It's funny most people jump to say Nash but Iverson has a Conference Championship by himself and Nash doesn't have one. So to say Nash is better when he has 0 Conference titles despite being surrounded by all stars seems a bit unfair. Also Jason Kidd has 2 Conference Titles.
2007-05-08 03:20:15 · 20 answers · asked by Mr. Basketnutz! 2 in Sports ➔ Basketball
of course Nashhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
2007-05-08 04:41:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the road to the conference championship was easier for iverson back then. if you look at the past years in the west, the suns had to go through the mavs and spurs, last year without amare. i think for nash and the suns being able to reach the conference finals last year is commendable feat without a dominant inside force. so i say, give nash credit. it's way tougher on him. iverson doesnt look too hot right now, since the nuggs got eliminated. but if you must, here are individual comparisons:
MVP: ai has one, nash has two.
scoring title: ai
assist title: nash
nba first team: both of them
conference title/finals appearance: ai
now, both are great athletes. ai is more remarkable. just a little over 6 feet, he can slash to the rim with an amazing set of moves. nash can penetrate and make the basket, or dish it out. both are defensive liabilities because of their size. both play with great heart and intensity. so much rests on them that without them, their teams lose.
this is a really tough one, but i'd say nash. he can score too like ai, 31 points vs SA the other night. but he trusts his teammates too and defers to them, making his team much better, something ai lacks. it's not so much that he's surrounded by stars. rather, he's made his teammates into stars. who knew barbosa, bell, diaw, and company before nash stepped in? credit also goes to d'antoni and the suns system for nash's success.
2007-05-08 03:37:05 · answer #2 · answered by yippiekayyaymotherlover 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They are two totally different players. Nash is more of a passer and Iverson is more a scorer. Iverson used to be able to take anyone off of the dribble and shoot, but he can't anymore. Iverson is also a tougher player than Nash. I have seen AI continuously get fouled hard and he just keeps playing his best. They are both great players and I do not know which one is better.
2007-05-08 03:45:40 · answer #3 · answered by robert f 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They play the game differently. Iverson is the best at 1 on 1 situations. Nash is the best at setting things up for his team. Both are amazing to watch with the style that they play.
At of 2007, I would give it to Nash. Iverson's game peaked 1 or 2 years ago.
2007-05-08 03:26:31 · answer #4 · answered by Thomas 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nash is a better passer that's all. He's a better pure point guard. Iverson is a better ball player. He just has a natural feel for the game that you can't teach. A way better all around player. Put them on the court 1 on 1, and Iverson would drag him 10 out of 10 times !!! Believe that...
2007-05-08 03:26:16 · answer #5 · answered by Da Jedi 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nash, Hands down. Better passer, leader, shooter. AI is a much better scorer, but he also needs to put up a lot of shots to do it. AI's leadership is also no where close to Nash's.
Nash doesn't have any conference titles because he plays for a western conf. team. If he was in east, i am sure that he would have had atleast one conference title.
Nash isn't the only one playing with stars on his team. This year AI has 'Melo and Camby on his team. How far did the Nuggets go? The only reason they won the first game against the Spurs is because Spurs rested their starters at the end of the regular season.
I believe AI is a lot more talented than Nash. I would pick Nash over AI in five-on-five. And AI over Nash one-on-one.
2007-05-08 03:24:57 · answer #6 · answered by Nup S 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Iverson, like you said he was the team in Phily, he had no supporting cast, and he basically won a conference championship by himself. Nash has a bundle of superstars on his team, Stoudamire, Marion, and Bell, but yet he still doesn't even have one. Iverson is tougher, he can drive the lane more effectively, and I think he has a better mid-range shot.
2007-05-08 08:02:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who would i like to run my offense, Nash without a doubt. Best point gaurd in the game because he understands a true point guards duties, to make your team better, and he is the best in the league at that. Not to mention he has a better basketballl I.Q than Ivo.
Iverson on the other hand is a better basketball player just going off skill alone and ability. He's faster, more explosive, a better defender, and one of the best finishers in the league. But lets make it clear, Ivo is a shooting guard, a pure scorer, and to me not a true leader. Overall i would take Nash on my team hands down.
2007-05-08 03:34:00 · answer #8 · answered by yamanziz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would say Iverson because he is a much better scorer by himself and he can make others better 2.See what he did 4 Denver.He gave up leadership 2 Carmelo when he had 2.Those 2 had some of the most outstanding plays dis season.
2007-05-08 03:30:29 · answer #9 · answered by bcgh19902004 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nash by a long way. A very long way. I'm in Australia, the distance between me and you is about the distance between Nash and iverson.
2007-05-08 03:59:35 · answer #10 · answered by N. Andrews 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As a Philadelphia sports fan since 1968, I am qualified to say that Iverson is one of the most one-dimensional, overrated players to come along in my time.
His nickname should be "The Cancer" for all the heaps of money, attention, players, and coaches that were thrown his way, only to have controversy, no championships, and snubbing ticket buying fans on "Fan Appreciation Night".
Denver can keep him. I am so glad he isn't playing in Philly. I don't care if he wins 10 championships for the Nuggets, he isn't worth a dollar to me.
2007-05-08 03:29:40 · answer #11 · answered by Awesome Bill 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