Bibby, just as good as Nash?

#31
^ well said...

when playing against each other bibby usually has the upper hand...

the thing about nash is that critics are influenced he is better is that he is the main catalyst (in terms of running the offense) to the teams he has played for so far.. thats why he has averaged much higher assists compared to bibby who plays for a passing orientated sacramento team....

in bibby's 2nd and 3rd seasons with the grizzlies he averages more than 8 asts per game but since moving to the kings his assits numbers have dropped but if you traded bibby with nash for one game mike would be able to fill nash's spo, mabye even better due to his late clutch plays and offensive punch...
 
A

AriesMar27

Guest
#33
^^^ thats true... kidd and nash wouldnt have been that great on this team.... not now and definitely not with divac and webber on the team....
 
#34
For those of you who don't think Mike's style would work in Phoenix.....

He originally was a run and gun point guard in high school (Beleive me I was there)

He took that run and gun style to U of A and LED Lute Olsen to his first and only national championship.

He averaged around 8 assists in his three years with completely inferior talent surrounding him in Vancouver.

He had to completely revamp his style of play when joining Sacramento. His first season he just basically brought the ball up and watched everybody else do their thing.

Everybody found out what he was capable of in the 2002 playoffs.

People talk about him not playing well vs. Dallas the next year but he had 29 points in the game 7 loss. He was not the reason we lost to Dallas. C-Webb getting hurt was.

Now he's the main option on this team. He has to think score first but still averages over 7 assists since the Webber trade.

If he had JJ,Q,Matrix, and Amare running with him. I beleive they could have won 70 games this year. Taking nothing away from Steve Nash....He's no Mike Bibby!
 
F

Fillmoe

Guest
#35
who you gonna take in the playoffs? nash or bibby............................................ end of story!
 
#36
Nash is quicker, footspeed, hand speed and decision making. Both are great shooters, and seem to excel in clutch time. Bibby is stronger and more durable

Overall, I'd say that up to this point Nash has been the better player (especially this season) with two major caveats.

1- Bibby is younger: Nash is at his peak right now, any minute he could start to decline, you never know whwn it'll start (especially for a player that relies on hi speed so much) Bibby should be good to go for years to come.

2- Durability seems to me a major problem for Steve-O. He seems to enter every post season beat up and worn out, and his game suffers for it. If I was coaching Nash, I'd folow the Sloan-Stockton set up during stock's final couple of years. Sloan took him out for serious pre-set long rests EVERY game of the regular season. Period. No matter what. In spite of the fact that the Jazz were something like plus 12 when stock was in the game and minus 14 when he was out. The jazz got slaughtered EVERY time he sat down, but Sloan realized that it didn't matter, relative to the importance to having stock as full speed as possible for the playoffs (where sloan played him much longer minutes)
 
#39
teamdimechampionship said:
Everybody found out what he was capable of in the 2002 playoffs.

People talk about him not playing well vs. Dallas the next year but he had 29 points in the game 7 loss. He was not the reason we lost to Dallas. C-Webb getting hurt was.
For those of us that actually watched those playoff games with a non-biased viewpoint, Nick Van Exel clearly was the reason we lost that playoff series. He absolutely killed us. Bibby nor Jackson could stop him.

Back to topic.

Not surprisingly, I agree with what Simmons said on this topic. Of course Phoenix wins just as many games with Bibby or Kidd as they do with Nash. I'm even in the belief they win 65-67 games with Kidd. Bibby wouldn't have dupicated Nash's numbers as far as assists and shooting percentage but still would of made the Suns as effective on the break and more concentrated and focused in the half court sets.

Is it just me, or do teams with high athleticism typically have PG with high assist numbers? Examples Suns with Nash and early Grizzlies with Bibby.

I still can't see giving Nash the MVP. He is doing the same thing John Stockton did for 10 straight years for Utah and never had this many media members calling for him to win it.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#40
C Diddy said:
For those of us that actually watched those playoff games with a non-biased viewpoint, Nick Van Exel clearly was the reason we lost that playoff series. He absolutely killed us. Bibby nor Jackson could stop him.

Back to topic.

Not surprisingly, I agree with what Simmons said on this topic. Of course Phoenix wins just as many games with Bibby or Kidd as they do with Nash. I'm even in the belief they win 65-67 games with Kidd. Bibby wouldn't have dupicated Nash's numbers as far as assists and shooting percentage but still would of made the Suns as effective on the break and more concentrated and focused in the half court sets.

Is it just me, or do teams with high athleticism typically have PG with high assist numbers? Examples Suns with Nash and early Grizzlies with Bibby.

I still can't see giving Nash the MVP. He is doing the same thing John Stockton did for 10 straight years for Utah and never had this many media members calling for him to win it.
Its the MVP for impact. Phoenix had the same core last year (minus Q who is easily their worst starter) and were miserable. Steve Nash makes that team go. Period. He's the engine that transforms great athletes with limited offensive games into explosive uber-weapons. Amare is only half the player without Nash this year (and the numbers back that up).

And no Phoenix would not be as good with Bibby because Bibby doesn't give them exactly what they need to the same degree Nash does. Bibby likes to shoot more, is slower, less intuitive as a passer. He is Nash's equal in overall ability, but his particular abilities do not suit that team as well. In fact the only PG in the entire league who I think could have done something similar with Phoenix is their old leader, Kidd. It really is a similar story to what he was able to engineer in New Jersey with Martin, Kittles, Jefferson etc. Ideal fit for a team of great athletes.
 
#41
Brick-You take a team WITHOUT a pg in Barbosa and put a point guard that fits the bill along with the maturity of Amare and Joe Johnson and that's why they are so good this year. Amare and Joe have never been this good. Amare was good last year after Marbury left and Joe has never been consistant, you can give Nash definitely some of the praise but you also must realize these players are both in there 3rd year and are definitely still maturing and getting better by the day. Nash can be credited with some of this, but I'm pretty sure without Nash, if they had Amare, Q, Marion and Joe Johnson + a number of good/decent pgs who are less praiseworthy than Nash this year you would atleast win 50 games (Miller, Kidd, Bibby, Parker, Tinsley), Nash definitely took these guys over the edge, but they had the talent there with JJ, Marion and Amare last year they were just missing a lot of pieces. Marion, JJ, and Amare with Starbury in JJ and Amare's first year gave the Spurs some trouble and Starbury is a crappy PG (better scoring guard).
 
#42
When I think of the 3 main things Phoenix does on offense, I see Bibby being successful in all three aspects equal to Nash.

Leading the break:

Bibby, while not as quick as Nash, is very capable of running the break. His passing in the open floor is marvelous. 3 seasons back, with a healthy-pre-knee injury Webb, we had 4 guys who could run down the floor and finish at the hoop (Christie, Webber) or spot up outside (Stojakovic, Bibby).

Nash is in a similar situation with arguably better supporting players. Stoudemire and Marion play above the rim with the best of em and Joe Johnson and Quentin Richardson are both deep threats. Nash is a 40% 3 point shooter also. He can drain the three if all else fails on the break.

Pick-and-roll:

In Dallas, Nash and Dirk killed us with this play, over and over, night in and night out. Dirk sets the pick at the arc for Nash, if Bibby goes around the pick (which he always does) Nash has the option of spotting up, or dribble penetration to draw the double team. If Bibby switches onto Dirk, there is an instant mismatch, forcing a double team from Webber or Stojakovic and after 2 passes, Michael Finley has an open jumper or a drive to the basket. Nash runs the same plays in Phoenix, but is far more deadly because of the supporting cast. Stoudemire is growing into one heck of a smart basketball player. His jump shot gets more and more range as he gets more experience. Same pick play, which they also run with Marion, produces the same results. An open look for Nash, a mismatch with Stoudemire on a pg who forces a double, or open jump shots or drives from Marion, Johnson, or Q.

On the flipside, Bibby knows the 2 man game just as well. He was forced to learn it inside and out to counter the Stockton-Malone punch against Utah 3-4 seasons ago. He had to perfect the pick and roll with Webber to compete. If the defender goes under the pick, Bibby spots up or drives. Webber can spot up if both defenders chase Bibby. He can pass the ball to Peja if the rotation isn't quick enough or if Webber draws the double team. I have no doubt Bibby could be just as successful as Nash in the pick-and-roll in Phoenix.

Lastly.

Dribble Penetration:

What Bibby lacks in speed, he makes up for in dribble moves. We've all seen Bibby's patented hop-crossover and how can get to the basket. Bibby is one of the best pg at using his body and offarms to shield shot blockers away from his lay-up attempts. Defenses know this and have to counter by doubling Bibby in the paint, which allows him to find an open Kenny thomas, or Darius Songaila, Brad Miller for the open 18 footer. Even better, he finds Peja for 3.

These are just 3 basic basketball aspects where Bibby would easily equal Nash if surrounded by the athleticism and talent in Phoenix.

Phoenix is healthy. They have all played with each other all year and have perfected the run and gun style, which heavily favors athletic scorers. The Kings, because of all the trades and injuries, haven't had the practice time to build the cohesion and chemistry like the Suns have. That is the main reason we aren't as successful as Phoenix this year.

Bibby would flourish in Phoenix.
 
#43
HndsmCelt said:
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.
Actually, I think he proved what he could do with other great players around him in the Olympic qualifying tournament. Bibby was sensational. So good, they ended up relying on him at point more than Kidd. It thought Bibby was amazing. Marion is an All-star and Amare will be a stud in this league for a long time (barring major injury). That certainly helps Nash.
 
Last edited:
#44
I would take Bibby any day. Hes a clutch shooter (duh!) and has a much better offensive game. His defense can be worked on but Nash isnt too good at defense either. If Bibby had the players that Nash had then he would be just as good or even better because he can shoot a lot better and step up in the clutch.
 
#45
Personally, I'd take either of them, but Nash has to show he can win this postseason with his team, the Mavs were awfully explosive on offense and we saw what happened to them. I'm not saying Phoenix won't roll through the playoffs to the WCF, it's a distinct possibility, they are even more explosive than the Mavs were, but Nash has to do it first. Game on the line in the playoffs and you need a basket... Bibby any day. Series on the line and you need a big game from your PG... Bibby any day(although Nash is also good in these two areas). I guess what I'm saying is the postseason is what really matters in the NBA, and while both have played very well at times over the last few years I'd have to give the nod to Bibby. Also like some have said, Nash is def a better penetrate and dish PG(His quickness offensively, and court vision are insane!), but Mike is def a better penetrate and finish and/or get to the line PG. Mikes assists have also jumped signifigantly since the trade, we hardly even act surprised any more when we see a 10 assist game from him, add his usual 20 pts, + super huge clutch shots... and thats saying something.
 
Last edited:
#46
Bibby_Is_Clutch said:
I would take Bibby any day. Hes a clutch shooter (duh!) and has a much better offensive game. His defense can be worked on but Nash isnt too good at defense either. If Bibby had the players that Nash had then he would be just as good or even better because he can shoot a lot better and step up in the clutch.
Me to!! With the way the Kings offense has been set up, they don't rely as heavily on their PG to run the offense (until Brad went down). And, especially with Brad out, you just can't compare what Bibby has around him with what Nash has. I've heard some "experts" say they would not call Bibby an "elite" PG, because of his defense. But Nash might get MVP???!!!!! If anything, he's a worse defender than Bibby!!! ("Experts" should be a 4-letter word:rolleyes: )
 
#47
i think mike bibby is every bit as good as steve nash. if the kings had a player like amare stoudemire who mike bibby could dish the ball to in the paint many times a game, then you'd see bibby's assist numbers up as high as nash's, not to mention bibby is a superior shooter. and i think bibby's court vision is also right on par with nash's. nash is flashier, but that counts for little in this kind of comparison. steve nash is an mvp candidate solely because of his teammates. was there talk of nash for mvp when he was with the mavericks, and younger? no. nash's scoring has fallen off some. his assists numbers are much higher, but that is about it. steals, rebounds, etc are mostly similar to his dallas days. the only reason he's a candidate for mvp is the impact he has for his team. he, quite literally, is the most valuable player in the nba, cuz we saw the suns go on a 6 game losing streak in his absence. take nash out, and the suns are much less functional. of course, same goes with the kings right now. but we can function w/o mike when we're completely healthy. we've got other guys who can initiate the offense. in phoenix, everything goes thru nash. with that said, i think nash deserves the mvp. its great what he's done in phoenix. but i honestly believe he and bibby are right wth each other as far as skill set is concerned.