Isiah Thomas 1990 or Steve Nash 2006, who was better?

[JordansBulls]

Why are we using 2005 Nash here when we are referring to 2006 Nash?

[ronnymac2]

I'm not sure who I'd take. Isiah gets underrated for many season in his career. This isn't his peak, but I'd call it his prime, and he was fantastic. I might personally side with Thomas here, but it is very close. Peak Nash is awesome.

As a Laker fan, I have to laugh at anybody implying Nash doesn't have some of the biggest balls in the league. Dude is a warrior (in a sports context, of course). He's a guy I fear, and he's tough.

[Jimmy76]

Out of curiosity when's the last time besides Nash someone made WCF's or ECF's with a 6'8 center?

[DatWasNashty]

Out of curiosity when's the last time besides Nash someone made WCF's or ECF's with a 6'8 center?

Ben Wallace? I know he's listed at 6'9" but he's admitted to being around 6'7" on several occasions.

[Warspite]

Looking at those Nash pics that are used as evidence to toughness I guess I had it all wrong. Tyson/Foreman/Ali were the bitch and the guys laying on the floor were the tough guys. If only I knew that having your face smashed was what it takes to be a tough guy. I grew up thinking that the guy that wins the fight was the tough guy while all along the guy that has his brains beaten in is actualy the tough guy. Where was RealGM when I was growing up to educate the masses??

If you want to sell tickets you want Nash and if you want a pay raise on your next contract you want to play with Nash. If you want to win you want Isiah Thomas. Being a Piston fan that lives in Phx I can honestly understand an argument for either.

Useing stats though is kind of absurd in this comparison. Isiah in todays rules could very easily be a 25ppg 13apg 52% FG 9FTA player. He has the GOAT crossover dribble and hes has the quickest 1st step in the history of the game. He would shoot at least 10 layups a game and get 5-7 hockey apg. The rules changes would fit Isiah so much that would be almost unguardable unless he falls in love with that 21ft jumper that he loves so much and cant shoot.

Outside of Steve Kerr Nash might be the best jump shooter I have ever seen. His court vision is awsome and he runs a break almost as well as Magic. Theres no doubt that they are so differant that neither would be able to replace the other and improve a team.

[Doctor MJ]

Looking at those Nash pics that are used as evidence to toughness I guess I had it all wrong. Tyson/Foreman/Ali were the bitch and the guys laying on the floor were the tough guys. If only I knew that having your face smashed was what it takes to be a tough guy. I grew up thinking that the guy that wins the fight was the tough guy while all along the guy that has his brains beaten in is actualy the tough guy. Where was RealGM when I was growing up to educate the masses??

Well obviously it's the fact that he's known for playing through such injuries without issue that they're talking about. They're not talking about the guy on the floor (a la Tony Parker rolling on the ground with Nash's blood thinking he was the one who was hurt), they're talking about Ali taking a pounding from Foreman, and coming back unfazed.

Of course, Nash being unfazed hasn't led to any titles, but obviously there's more to those results than Nash having or lacking toughness.

Also, in terms of the guys who land the blows, was Laimbeer tough? If he were a boxer, where the next round after a cheap shot the guy has full permission to slaughter you, Laimbeer would have been murdered. Laimbeer's not the face of toughness, if you want to attach him to any positive attribute, it should be cunning.

[Warspite]

Ill agree that both the hammer and nail are strong but personaly I think hammer beats the nail.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Wrong. In playoffs heir teams played at the SAME pace (1990 Pistons 92.2, 2006 Suns 92.3). Nash was better passer and also much more efficient scorer (61.5 to 56.0 TS%). And of course Suns offense was much better than Pistons, and you know - PG is responsible for offense. Pistons were winning because of their defense and Isiah had little to do with that.

Pace doesn't cover style of play. Phoenix's "shoot 7 secs into the clock" offense, was nothing like the halfcourt set Detroit ran.

Was Nash a better shooter, yes, BUT Isiah was a much better defender. Claiming that the Bad Boy defense had nothing to do with him makes me question whether you ever saw them play.

Also, Nash is a better open-court passer, BUT Isiah is better at running a halfcourt set.

Besides you chose the best Isiah's playoff run in his career, while Nash was better (than in 2006) in several other seasons. So to be fair you should also choose Nash best playoff run, which was 2005, when he faced very good defensive teams (Spurs that season were one of the best defensive teams of all time): 23.9 ppg, 11.3 apg, 4.8 rpg, 60.4 TS%. That was against teams with average DRtg -4.2 (Drtg below league average). Isiah in 1990 faced teams with 0.1 (so Pistons opponets were worst than average!). So overall here is huge difference in defensive quality of competition. Despite so good competition Suns were able to still be very good offensive team in playoffs: 10.4 (!) ORtg above league average in playoffs. On the other hand 1990 Pistons were barely above league average with 0.3 ORtg, despite they played against much worse defensive teams (in fact their ORtg decreased in playoffs, while Suns in 2005 increased!)
very good players, but defense is as much wanting to as being able. Leadership and desire lifted them from being just another version of the Portland, Sacramento, and Seattle teams that vie for the title of best team to never win anything.

Well, I didn't really choose this particular playoff run....the thread topic did. This isn't 90' Isiah vs 05' Nash, so bringing up 2005 is irrelevant. If you want to do that, why not bring up 85' Isiah who was 21.2 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 13.9 apg in the RS, and 24.3 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 11.2 apg in the playoffs? BTW, they lost to the 85' Celtics, who were also a great team.

And bringing up Detroit's ORtg as a slight to Isiah is somewhat funny when anyone who watch the Bad boys knows that Chuck wanted Isiah to slow the pace and keep the scores low. Isiah role was the polar opposite of Nash's.

[Jimmy76]

They had the same number of possessions per game how is the pistons offense slower because of catchphrases?

[Doctor MJ]

Ill agree that both the hammer and nail are strong but personaly I think hammer beats the nail.

Bad analogy. The nail doesn't get up and hit 3's with one eye open while eliminating the hammer.

[Doctor MJ]

And bringing up Detroit's ORtg as a slight to Isiah is somewhat funny when anyone who watch the Bad boys knows that Chuck wanted Isiah to slow the pace and keep the scores low. Isiah role was the polar opposite of Nash's.

There's no dramatic relationship between pace and ORtg. In the year being discussed ('90), the formerly run n' gun Lakers had well below average pace, but still had a fantastic, league leading ORtg.

Now, Detroit didn't get to be a defense-first team randomly. The talent surrounding Isiah was stronger on defense than on offense, which means ORtg may suffer but it's not as dramatic as you probably think. The Bulls had no problems getting the best ORtg in the league with an even more defensively focused Rodman, and much less offensively offensively talented big men than Laimbeer on the team, so for Isiah's Pistons to not even have a Top 10 ORtg here absolutely says something.

[An Unbiased Fan]

They had the same number of possessions per game how is the pistons offense slower because of catchphrases?

You can't judge two seperate offensive systems on the number of possesions, and then come to the conclusion that they're the same. Phoenix ran everything through Nash in an "up & down" style offense. Detroit worked the clock, and had Isiah setting the pieces for guys like Dumars & Vinny J. It's much harder to put up gaudy stats in Detroit's style of offense, as comapred to Phoenix's.

It should be noted that Seve Nash's highest apg before going to Phoenix was only 8.8 apg. His first year in that system he put up 11.5 apg. That's 2.7 more apg than he ever had. In 2009 under Terry Porter's slower system, Nash put up just 9.7 apg.

[Jimmy76]

They had the same number of possessions per game how is the pistons offense slower because of catchphrases?

