Bibby, just as good as Nash?

N.U.F.A.N.

N.U.F.A.N.

Bench
#1
#1
I'm listening to the radio right now, and they were talking about how Mike Bibby is EVERY BIT JUST AS GOOD AS NASH. they were talking about how Bibby's jump shot is better, Bibby finishes way better than Nash, and they would choose Bibby over Nash anyday. One thing that really made me think was when they said... "The only reason Nash seems good is because everyone else around him is better" That right there seems true to me...
 
iheartBrad

iheartBrad

All-Star
#2
#2
I'd pick Mike over Steve too...Mike's gotta be five years younger....and he is just as good as Nash...he has a more all around game actually...and I too agree with the last statement...and I believe I heard somebody say something similar to that before...
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#5
#5
I assume Sacto radio right?

The two players were considered roughly equivalent before this year. But this year has exposed something -- because of the purity of Nash's approach, he has the potential to legitimately be an MVP because of his impact. Mike hasn't even been an All-Star yet (think that may change next year). Its not that Nash is better than Mike talentwise, its that the talent he has, and the mentality he has, are so unique anymore, and so valuable in the right setting, that he can literally carry a team without all-planet talent.

I'm not sure there's any PG in the league rihgt now that I'd clearly trade Mike for (depending of course on what you call Dwayne Wade), but Nash is certainly outshining him and everybody else at the moment.
 
EmKingsFan4

EmKingsFan4

Starter
#7
#7
I think Mike has the potential to not only be as good as Nash, but even better...It's just a matter of more time and more experience....Webber leaving really opened up the door for Mike to truly lead a team and I think we've just seen the beginnings of what kind of PG Mike can be...>>geez..okay..jumping off Mike's jock now<< ;)
 
HndsmCelt

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#8
#8
Presure to evolve. Bibby has been coddled on a team that had 5 scoreing options who could all pass the ball way above average in a system that encouraged and rewarded that kind of play. All he has HAD to do since landing in Sac was get the ball over the line and to a big man, then be ready to drive, shoot or pass ir/when the ball got back to him... and he has done so beautifully. Nash went from a similar luxery to a team that is point gaurd focused putting the ball in his hands to create every play and surrounded him with good finishers who are not good passers. I am not saying that in the same situation Bibby would NOT rise to the occasion just noting that the circumstances that pushed little Stevie are not on Mike. Now the new look Kings have increased preasure on Mike and he is responding, but with Brad back on the court the Kings will still have grate passing big men in Brad, Darius and Thomass (well he plays where the big men play) so Mike will once agian be free to give up the ball quick and then move to the open spot.
 
Last edited:
F

Fillmoe

Guest
#11
#11
i think bibby is far better than nash..... for one, the only reason bibby doesnt put up nash style numbers is because we run the princeton offense and also we dont have a stoudemire type player....... although bibby scores more than nash he will never average double digit assists. i think Bibby beats Nash by a long shot..... if you dont believe me ask Dallas in the playoffs
 
A

AriesMar27

Guest
#12
#12
someone said in an article that bibby and kidd would have had the exact same success with the suns as nash has..... bibby has a better shot than both nash and kidd.... and the 2 of them would have been next to useless on the kings back when we had webber and vlade running the show.... they combined for nearly 10 assists.... nash's 13 points a game would look ridiculously stupid on this team....

that... and bibby is hella clutch....
 
Ray Allen34

Ray Allen34

Bench
#13
#13
bibby is really good but not close to the passer that Nash is nor does he have the court vision Nash has. Bibby is underrated by many but certainly not better than Nash.
 
KingKong

KingKong

Starter
#14
#14
Bibby is the best shooting point guard in the NBA, he is also a good ball handler, playmaker, passer and a pretty good rebounder for his size. Also his is the definition of C.L.U.T.C.H.

Nash on the other hand has better court vision and is a better playmaker than Bibby. He's much better at setting teammates up, but it also helps when your teammates can jump out of the gym everytime down the court. Nash is also a damn good shooter and scorer when he needs to be, but not as prolific as Bibby.

The question is who's the better defender?:eek:
 
tubiscus

tubiscus

Bench
#15
#15
Try Again....

Ray Allen34 said:
bibby is really good but not close to the passer that Nash is nor does he have the court vision Nash has. Bibby is underrated by many but certainly not better than Nash.
Click to expand...

