Jan 21, 2009

Why I will always love Steve Nash

Last week I received the latest ESPN magazine in the mail, and upon flipping through the first five pages and getting to Bill Simmons' latest column, my eyes grew wide and my breath caught in my throat.

HAS ANYONE SEEN STEVE NASH LATELY? ... NASH WAS EXPLOITED DEFENSIVELY MORE TIMES THAN LINDSAY LOHAN. - pull quotes from the Simmons piece

You can see how I'd be perturbed.

Essentially, the argument is that playing for Mike D'Antoni and his offense inflated Steve Nash's numbers, ostensibly making his MVP years and overall legacy "asterisks'" in the history of the game.

I respect Bill Simmons. He's a witty, observant sports columnist who often provides more accurate insight using his sports savvy and gut instinct than many trained journalists wielding notebooks of research and calculators of statistical metrics.

In this case however, I call bullshit.

I agree that playing in Phoenix inflated Nash's numbers. This much is for certain. What I don't like is the idea that somehow that is wrong, or unfair to the players on all the teams that played in cities not ending in 'X' during D'Antoni's tenure.

The argument of players putting up career numbers being a fluke makes no sense. Yes, Chris Duhon is playing great, but how could that possibly mean he's playing better than he is? What does that even mean really? Doesn't that simply show that, provided with the right environment, every NBA players could put up better numbers? And in fact, isn't that what D'Antoni does? Foster an environment whereby his players produce to the greatest potential their talent allows (see; Marion, S.)?

Why is that an unfair advantage? How is that an asterisks? Frankly the greater logistical failure in the column is the fact that, for much of the 70's and 80's, teams played at a faster pace and had nearly 30 more possessions per game than even the heralded 2004-2005 Phoenix Suns.

Detroit beat Denver 186-184 on December 13, 1983 in a game that featured only one overtime period. ONE! Those two teams put up a combined 370 points in 53 minutes of play. To put things in perspective, the highest scoring game yesterday was Houston's 115-113 win over Denver in regulation, or in other words, 142 fewer points in 5 fewer minutes played.

Also, maybe the Nuggets should stop getting into shootouts. But I digress.

My point is that in that ridiculous game from 1983, only Isaiah Thomas averaged double-digits in assists out of all the players from either of those team's rosters. He finished that season at 11.1 assists per game. Again, for context, this is just shy of Nash's 11.5 apg from the 2005 NBA season.

You get where I'm going here? What Nash did in his MVP years is not merely a result of circumstance. Other players have, and will continue to play for teams and in games where pace is pushed faster than the league-wide mean. This strategy is not new. But Nash managed to thrive in this environment perhaps more than any other player the NBA has ever seen.

Replace Steve Nash in 2005 with the 2009 iteration of Chris Duhon, and do you think the Suns are still title contenders that year? I think the answer is pretty clear.

An asterisks on the Suns is ridiculous. What would it say? "note: this team scored a lot" ?

Stick to 90210 jokes Simmons. You got too big for your britches this time, friend.

No comments: