Who Was Actually the Better Player: Steve Nash or John Stockton

[tamaraw08]

Nash is a much better ball handler, a better shooter, and a vastly superior interior scorer. I also think Nash is a pretty big level up on Stockton as a passer. Stockton was the steady playmaker (who could dial up the aggressive playmaking while in transition); prime Nash was a relentless, probing attacker who just constantly ripped up defense and rammed highlight passes down their throat. Stockton was a brilliant, but somewhat simple (brutally effective) pick & roll operator. Nash was a sorceror who made up new passes on the fly.

Stockton is physically way tougher and stronger than Steve Nash. That strength made him much more competent of an on-ball defender. Stockton was also fierce and dirty on that end. Nash wasn't awful, but aside from charges and not making too many mistakes, there wasn't a lot Nash brought to the table defensively.

Do you think a PG like Deron Williams averaging 20 pts/10 assists under also Jerry Sloan's system winning 53 games might affect Stockton's legacy?
I mean Boozer is a good partner but not in the caliber of Karl Malone.

[Hoop Hunter]

Peak is Nash
Career is Stockton

After retirement is Nash (Stockton is nuts)

[Black Jack]

Stockton has good offense plus Nash is weak on D but Stockton is tough!

I like Nash but I like Stockton's two way threat more.

[MightyMouse10]

Difficult to answer. If comparing to modern players I'd say Curry vs CP3, if curry didn't have the rings.

Stockton was the best cookie cutter PG you can create. Nash and D'Antoni changed the game. We don't have Curry and the GSW without Suns' Nash.

My take is Stockton was the better PG. Nash was the better player.

[og15]

I dissent.

You can take the player that ushered in modern offensive basketball or the player that wasn't even the best player on his team.

It's an easy choice.

People that don't think it is an easy choice are just looking at numbers and nostalgia.

Nash couldn’t win a title with Kobe, Dwight Howard, Ron Artest and Pau Gasol.

Stockton never had a team with half that talent.

Stockton was an iron man and a winner, and better than Nash.

Guys, why are we giving and1 here? There could have been a good counter here, but doing the name drop thing of mentioning Nash at 38 with a team that had a lot of injuries and Kobe was out in the playoffs and saying, "see, he couldn't do it with all these guys" is NOT the argument

Nash during the 90s under the old rules was pretty average and not that great unlike Stockton.

Sure Phoenix was stacked at the point guard position with Kidd and KJ (although he played a lot at SG position) but Dallas wasn't.

Like I said I consider they are about the same level but it's good to know.

Nash and Stockton were both late bloomers, had nothing to do with the 90's. Nash didn't become a starter until 26, Stockton didn't become a starter until 25.

The rules didn't change from 1999 to 2000 to make a players numbers change, and the more cited rule change wasn't until 04-05. Nash was very good in the early 00's which was the worst offensive era of modern basketball, not the 90's.

[ImmortalD24]

You can take the player that ushered in modern offensive basketball or the player that wasn't even the best player on his team.

It's an easy choice.

People that don't think it is an easy choice are just looking at numbers and nostalgia.

Nash couldn’t win a title with Kobe, Dwight Howard, Ron Artest and Pau Gasol.

Stockton never had a team with half that talent.

Stockton was an iron man and a winner, and better than Nash.

Guys, why are we giving and1 here? There could have been a good counter here, but doing the name drop thing of mentioning Nash at 38 with a team that had a lot of injuries and Kobe was out in the playoffs and saying, "see, he couldn't do it with all these guys" is NOT the argument

Nash during the 90s under the old rules was pretty average and not that great unlike Stockton.

Sure Phoenix was stacked at the point guard position with Kidd and KJ (although he played a lot at SG position) but Dallas wasn't.

Like I said I consider they are about the same level but it's good to know.

Nash and Stockton were both late bloomers, had nothing to do with the 90's. Nash didn't become a starter until 26, Stockton didn't become a starter until 25.

The rules didn't change from 1999 to 2000 to make a players numbers change, and the more cited rule change wasn't until 04-05. Nash was very good in the early 00's which was the worst offensive era of modern basketball, not the 90's.

