Steve Nash really should have won multiple championships.

[Bornstellar]

Maybe, maybe not. Had the Spurs not been in his way, he might have. But, if they beat SA in the three years they had the best chance to win a ring (2005, 2007, 2008 and assuming they get to the Finals in 07 and 08), they would have had to face the Pistons, Cavs, and Celtics in the Finals. I don't think they would've beaten Detroit in 2005 or even got past the Lakers in 2008 to face Boston and even if they did they would still not have won imo. So 2007 realistically was their best shot but unlike SA they did not have the team defense to slow LeBron down, so even that year is questionable

The Suns dominated those Cavs teams. The Cavs had a terrible matchup with those SSOL Suns teams and always lost by double digits everytime. Best case is Cavs take 1 maybe 2 if they get lucky.

You're probably right, though LeBron found an extra gear in the playoffs that year. But the Pistons were also 3-1 against the Cavs that season (the one loss being OT) and they still lost because LeBron went god mode and they couldn't stop him. So you never know

[JustBuzzin]

Attention everyone Nash is a 2x MVP.

We hold our MVP's to a different standard. Y'all can slander and hold Embiid accountable with 1 MVP. Yet you don't keep that same energy for all MVPs.


All I see is excuses for Nash.

You say this, but then you cited Nash not winning at 38 when he wasn't anywhere near MVP level, lol

It has to actually make sense

People do the same thing with LeBron lmao

Also that team was predicted to win the championship. Even though Nash was old it was still expected to win the championship. It makes all the sense. These teams he played for could never get over the hump.


How is it we can have a problem with players like Charles Barkley not winning a championship, but when it comes to Nash he's getting so many excuses.

All I'm asking is why so many excuses for said player?

[cupcakesnake]

You do realize I made this topic because he is a 2x MVP?

You do realize I view him in high regard which is why I am asking why didn't he win a championship despite playing on some great teams.

It seems you just have a problem with me holding Nash accountable. If you think he was great he should have a championship with the players he played with.

People are literally coming to your topic and explaining the facts that resulted in a 2x MVP not winning a championship. You're being given the details. Instead of talking about the details, you prefer to generalize.

I think you want the answer to be: "Steve Nash did not win multiple championships because he was not good enough and probably wasn't an MVP talent". But that's probably not the answer. People are giving you pretty good answers and you aren't interested in them (you even call them "excuses"). It makes your topic seem like... not so much a genuine question but more an agenda to take down a player you aren't a fan of.

I've seen you go hard on Nash a ton of times so this isn't like something that just crossed your mind today and you decided to make a topic. What's your thing with Nash?

I have no thing with Nash. It seems like every player I call out people have a problem with it.

I think it's more of a me problem with the board.

I stopped talking about Luka like the mods asked. Now I can't talk about Nash. It doesn't matter who I talk about people have a problem with it.


My thing is I have seen much worst when it comes to other players. The moment I say something it's "why do you hate said player."

Maybe I should continue slandering LeBron and Embiid because it's the cool thing to do.

No one said you aren't allowed to talk about Nash. There is nothing in this topic from you that I've seen that breaks any rules.

I'm talking basketball with you: responding to your basketball opinions and the way you're talking about basketball.

I don't even necessarily think you have a problem with Nash, I'm just sort of curious what people's "excuses" aren't doing for you. There's so much interesting story filled with real things that really happened on the the path of Nash not winning a title. You already know Nash won 2 MVPs and zero titles and are asking why, but you don't seem to like anyone's answers/explanations.

There's just so much there, and I think "Nash not being good enough to win a title" just isn't a factor that makes it to the top of the list. Do you think Nash wasn't good enough to lead a team to a title? Or do you think it was circumstance and luck?

[Kingdibs19]

Also, I am tired of people whining about the suspensions in 2007 being the reason they lost. They lost Diaw/Amare for 1 game. They were back for Game 6 and still couldn't get it done to force Game 7. If they were really a better team than SA, they would have won Game 6. Horry was still out for SA in Game 6 and at that time he was still a key playoff contributor on both sides.

If this was a true championship level team they would have forced a Game 7. But they couldn't even do that. Enough with the excuses

Same. Half the posts in here are mentioning that and that he’s “underrated”. Wild

[AbeVigodaLive]

He couldn’t defend Tony Parker and was a defensive liability overall. In none of his most important playoff series was he the best player on the court.

On top of that the Suns lit resources on fire to save money, selling valuable draft picks for petty cash so the team had less room for error.

I think he spent about 6-7 years on title caliber teams yet failed to make the finals.

2003 - would have beaten the Nets but lost in WCF to Spurs, had a mediocre series

2005 - lost to spurs, would have been favored vs Pistons

2006 - lost to Mavericks, may have been favored vs Heat. Struggled in series.