You can't judge two seperate offensive systems on the number of possesions, and then come to the conclusion that they're the same. Phoenix ran everything through Nash in an "up & down" style offense. Detroit worked the clock, and had Isiah setting the pieces for guys like Dumars & Vinny J. It's much harder to put up gaudy stats in Detroit's style of offense, as comapred to Phoenix's.

It should be noted that Seve Nash's highest apg before going to Phoenix was only 8.8 apg. His first year in that system he put up 11.5 apg. That's 2.7 more apg than he ever had. In 2009 under Terry Porter's slower system, Nash put up just 9.7 apg.

It doesn't matter the same number of possessions is the same number of possessions

[An Unbiased Fan]

And bringing up Detroit's ORtg as a slight to Isiah is somewhat funny when anyone who watch the Bad boys knows that Chuck wanted Isiah to slow the pace and keep the scores low. Isiah role was the polar opposite of Nash's.

There's no dramatic relationship between pace and ORtg. In the year being discussed ('90), the formerly run n' gun Lakers had well below average pace, but still had a fantastic, league leading ORtg.

Now, Detroit didn't get to be a defense-first team randomly. The talent surrounding Isiah was stronger on defense than on offense, which means ORtg may suffer but it's not as dramatic as you probably think. The Bulls had no problems getting the best ORtg in the league with an even more defensively focused Rodman, and much less offensively offensively talented big men than Laimbeer on the team, so for Isiah's Pistons to not even have a Top 10 ORtg here absolutely says something.

I think a lot of this comes down to the various systems these teams ran. LA still had Magic, Worthy, Scott, and 90' was the last gasp of the Showtime era. The 96-98' Bulls were a defensive team with a great offensive system(triangle). The Bad Boys were basically Isiah & Dumars on offense.

I wouldn't expect the 90's Pistons to compete with the 06' Suns in offensive efficiency. Phoenix had many more weapons on that side of the court, and the Pistons preferred to muck things up. Also, i do find it strange that Rodman has a 125 ortg, while Isiah only has a 104....something's a bit off with that stat.

[Jimmy76]

Individual ortg and team ortg are different stats

Individual is basically an efficiency stat and team ortg is just pace adjusted scoring

[An Unbiased Fan]

They had the same number of possessions per game how is the pistons offense slower because of catchphrases?

You can't judge two seperate offensive systems on the number of possesions, and then come to the conclusion that they're the same. Phoenix ran everything through Nash in an "up & down" style offense. Detroit worked the clock, and had Isiah setting the pieces for guys like Dumars & Vinny J. It's much harder to put up gaudy stats in Detroit's style of offense, as comapred to Phoenix's.

It should be noted that Seve Nash's highest apg before going to Phoenix was only 8.8 apg. His first year in that system he put up 11.5 apg. That's 2.7 more apg than he ever had. In 2009 under Terry Porter's slower system, Nash put up just 9.7 apg.

It doesn't matter the same number of possessions is the same number of possessions

My arguments haven't been about the number of possesions, but instead the style of play.

[Jimmy76]

The number of possessions is the pace of the game

They played at the same pace by the objective measure of pace

[An Unbiased Fan]

The number of possessions is the pace of the game

They played at the same pace by the objective measure of pace

But like I said a few posts before, pace doesn't cover style pf play. Nash benifted statstically by playing in D'Antoni's run & gun system. As I posted, Nash's career high in assists was only 8.8 apg, and and then jumps 11.5 apg his first year in that system. When PHX got Shaq and Terry Porter was coaching, Nash's apg dropped to 9.7 apg. CLEARLY, the system had a huge impact on his stats.

Frankly, I think Nash gets too much credit. Phoenix had turmoil in 04' which is why their record was so bad. Dallas had more success after he left, than they did with him. Isiah was a bigtime leader, and went through tougher competition in route to a Finals MVP, than Nash did in losing.

[Doctor MJ]

And bringing up Detroit's ORtg as a slight to Isiah is somewhat funny when anyone who watch the Bad boys knows that Chuck wanted Isiah to slow the pace and keep the scores low. Isiah role was the polar opposite of Nash's.