Let's revisit your post in about two weeks...:cool:


As I stated in my very first post..."Nash is the Mike Bibby of the Suns" He is a good player having a GREAT year. Bibby is a GREAT player having a good year. Bibby will continue to improve as he (since the Webber trade) continues to take on more of a leadership role with the Kings. Nash will never repeat this years performance. JMHO
 
BibbyForPrez

BibbyForPrez

G-League
#16
#16
AriesMar27 said:
someone said in an article that bibby and kidd would have had the exact same success with the suns as nash has..... bibby has a better shot than both nash and kidd.... and the 2 of them would have been next to useless on the kings back when we had webber and vlade running the show.... they combined for nearly 10 assists.... nash's 13 points a game would look ridiculously stupid on this team....

that... and bibby is hella clutch....
Click to expand...
This came from an espn article where Simmons was giving his MVP breakdown.


6. Steve Nash
Put it this way: If Nash won the MVP, it would be ...
A. The first time a table-setter won the award.
B. The first time a non-franchise player won the award.
C. The first time a complete liability on the defensive end won the award.

I know he's been immensely fun to watch, and he's making everyone who ever cared about the point guard position proud. But an MVP? You're telling me that Bibby or Kidd wouldn't have been just as successful with Stoudemire, Marion, Johnson and Q on their team? Does anyone else find it depressing that the point guard position has fallen so dramatically over the years, it's practically cause for celebration when someone plays it correctly? I have a variety of methods for determining my MVP choice every year, and here's one: "If this were a pickup game, based on how everyone's playing this season, who would get picked first?" I don't see Steve Nash going ahead of any of the next five guys. Sorry.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/050408&num=0


BTW, Bibby was ranked 20th in that article.
 
B

bball

Prospect
#17
#17
C'mon guys, get real. Two of them are not even close. Steve is above MIke in every aspect of the game except D. They both suck playing defense.
 
Ray Allen34

Ray Allen34

Bench
#18
#18
BibbyForPrez said:
This came from an espn article where Simmons was giving his MVP breakdown.


6. Steve Nash
Put it this way: If Nash won the MVP, it would be ...
A. The first time a table-setter won the award.
B. The first time a non-franchise player won the award.
C. The first time a complete liability on the defensive end won the award.

I know he's been immensely fun to watch, and he's making everyone who ever cared about the point guard position proud. But an MVP? You're telling me that Bibby or Kidd wouldn't have been just as successful with Stoudemire, Marion, Johnson and Q on their team? Does anyone else find it depressing that the point guard position has fallen so dramatically over the years, it's practically cause for celebration when someone plays it correctly? I have a variety of methods for determining my MVP choice every year, and here's one: "If this were a pickup game, based on how everyone's playing this season, who would get picked first?" I don't see Steve Nash going ahead of any of the next five guys. Sorry.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/050408&num=0


BTW, Bibby was ranked 20th in that article.
Click to expand...
No because Bibby is not quick enough not a good enough passer nor does he have the vision to find guys like Amare and Marion inside and his no look passer is not close to Nash's when finding guys open for three

Bibby is really no different than he was at the Grizzles he is just in a great system. Not that he isn't a pretty good player but not on the level of the Nash's, Kidd's or the baron davis's of the world.
 
4cwebb

4cwebb

Starter
#19
#19
Ray Allen34 said:
No because Bibby is not quick enough not a good enough passer nor does he have the vision to find guys like Amare and Marion inside and his no look passer is not close to Nash's when finding guys open for three

Bibby is really no different than he was at the Grizzles he is just in a great system. Not that he isn't a pretty good player but not on the level of the Nash's, Kidd's or the baron davis's of the world.
Click to expand...
I thought that argument was fine until you went and tossed Baron Davis' name in there. Baron has tantalizing talent, but has yet to really put it all together in an injury free season on a team that makes any sort of playoff noise. Nash, Kidd and Bibby have all performed better than BDavis in the playoffs.

As for the straight up Nash vs. Bibby comparisons, they are two different players. Nash is lightyears quicker than Bibby, and he uses his quickness (he did this in Dallas, too, btw) to put pressure on the defense by penetrating and finding the open man. In Dallas, he was finding open jump shooters. In PHX, he's finding Amare to dunk the ball, which probably accounts for two more assists per game just b/c of the increased percentage of the finish (jumper vs. dunk).

But Bibby is a better shooter than Nash, or at least a more consistent shooter. I don't buy the Sports Guy's argument that Bibby would've done what Nash did with PHX. That's not Bibby's style. He may have averaged 8, 9 or may be even 10 assists per game, but I don't think he'd have reached the over 11 mark just because he is not the relentless penetrator and pusher of the ball the Nash is.
 
EmKingsFan4

EmKingsFan4

Starter
#20
#20
Ray Allen34 said:
No because Bibby is not quick enough not a good enough passer nor does he have the vision to find guys like Amare and Marion inside and his no look passer is not close to Nash's when finding guys open for three

Bibby is really no different than he was at the Grizzles he is just in a great system. Not that he isn't a pretty good player but not on the level of the Nash's, Kidd's or the baron davis's of the world.
Click to expand...
You'll have to excuse me but I don't think I can take your opinion of our PG seriously considering you're a Sonics fan...;)
 
D

Double E

Guest
#21
#21
Ray Allen34 said:
bibby is really good but not close to the passer that Nash is nor does he have the court vision Nash has. Bibby is underrated by many but certainly not better than Nash.
Click to expand...
Stick to what you know...Sonics ball.

Bibby and Nash have been a wash for years. That didn't magically change in one offseason.
 
KingsFan54

KingsFan54

Bench
#22
#22
You'll have to excuse me but I don't think I can take your opinion of our PG seriously considering you're a Sonics fan...;)

__________________
"Somebody always has something to say,I like to be the one to prove them wrong." Mike Bibby





"I couldn't believe how loud it was tonight," Jackson said. "It gave me butterflies. It gave me chills. This is what I thrive off. I felt like Superman, the way they were cheering me." ~Bobby Jackson 4-20-05

I totally agree :cool:
 
BibbyForPrez

BibbyForPrez

G-League
#23
#23
For the most part, 4cwebb, I agree with what you had to say.

While Bibby's style of play is obviously unique to that of Nash and Kidd, he certainly has earned the right to be placed in that elite group. I said it in the past and still firmly believe that Bibby would have been just as successful in Phoenix, but in different ways (a little less in the assists dept., but more in scoring).

Ray Allen34, do you really believe that Mike is the same player he was when he was with the Grizzlies?!?!? Or are you just trying to agitate us Kings fans? :p . He has grown by leaps and bounds this year alone!

And I'm not knocking Baron's skills, but he has a long way to go before he can be compared with players like Nash/Bibby/Kidd. Maybe in a couple years, but not yet.

Man, would I love to see Bibby lead the Kings to a Western Conference victory over Nash and the Suns! That would force everyone to give him the recognition he deserves
.
 
Last edited:
Bad Boy Bo

Bad Boy Bo

Bench
#24
#24
The reason Bibby does not average a high assist ratio is because everyone on the Kings make that extra pass. Kings are #1 in assist--with Bibby being the leader in assist for the team, but the rest of the team also average a high assist number for their positions. I'm not a big Bibby fan, but I will not take Nash over Bibby ever.
 
KingKong

KingKong

Starter
#25
#25
Bibby has still won the point guard matchups against Nash in the playoffs while playing against the Mavs. The only series that the Mavs backcourt beat ours was in the sereies when Webber went down and Van Exel became superman. Which player makes his team better is a moot point.
 
piksi

piksi

Hall of Famer
#26
#26
this season - You have to go with Nash.

Generally, hard to say because they are fairly even. Would be interesting if the could "trade places" for a certain period of time.

Bibby is jounger player
 
acisking

acisking

Bench
#27
#27
i agree that nash and bibby are generally equal...but what about jason kidd? i mean for years he was considered the best pg in the league and he led his team to 2 finals....although he got injured and didnt play too well to start, he has really picked up the pace and is leading a team with no other decent players other than vince...the amaxing thing is that with the injury and all he still found a way to lead the league in triple doubles again...i dont think i wud trade bibby for kidd but he still is in my opinion the best point gaurd in the league
 
B

bigbadred00

Starter
#28
#28
J-Kidd is freaking nasty. I think over the Nets last 19 games he averaged a sick stat.

For Instance for the last month of the season, 19.2 PPG, 9.3 Rebounds per game and 9.7 Assists per game as well as 2.5 Steals per Game, at a good but not outstanding 44% fromt he field. Wow. Just imagine if Kidd had a post presense, Martin, Vince and Kidd or X-Post player would make a nasty team especially with a motivated Vince and Kidd. They won 15 of 19 without a true inside palyer, that's just sick.
 
quick dog

quick dog

Starter
#29
#29
I'm with Tubbie on this one. In two weeks, the player comparisons may be much easier to make. IMHO, the Kings will win this playoff series and Mike Bibby will look like an Allstar.

Alternatively, Steve Nash may demonstrate that he should indeed be the 2004-2005 NBA MVP.
 
N.U.F.A.N.

N.U.F.A.N.

Bench
#30
#30
Ray Allen34 said:
No because Bibby is not quick enough not a good enough passer nor does he have the vision to find guys like Amare and Marion inside and his no look passer is not close to Nash's when finding guys open for three

Bibby is really no different than he was at the Grizzles he is just in a great system. Not that he isn't a pretty good player but not on the level of the Nash's, Kidd's or the baron davis's of the world.
Click to expand...
Your just a Sonics fan... it wasnt so long ago when Nash and Bibby matched up, and Bibby clearly won through all those playoff matchups. If you say Bibby didnt get any better from when he was with the Griz, then it proves he's been good all along.

Kidd is a much better guard than Nash, and so is Baron.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.