Speaking of rule changes, I was looking up some rule changes the league can implement as soon as Bron retires on chatgbt (JJ Redicks favorite app):

Rule Change Ideas to Boost Offense
1. Defensive 3 Seconds Expanded
• Current rule: A defender can’t camp in the paint for more than 3 seconds unless actively guarding someone.
• New rule: Make it 2 seconds or enforce it more strictly. This forces defenders to leave the paint even quicker, opening up driving lanes and rim attacks.
2. Wider Lane / Smaller Restricted Area
• Widen the paint a bit more so rim protectors are pulled farther away from the hoop.
• OR shrink the restricted circle (currently 4 feet from the basket) to 2–3 feet, making it harder for defenders to draw charges under the rim.
3. No “Help Defender Charges”
• Only the primary on-ball defender can legally take a charge. Help defenders sliding over would be automatically blocking fouls. This opens up downhill drives.
4. Shortened Shot Clock After Fouls
• Offensive team gets a full 24 seconds after a foul (not 14 like now). That gives offenses more time to reset and run complex actions instead of rushing.
5. Illegal Defense: Limit Weakside Help
• Defenders can’t fully sag off a non-shooter to clog the lane. Similar to how hand-checking was removed to promote spacing, this would open driving lanes and force more one-on-one defense.
6. Smaller Court Mod
• Widen the court by 2–3 feet per side. It creates more real estate for drives, isolations, and corner threes.

Would lowkey like to see #3 for a week. It might also prevent injuries if we’re being honest about it. So many collisions from charge attempts since the implementation of zone and small ball.

[xinxin]

I dissent.

You can take the player that ushered in modern offensive basketball or the player that wasn't even the best player on his team.

It's an easy choice.

People that don't think it is an easy choice are just looking at numbers and nostalgia.

Nash couldn’t win a title with Kobe, Dwight Howard, Ron Artest and Pau Gasol.

Stockton never had a team with half that talent.

Stockton was an iron man and a winner, and better than Nash.

That lakers “super team”, never had a chance.

Aside from Dwight hardly a factor due to his back injury. Nash was out for most of the season.

Then Kobe , being run to the ground by D’Antoni for the playoff push, tore his Achilles right before the playoffs..

They were only complete for a few games that season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HMFFL]

Stockton wasn't the lead guy but I think I would say that he and Malone were a better duo than Nash and Stoudamire.

Stockton was always the lead guy. Stockton set everything up for the entire team. Malone was never the lead.

[Mr Ringer]

Peak it's Steve Nash
One of most unique offensive players.
But Stockton is bigger all-time for me
Uncanny career all-around

[Ritzo]

Malone would've have had a ring if Stockton didn't stink so bad in the offense in 1998 Finals, averaging 9 ppg, 8 apg, 22% 3FG as a second option is a crime. Malone and Nash combo would've won at least 2 titles.

[JinKaz69]

Malone would've have had a ring if Stockton didn't stink so bad in the offense in 1998 Finals, averaging 9 ppg, 8 apg, 22% 3FG as a second option is a crime. Malone and Nash combo would've won at least 2 titles.

Stockton wasn't the 2nd option, Hornacek was. He was the main reason why the Jazz took game 1.
Under old 90's rules and against Bulls' defense, Nash would had been even worse than Stockton.

Totally different era.

[Ritzo]

Malone would've have had a ring if Stockton didn't stink so bad in the offense in 1998 Finals, averaging 9 ppg, 8 apg, 22% 3FG as a second option is a crime. Malone and Nash combo would've won at least 2 titles.

Stockton wasn't the 2nd option, Hornacek was. He was the main reason why the Jazz took game 1.
Under old 90's rules and against Bulls' defense, Nash would had been even worse than Stockton.

Totally different era.

Huh? Nash played in a tougher rule. He was averaging 17 ppg and 8 apg as a 3rd option in the playoffs as a Mavs in the early 2000's, and that's before he hit his prime.

[ropjhk]

Stockton wasn't the lead guy but I think I would say that he and Malone were a better duo than Nash and Stoudamire.

Stockton was always the lead guy. Stockton set to everything up for the entire team. Malone was never the lead.

Malone was their leading scorer and MVP. By lead guy I meant the guy considered to be the best player on the team. Stockton was the floor leader and I won't argue if you want to say he was more important to the Jazz because the system ran through him.

[xinxin]

Off topic: wow - 55 - 53. with Nash up by 2 votes..

this is probably the closest poll i've seen in RealGM

[ImmortalD24]

Off topic: wow - 55 - 53. with Nash up by 2 votes..

this is probably the closest poll i've seen in RealGM

SGA vs Luka - viewtopic.php?t=2459898

[xinxin]

^ double wow!

I just voted.. & SGA's up by one vote now..

[KGtabake]

The guy who's an all time leader in steals.
And assists of course but the steals is more impressive.
Always pick the two way player.

