I thought this debate was interesting because both guys were drafted in '96, they're two of the best small guards in the modern era (though at 6'3'', Nash is actually closer in size to Jason Kidd than he is to Iverson), and Nash gets so much more media hype and love than AI. So I put the question to the other players in one of my fantasy leagues (ugh...don't ask me why I joined a league with no injured list and 14-player rosters - the dumbest fantasy format I've ever seen). Actually, I asked two questions: who's had the better career and who would you rather have running your team? The consensus was for AI on the first part, for predictable reasons (took his team to the finals, more of a franchise player, been great for 12 years vs just 6 years for Nash, etc.).  Here's my thoughts on the subject - I figured this was one of my better rants, best not let it go to waste.

"I agree, AI is the better player.

The [reasons above] covered most of the best arguments for AI, but I'd also add the fact that AI has been the tougher player. Even though AI has played well over 40 minutes per game, he never runs out of gas at the end of the season, unlike Nash, who has looked tired in the playoffs the last two years. I'm not saying Nash is soft, but it's crazy how durable and tough AI is - he never gets tired!

While Nash is an atrocious defender, AI is also pretty bad on D - he gambles a lot for steals and always seems out of position, despite his athletic ability. He may be marginally better than Nash, only because I don't see teams isolate against AI the same way they exploit Nash (watch what Nellie does with Baron, for example; Pop also does it with Parker, when Tony's not playing like Eva). Nash's D literally costs his team games, which is why [I can't believe] that he actually won MVP twice.

For the same reasons AI's had a better career, I'd rather have him on my team. Nash fits in easier with teams because of his passing. But if you surround AI with guys who play defense, you'll have a better team, because AI will come up bigger in crunch time. He's been better than Nash in the playoffs, and I think he'll give you a better chance of winning a ring.

Denver's problem right now is that they don't have enough of a defensive mentality to make up for AI (and Melo) not playing any damn defense. That's why there's a real chance AI will bolt when he hits free agency (next summer? two years?). My Pistons should be under the cap by 2009. Hmmm...

Oh yeah, and I was partially inspired by this:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/7650438

bullspit article, where Rosen proves that Nash's teammates are better then AI's, then uses it to argue that Nash is better than AI. I like how the numbers show AI had the better game, so he has to use some other  arguments to prove his point."