Nash averaged 21 ppg and 10 ast on 52/44/96 shooting splits.

2007 - lost to Spurs in semis, would have be huge favorites vs Jazz and Cavs to win it all

2010 - lost to Lakers in WCF, would have been a toss up series vs Magic

That’s several years as strong contenders. He never had that ‘put the team in my back and carry’ series that title teams have

Never? In 2005, Nash's former team tried a new strategy by making him a scorer later in the 2nd rd. series. Nash responded with a 48/5 game followed by a 34/13/12 game and finally a 39/9/12 game to close out the series. Nash averaged 30/7/12 for the series with 55/42/96 shooting splits.

Just a couple of nuggets for those interested (in bold).

[TheGeneral99]

Weird thread. The answer is that Nash had a ton of back luck.

1) Nash played in a stacked Western Conference with rivals like the Kobe/Shaq Lakers, the Duncan-Manu-Parker Spurs, the Kings etc.

2) Nash and Dirk made the WCF in 2003 but unfortunately Dirk got hurt that series in game 3. That series still went 6 despite missing Dirk for games 4, 5, and 6.

3) Nash led the Suns to the conference finals in 2005 after the only won 29 games in 2004.

4) Nash led the Suns to the conference finals in 2006 without the Suns 2nd best player in Amare and losing Joe Johnson in free agency.

5) Terrible suspension of Amare and Diaw in game 5 after the series was tied 2-2 against the Spurs in 2007. That Spurs team swept the Cavs in the finals.

6) An old Nash took the Suns to the conference finals again in 2010, narrowly losing to a stacked Lakers team Kobe, Pau, Artest and Bynum.

[jkvonny]

Anyone winning multiple championships means someone else isn't winning. What champs should Nash's teams have been displacing?

Championships don't happen in a vacuum.

So OP, which years should he have won? How many championships exactly or is this just a vague throw it into the air. If you give us that, we can discuss something. There's usually reasons why teams that "should" win don't win.

He should have won with either of those teams. You telling me Nash/Joe/Marion/Amare shouldn't have won a championship?

The Lakers were the favorites before the season when they had Nash/Kobe/Pau/Dwight. They choked.

At what point do we hold the 2x MVP accountable?

It's like certain players can only get hate. Nash is no different than KD. Just because he's nice doesn't mean I should treat him any different than I do KD for his failed attempts at a championship with talented teams.

Maybe local media favorites or ESPN favorites?
Although, I do recall them gettin a lot of hype, but realistically, most of us didn't see it.

That Lakers team was too old at the time and injury prone.

The defending champs (Heat) and OKC Thunder (Title runner ups) were the heavy favorites. The Bulls were ahead of them as well. Spurs, too. Mavs (2011 champs)/Clips/Pacers not too far behind them.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/2013-nba-championship-odds-of-course-the-heat-are-the-favorites/

[jkvonny]

Can’t really blame him for losing to Duncan, Kobe, and Dirk. All players that nobody thinks he’s better than. Yeah, he did lose to the Kings I think a couple times in his Dallas days, but that early 2000 Sac squad was legit.

Yep, those Kings teams played great defense, too. Webber, Christie, Bibby, Jackson, Vlade, etc. early-mid '00s.

Kings beat them twice (2002 and 2004) in the playoffs those years. Could have been 3 times (Webber knee injury, lost in 7 games), 2003.

[uncleduck13]

Yeah this thread is an absolute garbage/predictable attempt at trying to get people to label Nash as oVeRatTeD & undeserving of his MVPs. OP + those first couple of posters = an organized network of Nash haters. You will find them in various different Nash-related threads, trying to push their garbage agenda.
It’s trolling at this point.

Thanks to everyone who took the time and added reasoning and context (that OP chooses to ignore btw). And thanks to everyone who straight up called this foolishness out for what it is. These guys still can’t get over Nash winning awards over their precious favorite shot chucker. It’s okay.

[og15]

Attention everyone Nash is a 2x MVP.

We hold our MVP's to a different standard. Y'all can slander and hold Embiid accountable with 1 MVP. Yet you don't keep that same energy for all MVPs.


All I see is excuses for Nash.

You say this, but then you cited Nash not winning at 38 when he wasn't anywhere near MVP level, lol

It has to actually make sense

People do the same thing with LeBron lmao

Also that team was predicted to win the championship. Even though Nash was old it was still expected to win the championship. It makes all the sense. These teams he played for could never get over the hump.


How is it we can have a problem with players like Charles Barkley not winning a championship, but when it comes to Nash he's getting so many excuses.

All I'm asking is why so many excuses for said player?

