Steve Nash is waaay overrated. When he left Dallas it didn't even phase Dallas. If Nash is as valuable as his HYPE says he is, then Dallas should of crumbled when Nash left Dallas. But instead, they remain in the PLAYOFFS, reach the NBA FINALS, & having a Dallas record breaking season. Dallas success without Nash just shows you how Nash is not needed. If Nash makes his teammates better, well why didn't Dallas fall apart? You know why? Because he doesn't. Nash is just a average PG that depends on good talent around him.
Anyways, here's a example of a great player leaving a team. 2004 NBA Finals, The Lakers with Shaq were competing for a title. Shaq leaves L.A. to play with the Heat in 2005..Then in 2005 L.A. without Shaq crumbled, missed the playoffs, & in 2006 got put out in the first round. Now that shows you what a valuable player does for a team....and don't even say because Dallas had Dirk & some other guys. Because L.A. had Kobe, Odom, Butler(2006 all-star), Grant, & etc.
2007-03-07 09:08:12 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Basketball
Amen Brother! I've been asking myself the same question. You put Nash on a sub-par team and he's just another sub-par player.
2007-03-07 09:12:42 · answer #1 · answered by Scottie Boy 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
If you knew anything about basketball you would not have to ask this question! Nash may not have any rings but the way he runs the point position is uncomparable to any point guard in the league! Dallas still had Dirk, Jason Terry showed up and Josh Howard stepped in and Stackhouse was there! Shaq is a dominant force and is at a different and scarce position being a Center in the NBA! Nash has a team that is fit for his style more and so does Dirk! Dallas now plays "D" and did not with Nash there! Nash by far is the NBA's MVP
2007-03-07 17:48:42 · answer #2 · answered by jesse r 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
because dallas didn't build their entire team around nash the way phoenix has. even then dirk was the first option. phoenix's entire system depends on the unique talents of nash in order to run smoothly. he can run at 100%, and still dribble and see the floor as well as he does at 50% speed. no other guard can do that. you might notice that every player on the suns got much better with nash. the mavs had other guys step up, dirk is getting better, and nash wasn't a huge loss because he wasn't the key to dallas' gameplan.
the lakers fell apart because their entire system was built around shaq occupying the defense. it's a lot easier to get open shots when you have one of the most dominant players in history in the paint. odom isn't really that good, butler didn't play that much (he's improved dramatically since then). the lakers were built around shaq and kobe, and then a bunch of role players. dallas still had finley, and they had terry, howard, and daniels. the lakers still aren't that good because kobe is still their first, second, and third option. the only decent players on the lakers other than kobe are odom, and maybe parker and walton. dallas has dirk, howard, stackhouse, terry, harris.
the success of phoenix is because they were able to build their team entirely around what steve nash does best. dallas didn't do that, which is why they didn't fall apart
2007-03-07 17:49:11 · answer #3 · answered by C_Millionaire 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If STEVE NASH is so invaluable why do the suns win 35 more games when they added him and got rid of Stephon Marbury? Im pretty sure the Suns beat the Mav's that year.
As for Dallas they added Jason Terry, they already had a blue chip backup in Devin Harris. They added Jerry Stackhouse, Josh Howard was only a rookie with Nash, now he's an all star. also have a better coach.
2007-03-10 09:55:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Dallas became a better defensive team with Avery Johnson as coach instead of Nellie and replacing Nash and Finley with Jason Terry and Josh Howard, so now they can score and play defense, whereas with Nash, all they did was score. Also when Nash was in Dallas, his stats and role wasn't as big as they are in Phoenix, since Phoenix's offense pretty much revolves around Nash, not Nowitzki as in Dallas. In LA, it was because Shaq was only one of a few good centers in the league, and you can't replace a dominant center with a forward like Odom, since there are a lot of good fowards in the league. Not having Shaq took away the lakers' primary inside threat, whereas the Mavs can still score from the outside without Nash. And unlike the Mavs, the lakers don't play much defense, giving up over 100 ppg.
2007-03-07 17:26:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
3rd Post and counting...
Good example with Shaq...However, you forget the Lakers lost a lot more than just Shaq. They also lost their PG (D.Fish) , their Coach (P.Jackson), whoever their Shooting Guard was, they ONLY retained Kobe. You bring Jackson back...viola! Lakers back in the Playoffs. You say they were put out in the first round. They played the #1 Seed...and were up 3-1...and lost in 7. They had that series and we all know it, they just came up short.
Why didn't Dallas crumble? Look who they picked up. They picked up Jason Terry, they had Marquis Daniels, and Josh Howard. To go along with Dirk. So YES, they did still have a very good team. And with their new coach (A.Johnson) they've gotten further.
Let's consider this...before Nash the Suns were 29-53, after Nash they were 62-20, best in the NBA, the VERY NEXT YEAR!!!
2007-03-07 17:31:21 · answer #6 · answered by Chaney34 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's because Dallas Have excellence player that can replace Nash after he left. You can't say the same with the laker, since those guys can't compare to the Dallas line up, all star or not.
2007-03-07 17:12:14 · answer #7 · answered by my alias 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He has really excelled and hit his prime AFTER he left Dallas. While he was in Dallas, he didn't have much of his skill as he does now. Since he has some experience, and, yes, no one is competing against him for the Suns' PG spot, he plays a huge role in the Suns' offense. Even so, it's not like the Mavs WON the Finals after he left...
2007-03-07 17:44:10 · answer #8 · answered by J Nig 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because Pheonix has players that get along with Nash better, and when the Mavs had Nash, the other players stunk.
2007-03-07 17:52:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
very good point man...
i never really thought of that
i got 1 reason mayb, and its probably not too good
but its the only one the i can make of it
anyway heres my guess... its not an opinion just a guess ^^
mayb, nash was getting the ball allot so dirk wasnt really able to be his best since nash was getting all the attention. when nash left, dirk staretd being the playmaker on the team, and he turned out to be really good so the team actually started doing better?
thats just my guess :)
but really good question bro
2007-03-07 17:14:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