Steve Nash and John Stockton are both playmakers, when you compare them John Stockton wins the battle:
Stockton has had a career high in assists at 14.5 while Steve Nash's highest is 11.5 and Stockton has reached the NBA finals 2 times. Nash has never reached the NBA finals.
They both had great players around them Stockton with Malone, and Nash with Marion and Amare.
If your going to say Steve Nash is a NBA MVP why did John Stockton never win one, when he had better stats and a better team then Nash?
2007-03-27 16:35:16 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Basketball
because Steve nash is the media's pet and they've handed him some undeserved awards making the MVP have the lowest amount of credibility of all time
2007-03-27 16:41:17 · answer #1 · answered by truthistold2u 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
its very true when u compare nash and stockton. nash is probably a more creative player, whereas stockton is old fashioned simple passes = simple baskets.
if stockton was playing now with the numbers he was producing, then MAYBE he would be MVP. but remember, when stock was playing, there were so many other great players in the L. michael jordan was dominating and he was winning the acolades.
stockton i think was also hurt from his offensive production, he only averaged 13 points for his career tally. so he wasnt the offensive giant....but then again neither is nash. however, nash this year is an almost 20-10 guy.
with the jazz, the team was never a dominant team that was at the top of the tables. only once they were, and malone won the award. i think that also affected his chances. not having a team that was a top 2 finish meant he wasnt considered. playing with malone probably stole some of his votes as well.
it is a shame, however back then stockton wouldnt have deserved the award. in givin the mvp they tend to look at how well the team plays, team position and individual numbers.
stockton was avery durable player hardly missing any time. it would have been interestin to see the jazz play with stock sidelined for half a season. maybe then we would really see how valuable stockton is to his team.
he may not have won any mvp awards, but he has definitely left his mark in the game.
2007-03-28 04:19:21 · answer #2 · answered by C Dizzle 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very good question. First of all, I think that Nash is much more potent offensively. Which makes his game that much more dangerous. Like Stockton, he makes 1 out of 2 shots, if he didn't have the shot, he'll find someone who's free. I think the major difference is that Nash will set you up anyone of his players perfectly for a shot whereas Stockton relied on Malone to produce most of his assists. I always felt that most of Stockton's assists came Malone's short jumpshot and layups. I really wondered what percentage of his assists actually came from players other Malone. Both players are dreadful on the defensive end, though. The biggest difference, I think, is the fact that Phoenix plays like a lottery team when Nash is not playing (despite still having alot of good players on the court). You raise a very good point, though. No one gave Stockton that much credit, the guy averaged 14+ assists! Maybe it was his short shorts?
2007-03-27 16:55:09 · answer #3 · answered by lmatrixl 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That's just it. Stockton is one of those players who should have retired with a title or at least one MVP award, and did neither. He is currently the all-time leader in assists and steals, yet his Jazz couldn't completely shut down the Bulls in their only Finals appearances. Plus, he played into his old age--he was 41 when he retired--and the Jazz kept on breaking the playoffs. I don't know exactly what made Nash so popular, but I remember watching Stockton. He was tough, agile, and hard to dominate, even for a guy that was like 6'1''.
The problem is, he happened to be playing about the same time as Bird, Magic, Jordan, Duncan, and O'Neal...those were the days when the West got less respect than it does now.
2007-03-27 16:49:22 · answer #4 · answered by david u 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Michael Jordan is one of the answer. you can also apply that question to Jason Kidd. while Stockton have Malone who has 2 MVPs, Nash is the better player compared to Marion and Amare during his 2 MVP years.
and maybe because they miss Bird and Magic. there's not much player today other than Kidd and Nash who can make their teammates better much like those two icons have done during their era. a reason for them to highlight Nash's selfless style of playmaking.
2007-03-28 17:07:50 · answer #5 · answered by schnooks17 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, Stockton was always overpowered by Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson.
Kobe, Wade, Lebron, Arenas, etc. overpowered Nash, but yet he wins them back to back. Simply because he is the most overrated player in the league. Sure he can move the ball and make players better, but kobe brought it down with 81 points and didnt get any award for that. He's simply overrated and theres nothing we can do about that
2007-03-27 18:50:31 · answer #6 · answered by Adam T 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Its not really that Nash is better than Stockton but try checking out who was with him in the league. hmmm. lets see...
WOW,surprisingly its Michael Jordan! now..Who do i give the MVP award to?Stockton or Jordan?
Get it??put nash wit MJ and the bulls then he wouldnt get the MVP either.
2007-03-28 15:01:13 · answer #7 · answered by jAcob 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nash didn't play in the 1990s when Jordan, Bird and Magic dominated the NBA.
2007-03-27 18:15:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Stockton had to compete against Jordan for that MVP. If Nash had to compete against Jordan, he'd have never been in the MVP discussion.
2007-03-27 16:43:56 · answer #9 · answered by doctorklove07 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nash is just a Better Player
2007-03-27 16:42:41 · answer #10 · answered by tfoley5000 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