You're basically saying, "I like bad arguments"

LeBron at 38 is also at a whole different level from Nash at 38, but they are still bad arguments against LeBron and the people using them are generally arguing in bad faith, so you're saying, "these are my role models"

The team was predicted to win the championship, so because they didn't, it is a stain on their 4th best starter?

Why do you think this is a good argument?

[JustBuzzin]

People are literally coming to your topic and explaining the facts that resulted in a 2x MVP not winning a championship. You're being given the details. Instead of talking about the details, you prefer to generalize.

I think you want the answer to be: "Steve Nash did not win multiple championships because he was not good enough and probably wasn't an MVP talent". But that's probably not the answer. People are giving you pretty good answers and you aren't interested in them (you even call them "excuses"). It makes your topic seem like... not so much a genuine question but more an agenda to take down a player you aren't a fan of.

I've seen you go hard on Nash a ton of times so this isn't like something that just crossed your mind today and you decided to make a topic. What's your thing with Nash?

I have no thing with Nash. It seems like every player I call out people have a problem with it.

I think it's more of a me problem with the board.

I stopped talking about Luka like the mods asked. Now I can't talk about Nash. It doesn't matter who I talk about people have a problem with it.


My thing is I have seen much worst when it comes to other players. The moment I say something it's "why do you hate said player."

Maybe I should continue slandering LeBron and Embiid because it's the cool thing to do.

No one said you aren't allowed to talk about Nash. There is nothing in this topic from you that I've seen that breaks any rules.

I'm talking basketball with you: responding to your basketball opinions and the way you're talking about basketball.

I don't even necessarily think you have a problem with Nash, I'm just sort of curious what people's "excuses" aren't doing for you. There's so much interesting story filled with real things that really happened on the the path of Nash not winning a title. You already know Nash won 2 MVPs and zero titles and are asking why, but you don't seem to like anyone's answers/explanations.

There's just so much there, and I think "Nash not being good enough to win a title" just isn't a factor that makes it to the top of the list. Do you think Nash wasn't good enough to lead a team to a title? Or do you think it was circumstance and luck?

Im fine with people answers.

It's perfectly fine to disagree with me. It's the people who defending Nash that act like im in the wrong. You got people in this very thread calling him overrated. My problem is more about holding players accountable. I have seen previous MVP players get criticism for not winning a championship. Nash is no different imo.

#Accountability

[JustBuzzin]

Yeah this thread is an absolute garbage/predictable attempt at trying to get people to label Nash as oVeRatTeD & undeserving of his MVPs. OP + those first couple of posters = an organized network of Nash haters. You will find them in various different Nash-related threads, trying to push their garbage agenda.
It’s trolling at this point.

Thanks to everyone who took the time and added reasoning and context (that OP chooses to ignore btw). And thanks to everyone who straight up called this foolishness out for what it is. These guys still can’t get over Nash winning awards over their precious favorite shot chucker. It’s okay.

Buddy we get these threads with Lebron daily.

Deal with it. It's fine to talk about other players. You don't get tired of baiting Lebron?

[ChipotleWest]

Small guards who don't play defense, other than Kyrie 1 time with Lebron James don't win championships.

Throw in Isiah Thomas as well, good thing his teammates (Bad Boy Pistons) were great defenders tho. lol

Actually I missed another one and I'm surprised you didn't correct me, Tony Parker.

[Roger Murdock]

He couldn’t defend Tony Parker and was a defensive liability overall. In none of his most important playoff series was he the best player on the court.

On top of that the Suns lit resources on fire to save money, selling valuable draft picks for petty cash so the team had less room for error.

I think he spent about 6-7 years on title caliber teams yet failed to make the finals.

2003 - would have beaten the Nets but lost in WCF to Spurs, had a mediocre series

2005 - lost to spurs, would have been favored vs Pistons

2006 - lost to Mavericks, may have been favored vs Heat. Struggled in series.

Nash averaged 21 ppg and 10 ast on 52/44/96 shooting splits.

2007 - lost to Spurs in semis, would have be huge favorites vs Jazz and Cavs to win it all

2010 - lost to Lakers in WCF, would have been a toss up series vs Magic

That’s several years as strong contenders. He never had that ‘put the team in my back and carry’ series that title teams have

Never? In 2005, Nash's former team tried a new strategy by making him a scorer later in the 2nd rd. series. Nash responded with a 48/5 game followed by a 34/13/12 game and finally a 39/9/12 game to close out the series. Nash averaged 30/7/12 for the series with 55/42/96 shooting splits.

Just a couple of nuggets for those interested (in bold).

Fair points - I was looking at stats on my phone and may have referenced wrong series when referencing his weak series. I did not look at the Mavs series when he scored like crazy and forgot about it offhand.

