Comments on: Is Steve Nash a Hall of Famer? Part II

By: 70percentwinner

70percentwinner — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 19:23:55 +0000

"Stop posting arguments that have COMPLETELY wrong facts! Never made it past the second round of the playoffs?!

Steve Nash led the Suns to the NBA finals in EACH of his first TWO seasons as a Phoenix Sun."

Steve Nash nor the Suns have made it to the NBA Finals since 1993.

By: killic

killic — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:46:09 +0000

Steve Nash is the only PG other then Magic Johnson to win 2 MVP awards. That alone could get him into the Hall of Fame.

By: RJTobin

RJTobin — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:09:19 +0000

"Nash’s two MVPs have been very controversial"

That doesn't matter now…. he has the hardware; 2x MVP he will be a lock!

By: writingillini

writingillini — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:17:41 +0000

Hey anthony,

I apologize for the couple of insignificant errors I've made in my article.

However, the little errors that I made have NO BEARING on the argument I am making.

Walton has two rings instead of one. Great. Does that change the fact that Nash still doesn't have one?

I also said that the "number of rings" argument isn't nearly important compared to the Hall of Fame argument.

If the usage of Google was so easy, you could have easily typed in "NBA HOF" and found out that it doesn't exist. It's the Basketball Hall of Fame buddy. Nice try though.

In writing these two Nash pieces, the biggest lesson I learned was that I should have really focused on the minor details in my piece. None of the petty mistakes I've made had anything to do with the legitimacy of my argument. Yet tons of commentors hung onto these mistakes and called into question my merits as a "journalist" (which is retarded because I'm clearly a blogger that writes about sports as a hobby) instead of focusing on the arguments that I presented.

All in all, I'd probably agree that Nash is going to make it to the Hall. It's just that there's a lot of convincing arguments on the other side that weren't being talked about. The purpose of these articles was to point the arguments against Nash out.

By: nashty

nashty — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:05:46 +0000

….

By: anthony

anthony — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 04:58:37 +0000

Uh, actually Walton owns 2 rings (got one in Boston). And I think it IS the NBA Hall of Fame, and there's one for NCAA too, which if I were a journalist I would double check before writing about. You'd think Google alone would end what is basically sloppy use of facts. I really think it's more often than not about bias and making the story fit desired outcome. But honestly, today's journalists are about as well thought of as used car salesmen and politicians and traditional media is dying a slow, well deserved death.

But come on, 2 MVP's and top 5 in assists, three pt%, and FT % is a no brainer. Let it go. You're a pretty good writer so move on to something else!

By: writingillini

writingillini — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 04:36:51 +0000

Thanks for the heads up, I corrected it. That has absolutely nothing to do with my argument though. The main point is that Walton was one of the greatest college players ever and owns a ring neither of which Nash could say the same for.

By: plc

plc — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:54:32 +0000

Stop posting arguments that have COMPLETELY wrong facts! Never made it past the second round of the playoffs?!

Steve Nash led the Suns to the NBA finals in EACH of his first TWO seasons as a Phoenix Sun. Eliminated in the West finals by San Antonio (4-1) in 2004-05 and by Dallas (4-2) in 2005-06, in a series Phoenix may have won without some untimely injuries.

So, would you like to continue this bogus argument with anymore fabrications? Maybe he doesn't deserve the HOF because he placed Flubber on the bottom of his sneakers? Switched the gameball out for a smaller one just prior to tipoff, so his shooting percentage would go up? Or maybe he doesn't deserve the HOF because he actually used a stunt double for six seasons to preserve his body for his later years?

The most important thing in journalism is accuracy. And, you sir, have placed very little emphasis on that. Embarrassing to journalists everywhere. Please, just please, stop writing.

By: B.CrayZ.

B.CrayZ. — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:36:13 +0000

More defensive crap.

Don't you ever tire from propogating such nonsense and having the nerve to call it journalism? This piece is another insult to the intelligence of each and every reader. Will you write a part 3 and part 4 continuing to attempt to defend your embarassing bias?

Does seem to me that you must know somebody in order to get away with this pitiful excuse for research. You obviously must own a crystal ball. How else can one explain your certainty of what the last years of his career will look like? I can tell you what you look like but it won't be good.

Nash does not deserve a jerk like you.