[Ancalagon]

It’s a myth that Stockton got home cooking on assists stat keeping. His home/away splits are about what you’d expect - more assists at home because the Jazz tended to win at home.

Stockton 10.9 home/10.1 away
Magic 12.4 home/11.8 away
Kidd 9.2 home/8.2 away
Paul 9.6 home/9.0 away
Nash 8.3 home/8.7 away is an anomaly.

I don’t have the time to see how this reflected in record, but I remember seeing that these assists were relatively proportional to wins at home as well. The Jazz were routinely winning 30-35 home games per year, so the team’s better shooting was reflected in higher assist numbers. If anything, you would have expected more generous home/road splits based on the team’s performance.

[MMyhre]

This is actually a pretty tough question. I want to say Stockton because he was a more complete player, with no real weaknesses -- and was actually a plus defender. But the argument for Nash is that he was able to play at an MVP-level as the lead guy. Stockton was never used that way. When Nash played a secondary player to Nowitzki, Stockton was hands down the better player. He out-performed Nash in that type of role. You have to wonder how Stockton would have done if he was asked to be the lead in a D'Antoni-like system, but we never got a chance to see that. So because of that, it's really a close debate, IMO.

Perfect answer

No it wasnt. Stocktons best 3pt made seasons are 1.2 a game and 4.8 ftm a game, and those occurred at different points in his career. There is nothing that says Stockton had the potential to be as good as Nash offensively. Nothing.

[f4p]

Nash couldn’t win a title with Kobe, Dwight Howard, Ron Artest and Pau Gasol.

Stockton never had a team with half that talent.

Stockton was an iron man and a winner, and better than Nash.

Guys, why are we giving and1 here? There could have been a good counter here, but doing the name drop thing of mentioning Nash at 38 with a team that had a lot of injuries and Kobe was out in the playoffs and saying, "see, he couldn't do it with all these guys" is NOT the argument

Nash during the 90s under the old rules was pretty average and not that great unlike Stockton.

Sure Phoenix was stacked at the point guard position with Kidd and KJ (although he played a lot at SG position) but Dallas wasn't.

Like I said I consider they are about the same level but it's good to know.

Nash and Stockton were both late bloomers, had nothing to do with the 90's. Nash didn't become a starter until 26, Stockton didn't become a starter until 25.

The rules didn't change from 1999 to 2000 to make a players numbers change, and the more cited rule change wasn't until 04-05. Nash was very good in the early 00's which was the worst offensive era of modern basketball, not the 90's.

Speaking of rule changes, I was looking up some rule changes the league can implement as soon as Bron retires on chatgbt (JJ Redicks favorite app):

Rule Change Ideas to Boost Offense
1. Defensive 3 Seconds Expanded
• Current rule: A defender can’t camp in the paint for more than 3 seconds unless actively guarding someone.
• New rule: Make it 2 seconds or enforce it more strictly. This forces defenders to leave the paint even quicker, opening up driving lanes and rim attacks.
2. Wider Lane / Smaller Restricted Area
• Widen the paint a bit more so rim protectors are pulled farther away from the hoop.
• OR shrink the restricted circle (currently 4 feet from the basket) to 2–3 feet, making it harder for defenders to draw charges under the rim.
3. No “Help Defender Charges”
• Only the primary on-ball defender can legally take a charge. Help defenders sliding over would be automatically blocking fouls. This opens up downhill drives.
4. Shortened Shot Clock After Fouls
• Offensive team gets a full 24 seconds after a foul (not 14 like now). That gives offenses more time to reset and run complex actions instead of rushing.
5. Illegal Defense: Limit Weakside Help
• Defenders can’t fully sag off a non-shooter to clog the lane. Similar to how hand-checking was removed to promote spacing, this would open driving lanes and force more one-on-one defense.
6. Smaller Court Mod
• Widen the court by 2–3 feet per side. It creates more real estate for drives, isolations, and corner threes.

Would lowkey like to see #3 for a week. It might also prevent injuries if we’re being honest about it. So many collisions from charge attempts since the implementation of zone and small ball.

Not that I want more offense, but i've actually thought #3 should be a thing for a while now. Sliding over a tenth of a second before a perfectly under control driver gets there doesn't seem to be the point of a charge. You basically don't see this call at all until maybe the 90s. You obviously can't just barrel through your own man. Now granted, if the help defender has been there forever, you can't just barrel.over him either so there would have to be some middle ground, but guys sliding over at the last second into guys who are basically already jumping does not seem like the spirit of the rule.