Either way, in every series he lost he wasn’t the best player.

Nash is unique in that when he was winning MVPs nobody considered him a top 3 player and most didn’t consider him a top 5 player.

I view it less as Nash as being a disappointment but more that he’s clearly the worst multi time MVP winner in recent memory and people don’t hold him to same standard as other MVPs.

In NFL Lamar Jackson has 2x MVPs and nobody holds him to Mahomes standards. I think it’s similar there

[jkvonny]

Small guards who don't play defense, other than Kyrie 1 time with Lebron James don't win championships.

Throw in Isiah Thomas as well, good thing his teammates (Bad Boy Pistons) were great defenders tho. lol

Actually I missed another one and I'm surprised you didn't correct me, Tony Parker.

Uugghhh!! Mr Parker, too.

[VanWest82]

Really overrated, managed to have only 4 50/40/90 seasons and people consider him a good shooter, he had a season there he only hit 89.9% from FT line, to miss this record, basically Shaq level FT shooting, he replaced Marbury on the Suns and only added 32 wins to their record with the same players, 61-21, take any other Steve, like Blake for example, would've given them 71 at least, and that's only because he wouldn't want to touch the Bulls record.

Good candidate for adding an And2 button.

[JJ_PR]

Just looking back at some of the teams he played for dude had Amare Stoudemire/Joe Johnson/Shawn Marion. That team should have won a championship.

He also had prime Dirk. Then he had Kobe/Pau/Dwight at the end of his career.


Why couldn't Steve Nash get over the hump with these talented teams?

Nash was like 40 years old when he got to the Lakers. That's the reason he couldn't win with those guys.

[nikster]

I have no thing with Nash. It seems like every player I call out people have a problem with it.

I think it's more of a me problem with the board.

I stopped talking about Luka like the mods asked. Now I can't talk about Nash. It doesn't matter who I talk about people have a problem with it.


My thing is I have seen much worst when it comes to other players. The moment I say something it's "why do you hate said player."

Maybe I should continue slandering LeBron and Embiid because it's the cool thing to do.

No one said you aren't allowed to talk about Nash. There is nothing in this topic from you that I've seen that breaks any rules.

I'm talking basketball with you: responding to your basketball opinions and the way you're talking about basketball.

I don't even necessarily think you have a problem with Nash, I'm just sort of curious what people's "excuses" aren't doing for you. There's so much interesting story filled with real things that really happened on the the path of Nash not winning a title. You already know Nash won 2 MVPs and zero titles and are asking why, but you don't seem to like anyone's answers/explanations.

There's just so much there, and I think "Nash not being good enough to win a title" just isn't a factor that makes it to the top of the list. Do you think Nash wasn't good enough to lead a team to a title? Or do you think it was circumstance and luck?

Im fine with people answers.

It's perfectly fine to disagree with me. It's the people who defending Nash that act like im in the wrong. You got people in this very thread calling him overrated. My problem is more about holding players accountable. I have seen previous MVP players get criticism for not winning a championship. Nash is no different imo.

#Accountability

Accountability for what?

For not winning a championship a season 7 years after his MVP?

[SkyBill40]

Do we not hold all MVP's to the same standard?

"Standard" is a pretty vague rule set seeing there isn't any specific guidelines whatsoever. It's a hugely subjective measurement and your values may differ from mine or that if anyone else.

You're presenting a case of fallacy by false authority. Not to mention trying to argue based solely on subjectivity.

We all get it: You don't like Nash for any number of reasons. That's fine. But coming here and slandering a guy's individual accomplishments and value to a TEAM in a TEAM SPORT is pretty silly. His effect on the team was obvious and clearly they were outstanding with him and definitely worse without him.

Should he have won? Sure. Did he? No. Was that because Nash was a bad player? Obviously not.

Sent from my [Samsung Z4 Fold] using RealGM mobile app

I'm just curious how a 2x MVP didn't win a championship.


Charles Barkley gets hate all the time for not winning a championship. It's not his fault, but when you look at the teams Barkley played for you can see why he struggled to win a championship.

Nash on the other hand has played with other great players and had loaded rosters. I'm just curious as to why he came up short.

Barkley and the rest of the Suns ran into the Bulls at their peak, and they took two games from them and nearly pushed it to a game 7. The Bulls and Suns was a great matchup and only a Paxson three landed them that title.

Barkley isn't to blame any more than Nash is. Continuing down this path is laughable and makes no sense.

Sent from my [Samsung Z4 Fold] using RealGM mobile app

[pr0wler]

I mean, other than being one of the best offensive point guards of all-time, yes he was def overrated lol