The Eastern Conference's "other big 3" will be down to a mere 2 for quite some time. News came yesterday that Washington Wizards guard Gilbert Arenas will be out of commission for 3 months, leaving Caron Butler and Antawn Jamison to carry the Wiz in the nation's capital. Arenas suffered torn cartiledge in his knee (ouch!), which he admitted on his NBA.com blog could be a result of pushing himself a little too hard coming back from last year's somewhat unrelated knee injury. According to Arenas, he didn't give himself enough time to let his muscles heal and put too much pressure on the knee over the summer.

"I'm going to stay positive this time, because feeling sorry for myself didn't work last time. It just kind of hurt that everything I did this summer really meant nothing, to the point where I'm rehabbing again...Running bleachers, riding bikes and doing all that stuff was just a little too much," wrote Arenas on his blog.

While Agent Zero sits out until February, the Washington Wizards so far have been doing a pretty decent job keeping the ship going in the right direction. After a rather worrisome 0-5 start to the season, Washington has won 6 games in a row and word around town is that Arena's injury, while tough, probably won't be enough to derail the team's playoff hopes. But, while Butler and Jamison are plenty talented, and Brendan Haywood, Darius Songaila and Antonio Daniels have stepped up this season, we're not so sure the Wiz can keep rolling along for long without o'l Gil.

First, their 6-game winning streak is a bit of an abberation. During that streak the Wizards have beaten Atlanta, Indiana, Minnesota, Portland, Philadelphia and Charlotte. Of all those teams, perhaps only the Charlotte Bobcats have a legitimate shot at the playoffs -- and their's is a tricky shot to say the least. On paper it looks like the Wiz have picked up the defensive intensity and are staying on track offensively without Gilbert, but in reality the numbers are seriously skewed as a result of poor competition. Combined, those squads have a horrendous 23-42 record. The Wizard's 0-5 start, which included losses to teams like Boston, Orlando, New Jersey and Denver, is probably closer to their actual status in the East. And, they are yet to play other Eastern powerhouses like Detroit, Toronto and Cleveland.

The loss of Etan Thomas to injury before the start of the season hurt significantly, as Washington lost a force on the offensive glass and a big body underneath from a front-line that is paper-thin to begin with. Now, the loss of Arenas could put them in a large enough hole in the standings, where a climb back to playoff contention may be too difficult to accomplish. In a perfect world, Arenas would be back before the All-Star game, which would in theory give the Wizards enough remaining games, if they play near-perfect ball, to get back in the mix. But in reality, that seems unlikely. The magic 8-ball says that the prognosis for a playoff run this season is "very doubtful".

The bottom line to all of this of course -- if the Wiz do miss the playoffs -- is that Eddie Jordan's coaching tenure in Washington could be in serious jeopardy. Sure, GM Ernie Grunfeld and Jordan have brought the Wizards franchise, which had been less than mediocre for decades, back to playoff prominence. And believe us, the fans around Washington are plenty thankful. But, for the last three seasons the team has been been treading water a little bit. It's not just about making the playoffs anymore for this franchise. They need to take the next step, before it's too late. Given that they now possess one of the most explosive scorers in the game in "hibachi", it's high time the Wiz stepped up into the upper echelon of the Eastern Conference, with neighbors like the Celtics, Cavaliers and Pistons.

Conventional wisdom when drafting in the NBA is "when in doubt go big". Historically NBA GMs have played it safe and followed that mantra to a tee, even when the results were embarrassing and career jeopardizing - the classic example against this rule of thumb of course is when Portland took Sam Bowie out of Kentucky ahead of some guy named Jordan.

Still, that thinking continues to persist among NBA management and player personnel circles. So, it was no surprise then that during the 2005 draft big men Andrew Bogut and Marvin Williams went 1-2 to the Milwaukee Bucks and Atlanta Hawks respectively. While Bogut and Williams have been decent additions to their teams, those two squads passed up on 2 really great point guards. Deron Williams of the Utah Jazz and Chris Paul of the New Orleans Hornets went 3rd and 4th during that season's draft, and both will be the dominant players at the point guard position in the NBA for years to come.

