How good are the Diaz brothers?

[legcramp]

Nick turned The Natural Born Killer into The Natural Point Stealer, nuff said.

 

[The Don]

They maximized the tools and attributes they had and were very close to being elite. Nate Diaz's best version was when he fought Michael Johnson. He never looked as good since, but that version of Nate hangs with the top 10 for sure.

 

[Armyhawk]

Not much to add that hasn’t been said already. But Nick was/is the better fighter. Underrated these days by new fans imo. Worst thing people can say is he lost to gsp and silva in their primes as if that proves he sucks or something.

 

[Poatan Power]

You are revisioning history, not me.
You didnt mention Sherk for some reason btw...oh well. Didnt see that much of LnP on that one.

There is no rewriting here. We can go down the list of all of Nick's opponents, his incidence of facing elite wrestlers, or even decent ones, is very low. I think it's redundant, but, if you want to review:

Tibau as a Brazillian wrestler had him on his back for over half of the first round and had his back (no hooks) more than once and had Diaz in turtle position more than once. Fickett had a good HS record in Arizona and took Diaz down in ten seconds. Sherk had more than double the control time of Diaz, albeit he attempted like 20 takedowns and only got a few. Riggs took the 2nd round from Diaz by taking him down and keeping him on his back and took him down in the 3rd, too. Diego took him down 5/11 times and had 10+ minutes of control time in the 15 minute fight. He was a HS wrestler. The only example you give in favor of your position is Nick fighting 5'6" Sean Sherk, who outgrappled Nick the entire fight, but didn't put him on his back much en route to victory.

This isn't a knock on Nick. He has elite level BJJ, elite cardio/conditioning, elite chin, he throws great volume and is very accurate. He was not the antidote to wrestlers in MMA which is why he didn't match up with them for half a decade. The fights would have been boring, just like Nate's fights whenever he fought someone determined to take him down and keep him there with decent submission defense. Stating Nick didn't lose a fight to an elite grappler when he didn't fight one is disingenuous.

Oh and I don't disagree about Shields > Askren in striking, but, he was the Askren of his day before Ronda and Askren came about.

 

[mmacool]

They had boxing, grappling, cardio and chin.
That’s basically the best setup for mma.

 

[Deleted member 592659]

Nick did much better in Strikeforce, than in UFC. Nate was a legit top 10 LW in UFC for some time. Diaz bros were a synonym for a great pace, technical strikes and killer submissions.

 

[SomethingCringetastic]

GOATS, LEGENDS, MMA GODS

 

[pick999]

I feel like nick was overrated.he fought alot of old fighters in sf and not as talented imo and his early ufc run was better than his late one only beating a old bj penn.

 

[NoSmilez]

They are beatable fighters for some competitors while being terrible matchups for others. The game plan for beating a Diaz brother isn’t a secret. If you refuse to follow one of those game plans then you are most likely in trouble with them.

 

[Hdfi]

great fighters, they remained in the top 15 for several years of the most competitive weight classes in MMA.

 

[pankrat]

Stating Nick didn't lose a fight to an elite grappler when he didn't fight one is disingenuous..

Its disingenuous to quote me out of context. This is the post Im replying initially:

Journeymen with cult followings neither could stop a takedown against any credible wrestler.​

I dont think odds at the time would have Nick Diaz as underdog matched up with some of the many wrestlers at WW. Not less favoured than Alves, Condit, Hardy, Daley or any other striking specialist you pick

To say Diaz didnt get exposed by "any credible wresler" because of match making is disingenuous as well.
If you ask me, even more so after your review considering very credible wrestlers in Sanchez and Sherk went 2 of 19 and 5 of 11 in TD attemps with a 21-22 years old Nick Diaz barely edging a controversial dec. And that Tibau got smoked

Fights with guys who tried to LnP Nick Diaz could have been boring sure. There is also a very good chance Nick catch/overwhelm them with punches, choke or outlast them by making them work in every position.Only the best of them would be favoured with prime Diaz imo, and even then he had a good chanve vs anybody not named GSP

 

[pankrat]

Oh and I don't disagree about Shields > Askren in striking, but, he was the Askren of his day before Ronda and Askren came about.

