Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chumdawg
Well, I guess it's a case of selective memory, then. If a guy averaged 15 or 16 points in the playoffs, and also was not known to routinely score 30+ in those games, it's reasonable to assume that two- and six-point outings are outliers. And the outliers don't generally form the impressions you remember about a player.
But even moreso than that, the impression I got from your post wasn't that you were talking about the playoffs in specific--since the NJ game wasn't a playoff game, especially. You may be right that this is a misunderstanding caused by differing semantics, but I remain painfully aware that there is a considerable, and often quite vocal, contingent that likes to disparage Nash now that he is gone. Kinda like when the hot chic dumps you and you tell yourself, not to mention anyone else who will listen, that she wasn't that great anyway.
But yes, you did say it was an extreme example. Still, I found the observation disrespectful to not only Nash but also to every Maverick and every Mavericks team from the Nash days. I prefer to hold franchise stalwarts in higher regard.
|
Look, simply put, the 0 pts, 0 asts line reminded me of Nash's mortality. You will note that I was very careful to say that "it reminded me
a little bit" of Mavs Nash and that it was an
extreme example. Yes, 10-11 pts aren't 0 pts, but c'mon you can't tell me you don't see what I'm trying to say: that the shooting star that is Steve Nash "MVP" was brought hurtling down to earth that one night. We saw in place of the unstoppable offensive juggernaut the media lick their chops over, a too-slow, defensively-inept PG who had his hands bound and couldn't lead his team to victory despite his best efforts.
THAT is what reminded me of the old Steve Nash. We can argue over the stats all night long and probably never see eye-to-eye, but I hope I've clarified what I am saying.
Today, when Nash scores 10-11 pts, it's considered an off-night. That was the
norm in the games that I cited - games that are representative of Nash's performance with the Mavs (15 of the 21 playoff games he's been in for us since 2001). What would people be saying about Nash if he averaged 15-16 a night for the Suns? Whenever he went off for 20+ pts or 10+ asts with us, it was a
monster night - now that he's in Phoenix,
that has become the norm. My impression of Nash while he was here is that he was a
good PG - comparable to players such as Jason Kidd, Mike Bibby - but since he's left he's taken it to another level. He
was not great here. He wasn't a 0 pts, 0 asts player, but neither was he a 25 pts, 10 asts player.
Furthermore, while I am decidedly of the mindset that we are better off without Nash, I have certainly never "disparage(d) Nash now that he is gone". Don't include me in the Nash-bashing set. There is little, if any, point in debating the merits of a player who is no longer here - it's a waste of time and energy. Any fan would have to be ignorant of basketball not to recognize the fact that Nash was a good player - and in his current incarnation, a great one. But that doesn't change the fact that this Mavs team is a stronger team and a more competitive team in his absence - an assertion that I hope we prove to people like yourself in the coming weeks.
Your hot chick analogy doesn't fit. Nash was cute when he was here, maybe that track girl who hadn't filled out yet. But by no stretch of the imagination was he hot. After Nash left for Phoenix - he got a boob job, he changed his hairstyle, maybe got highlights, he got a tan...whatever...he's hot
Now, he wasn't then. Nash is the girl I dumped because I thought she was too plain and I could do better, who then came back with a pair of double-D's and made me regret ever leaving her. Nash is our very own "She's All That".
I get that you're a big Nash fan. No problem - but don't let that cloud how you read and interpret my post.