 While players like Steve Nash and Jason Kidd ride off into the twilight years of their careers, Williams and Paul will be racking up All-Star, All-NBA and perhaps even NBA Championship honors. But, let's get more specific here. Who's better? Is it the steady confidence and pin-point passing of Williams? Or, the explosive first step, toughness and playmaking ability of Paul?

Leadership: We went with this category first, because here is where you separate the talented, but unexceptional point guards from the great ones. While Paul is the clear leader on his team, despite the presence of other talented players like Peja Stojakovic, Tyson Chandler and David West, Williams plays second fiddle on the Jazz to at least Carlos Boozer, and perhaps even Mehmet Okur and Andre Kirilenko. Williams also doesn't have a "take charge and round up the troops" type personality. Paul, on the other hand, took the reigns of the Hornets from Day 1, leading the team to a whopping 20-win increase over the previous season.

Chris Paul: B+
Deron Williams: C+

Advantage: Chris Paul.

Shooting: Chris Paul is shooting 50% from the floor this year on 14.6 shots per game, but for his career Paul is only a 43.9% field goal shooter with most of his shots coming in the lane on driving layups. Williams' game on the other hand is very much reliant on his silky-smooth outside jumper. Deron is shooting 49.1% this year on 13.9 shots per game, and for his career has shot 44.5%. He is also a better 3-point shooter than Paul, making 42.4% of his 3s this year while taking 2.8 per game. Paul is shooting better on this 3s this year, making 40.9%, but for his career he is a 31.9% shooter from beyond the arc. Williams has also shown, at least to this point, that he is a better clutch shooter than Paul.

Chris Paul: B-
Deron Williams: B+

Advantage: Deron Williams

Passing: This is a really close call. While Chris Paul is better at breaking down the defense with his dribble and creating easy opportunities for the Hornets big men, Williams is a more accurate passer and gets a lot of his assists on pick-and-rolls with Boozer and Okur. This year, Chris Paul's assists are through the roof at 10.8 per game, and for his career he is dropping 8.5 dimes per. Williams is getting 8.5 assists per this season and for his career he has dished out a relatively paltry 7 assists a game. Coming in this is a category we expected Williams to take. But, while he is a more accurate passer than Paul, he also gets a good chunk of his assists through the Jazz offensive system. Paul, on the other hand, can create assists, and subsequent points, where there aren't any - creativity wins out.

Chris Paul: B+
Deron Williams: B

Advantage: Chris Paul

Defense: In this case, size makes a difference. Williams at 6' 3" and 208 pounds is able to body up in the post against some of the bigger point guards in the league and he's just quick enough to hold his own on the perimeter defensively. Paul, while crafty defensively on the block - see his steals at a whopping 3.2 per game - is somewhat undersized at 6' and all of 175 pounds. While he is a better lock-down defender on the perimeter, anytime they play against Paul teams will try to make him play defense in the paint. Williams, on the other hand, has no such glaring defensive deficiency that teams can exploit.

Chris Paul: B-
Deron Williams: B

Advantage: Deron Williams

Potential: The thing we like about Chris Paul, more than any thing else, is the way he has improved every season - the result of a lot of hard work in the off-season. Granted, Deron Williams also works incredibly hard and the Jazz coaches have labeled him the biggest "gym rat" on the team, he just hasn't shown the incremental improvement that Paul has. His scoring, assists, field goal percentage and three-point percentage has improved every year during his first 3 seasons. This season, Paul is averaging an impressive 19.5 points, 10.8 assists, 4.4 rebounds and 3.2 steals per game. He is also shooting 50% from the floor overall, 40% from beyond the arc and 90% from the line - those are All-NBA numbers. Deron Williams has been a bit more up and down. While his scoring has gone up every year he's been in the league, his assists, for example, are down this year. On the season, Deron is averaging 17.8 points, 8.4 assists, 2.9 rebounds and 1.2 steals per contest. His shot though is solid at 49.1% from the floor, 42.7% from 3 and 78.9% from the free-throw line.

Chris Paul: A-
Deron Williams: B

Advantage: Chris Paul

Really, you probably can't go wrong with either guard. But, if we were starting a franchise today and had to choose one of the two we'd take Chris Paul. His leadership and ability to take control of a team, potential to improve even more individually and highlight reel, ticket-selling game would put Paul just slightly ahead of Williams.