There's no dramatic relationship between pace and ORtg. In the year being discussed ('90), the formerly run n' gun Lakers had well below average pace, but still had a fantastic, league leading ORtg.

Now, Detroit didn't get to be a defense-first team randomly. The talent surrounding Isiah was stronger on defense than on offense, which means ORtg may suffer but it's not as dramatic as you probably think. The Bulls had no problems getting the best ORtg in the league with an even more defensively focused Rodman, and much less offensively offensively talented big men than Laimbeer on the team, so for Isiah's Pistons to not even have a Top 10 ORtg here absolutely says something.

I think a lot of this comes down to the various systems these teams ran. LA still had Magic, Worthy, Scott, and 90' was the last gasp of the Showtime era. The 96-98' Bulls were a defensive team with a great offensive system(triangle). The Bad Boys were basically Isiah & Dumars on offense.

I wouldn't expect the 90's Pistons to compete with the 06' Suns in offensive efficiency. Phoenix had many more weapons on that side of the court, and the Pistons preferred to muck things up. Also, i do find it strange that Rodman has a 125 ortg, while Isiah only has a 104....something's a bit off with that stat.

Okay, so the issue is that Daly ran a stupid system on offense, when he could have just as easily run a smart one? It's a shame Isiah didn't get to play with competent coaches, eh?

Re: '06 more weapons. That '06 team was absolutely crippled, and their decrease in ORtg from the previous year reflected that. Literally, Nash's only teammate that yearwho would definitely make the '90 Pistons' starting lineup was a guy who basically never scored with even average efficiency before or after his time with Nash.

Re: Something wrong with ORtg. Nothing wrong with the stat. It's not meant to show total offensive impact, it's supposed to measure the good things a guy does when the guy does something. You measure it with usage to get a sense of total impact. Isiah's rating is so low because he's inefficient by '90, partly because he kept shooting at about the same clip as he had in his more athletic youth.

And I'll add that when a point guard to have such a low ORtg compared to his teammates, doesn't say great things about the offense. Again, Daly's clearly an idiot.

[Doctor MJ]

]
But like I said a few posts before, pace doesn't cover style pf play. Nash benifted statstically by playing in D'Antoni's run & gun system. As I posted, Nash's career high in assists was only 8.8 apg, and and then jumps 11.5 apg his first year in that system. When PHX got Shaq and Terry Porter was coaching, Nash's apg dropped to 9.7 apg. CLEARLY, the system had a huge impact on his stats.

Frankly, I think Nash gets too much credit. Phoenix had turmoil in 04' which is why their record was so bad. Dallas had more success after he left, than they did with him. Isiah was a bigtime leader, and went through tougher competition in route to a Finals MVP, than Nash did in losing.

Re: D'Antoni's system...was basically D'Antoni realizing that he could have his best offense by just letting Nash coach on the floor. That's why he's had so little success elsewhere.

Blaming Nash for having less success when he's not allowed to direct the offense, is like blaming Joe Montana for not throwing many touchdowns when he's told to hand the ball off to a running back every play.

Re: Too much credit. The Phoenix offense had been below for half a decade before Nash got there, since then they've had one of the greatest offensive dynasties of all times while having incredible amounts of player turnover and 3 different coaches. If you prefer Isiah because of his defense that's cool, but the idea that Nash's impact on offense in Phoenix isn't astounding is pretty silly.

Re: Dallas. It's been said a million times that Nash didn't have the same role in Dallas as in Phoenix. No one here is saying Nash's impact in Dallas was MVP-level. With that said, the offense took a significant drop without Nash. The '03-04 Mavs had an ORtg 9.69% higher than the median team in the league which was the greatest in NBA history. In '04-05, their ORtg was 3.96% above the median. It's a pretty big falloff. Now, also points to defensive improvement in '04-05, but let's remember that's also the year Nelson gradually let go of the reins as coach.