Chris Paul, Steve Nash, these should be the two greatest traditional point guards in the new century. Both of them are traditional point guards focusing on passing, and the honor they have gained in their respective eras Quite rich, so who of them has a higher historical status, who is the greater point guard? Today we will analyze it. First, let's look at Paul.
Until now, Paul is also the greatest traditional point guard currently active in the NBA. He is far better than traditional point guards like Rondo and Wall. Throughout Paul’s career, averages per game. He can contribute 18.5 points, 9.5 assists and 2.2 steals. He is the best defensive point guard in active service, so there is no need to add one.
's career Sao Paulo was selected to ten All-Stars, including four starts, one All-Star MVP, four assists, six steals, and four NBA first teams. Selected to the NBA All-Defensive Team seven times.
This honor is placed in the history of the NBA, and it is absolutely strong. At his peak, Paul can compete with Kobe for the MVP. His attitude and style are relatively sturdy, and the player is also the top player in history!
But unfortunately, Paul’s career lead is not very good. His lower limit is very high, but the upper limit is relatively low. The most obvious is the years when he led the Clippers, those years the Clippers also have Relatively good lineup, but every year, early in the playoffs out.
Let’s look at Nash again. His career Nash averaged by can contribute 14.3 points and 8.5 assists. , he is the first generation pioneer in the small ball era, as the Phoenix’s back then Engine, Nash won the regular season MVP in the Suns for two consecutive years. Occupation career, Nash was selected to the All-Star eight times, including two starters, three NBA first team selections, five assists for the king , we will find that it seems that Nash is not as good as Paul in all the honors except for consecutive MVP awards. .
Facts, it is true. Nash and Paul pass the ball. Needless to say, they can become historical-level point guards. Their passes must be SSS+ level, but apart from passing, Nash Nash's defensive and scoring abilities are not as good as Paul's. This is the visible gap. Nash has 0.7 steals in his career, which is a relatively low number.
Back to the question itself, Paul and Nash, who is the greater player with higher historical status? So far, the US media’s rankings for them are among the best. Nash’s high and Paul’s are okay. Some fans may wonder what this is for. Obviously it is a two-time MVP, but Nash’s other The honor is slightly shabby, the statistics other than assists are not good, and Nash does not have a championship, which is why he cannot have an overwhelming advantage over Paul.
Let me talk about my personal opinion. I personally think that the historical status of Paul and Nash is the same as that of Iverson and Harden. Now you say that Paul surpassed Nash, that must be There will be huge controversy, but as time goes by, Paul's data and honors accumulate, and it will be sooner or later to surpass Nash without dispute.
I know that some friends may question that MVP is the biggest award a player can obtain. He cannot be substituted. This is true, and I absolutely agree, but he cannot offset the gap that is too large. Wait for honor, which is why I think Paul’s historical status will eventually surpass Nash.
Finally, I want to say one thing. Actually, it depends on the understanding of players' historical status. Everyone has different rankings in their hearts. It is only for the historical status of Nash and Paul. Who do you think is their historical status? Higher?