapon a Jordan/Kobe pulls out to dissect an opponent before finishing them with their athleticism and highlight plays. SGA doesn't do the latter, it's just all midrange and free throws (and 3's to his credit). Even Kawhi imo has a more aesthetically pleasing game than SGA, and I've seen people call Kawhi the Tim Duncan of wings.

Again though, if "it" in your opinion is just superstar impact, then he's got "it" regardless of what other people say.

[TheAlchemist]

Both Shai and Tyrese are very laid back personality and much different then the older guard of NBA stars (Kobe, Jordan, Shaq etc). These guys are methodical and chose their spots to be impactful. Either scoring or assist wise.

Sometimes what you need is a leader to do the work without being agressive, but influential. If you have a team of highly talented deep guys, you don't need to be the ball dominant scorer and show you got "IT". You lead and influence the game by playing and targeting your chances in the flow of the offense.

Look at both teams, they got 3-4 scoring options. You don't need a guy to "take over".

This has a lot to do with the new NBA as much as the personalities of these guys.

[D.Brasco]

If he finishes the year winning regular season MVP and Finals MVP, something only a few select players have ever achieved in NBA history. Yes, whatever "it" is, he'll have it.