Like fine wine, Steve Nash has only gotten better with age, seriously better. It doesn't seem possible now, what with Nash becoming intimately familiar with the NBA MVP award in recent years, but his first four seasons out of Santa Clara University were pretty pathetic. In fact, take a close look at his career numbers, Nash was nowhere near MVP-caliber until he came back for his second run in Phoenix playing under Mike D'Antoni's "7 seconds or less" offensive system. A system by the way, that has made solid players out of career journeymen like Raja Bell, James Jones and Boris Diaw. But we digress. In Dallas, during his best season, Nash averaged 17.9 points and 7.7 assists. Solid, but sorry, no MVP for you!

We bring all this up because we were having this conversation over the weekend. Where does Nash rank among today's crop of point-guards? Does Nash really deserve the 2 MVP trophies he took home following the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 seasons? In fact, where would Nash rank among the greatest points of all-time?

Steve Nash fans probably won't like our answers.

Look we love the little guy's heart and hustle. His offensive skills are also rather substantial, with a silky smooth jumper, mesmerizing passing ability and high basketball IQ. And to top it off, Nash is a model citizen and all-around good guy off the court. In fact, if every NBA player had his personality, principles and poise, the NBA would be a whole lot more popular with casual fans.

But, on the flip side, Nash is also one of the worst defensive point-guards in the league, he can't rebound to save the world and, plain and simple, owes a huge chunk of his success in recent years to the D'Antoni system. In fact, to those that watch the NBA closely it is pretty clear that the only reason Steve Nash won the MVP award during the 2005-2006 season, ahead of more deserving candidates like Kobe Bryant or Dirk Nowitzki for example, is because the 125 sportswriters and broadcasters that vote for the NBA MVP award are simply fonder of Nash. That's it, given a close MVP race, the only reason Nash took home the hardware was because he's the most likeable. Didn't know we were back in high school, but whatever.

So, given that analysis, and considering the fact that Steve Nash has never won an NBA championship, let's get back to those pressing questions. Where does Nash rank, among the point-guards both today and all-time? Well, looking at his current peers, the other point guards in the conversation should probably be Jason Kidd, Deron Williams, Chris Paul, Baron Davis, Gilbert Arenas, Tony Parker and Chauncey Billups. If we had to rate this group, considering current skills, ability to play under a variety of systems, and future potential, we'd do it thusly:

1. Gilbert Arenas
2. Jason Kidd
3. Chris Paul
4. Steve Nash
5. Baron Davis
6. Deron Williams
7. Chauncey Billups
8. Tony Parker

By our calculations, Nash is clearly not the top point-guard in the game today, as some might think. What about all-time? Just for kicks, the list below is how we'd rank the top 5 point guards of all-time. Nash would probably appear somewhere near the bottom of the top 15.

1. Magic Johnson
2. Oscar Robertson
3. Isiah Thomas
4. John Stockton
5. Bob Cousy

Then you've got players like the aforementioned Kidd, Kevin Johnson, Walt Frazier, Gary Payton, Pete Maravich, Nate Archibald, Dennis Johnson, et al. Take Kevin Johnson for example. The guy averaged 18 points, 9 assists and 1.5 steals a game, while shooting 49 percent from the floor for his career -- better than Nash's numbers. Or, how about Nate Archibald? He averaged 19 points, 7 assists and nearly a steal per game throughout his illustrius career. In comparison, Nash has a paltry 14 points, 7.6 assists and .8 steals per game over his career. And, Nash, unlike Archibald, and a lot of the other players on the list, is yet to win a championship.

Just because Steve Nash is the flavor of the day, particularly among sportswriters who seem to be in love with the Suns star, history, and a quick statistical analysis, show us that he isn't quite as prolific as some would have you believe.

Obligatory Note: On any all-time list, you can't compare skills across eras, but gauge talent by comparing to other players in their own era, and by measuring the impact they had on their particular team. So, don't even get started with "Jason Kidd is so much better than Bob Cousy" - arguments like that are pointless.