I dont think Shields was that much below the average for grappling specialists in his era. As a matter of fact, he outstriked Akiyama for the W and edged out rounds in the feet with many, even including GSP. Not sure Fitch would get the better of him in a standup fight neither

Shields looked awkward but it was evident he had many rounds of quality sparring, understoood distances well, could reply with own strikes even if no KO threat and was composed, hard to overwhelm or catch clean.

 

[VAfan]

they were in the ufc, so i guess that makes them elite fighters.

within the context of the org, nah, not so much. their antics overshadowed their performances.

 

[Poatan Power]

Its disingenuous to quote me out of context. This is the post Im replying initially:



I dont think odds at the time would have Nick Diaz if matched up with some of the many wrestlers at WW. Not less favoured than Alves, Condit, Hardy, Daley or any other striking specialist you pick

To say Diaz didnt get exposed by "any credible wresler" because of match making is disingenuous as well.
If you ask me, even more so after your review considering very credible wrestlers in Sanchez and Sherk went 2 of 19 and 5 of 11 in TD attemps with a 21-22 years old Nick Diaz barely edging a controversial dec. And that Tibau got smoked

Fights with guys who tried to LnP Nick Diaz could have been boring sure. There is also a very good chance Nick catch/overwhelm them with punches, choke or outlast them by making them work in every position.Only the best of them would be favoured with prime Diaz imo, and even then he had a good chanve vs anybody not named GSP

fair enough on the context

I think at best I can come halfway and say he didn't face a level of wrestler that would provide evidence that he had elite takedown defense at the level of say BJ who faced Hughes and GSP multiple times. for example. But, to that end, that also means we don't have a big sample size to say he did not have high level TDD either. I'm going to say I'm extrapolating from his style, match making throughout 2006-2011 and Nate's performances since their styles were very similar and obviously their training was too.
Cheers

 

[EYEKICKFACES]

You referenced a couple of highly controversial decs vs before he was even 22 years old. Then GSP. Thats all.

Myths and simpleton takes are parroted ad nauseum around here

Nick had several shortcomings, involving kicks or TDs of his own. To go in there and just try to outwrestle him was far from an easy task for anybody not named GSP, unless what the typical shertard like that you replied initially would tell you

You sound butt hurt that Diaz wasn't a good wrestler. Sean Sherk out struck and out grappled him as did Diego Sanchez. Then Diaz left the UFC where he didn't face any top level wrestlers. Easy to say he didn't get out wrestled when he stopped fighting people who will wrestle. The fact is, he struggled with good wrestlers whether you like it or not. Stop being a salty cry baby.

 

[Tapatio]

Nick is done. Nate is a gatekeeper at this point.

 

[xn7]

they're uhhh really good. and respected. so that's pretty much all that matters.

 

[mkt]

I feel like nick was overrated.he fought alot of old fighters in sf and not as talented imo and his early ufc run was better than his late one only beating a old bj penn.

To me he kind of wasted some of his prime years. I think he outgrew LW (even more than Nate) and found a good home at WW. As I said earlier, his win over Daley was definitely impressive. Overall he did very well in Strikeforce, but his competition just wasn't good. It wasn't like HW in SF or even LW with Gilbert Melendez, Josh Thomson, Masvidal, etc. WW was just really weak at the time there but very solid with a lot of depth in the UFC. I think he could probably beat guys like Kampmann, Ellenberger (who was very dangerous but gassed by Round 3 if he didn't get the finish), etc. But he'd also face wrestlers and a steady diet of good competition...no easy fights like Mr. Cyborg.

It's too bad Condit played the elusive, leg-kicking game. He really was a killer in most fights and that could've been a war and great test for both. Condit arguably beat Lawler in Robbie's last successful title defense.

 

[mkt]

I dont think Shields was that much below the average for grappling specialists in his era. As a matter of fact, he outstriked Akiyama for the W and edged out rounds in the feet with many, even including GSP. Not sure Fitch would get the better of him in a standup fight neither

Shields looked awkward but it was evident he had many rounds of quality sparring, understoood distances well, could reply with own strikes even if no KO threat and was composed, hard to overwhelm or catch clean.

To be fair, GSP was beating Shields decisively before the eye poke. But he did beat Akiyama and Woodley via high-volume, pitter patter striking.

 

[michi972]

Nick was elite in his prime. That SF run was no joke.

Nates best run as far as skills was 2011-2012 i think. He worked his way up to a titleshot and was legit the #1 LW in the world at one point so yeah.

People forget that run. They also forget MJ was a top 5 once he beat Barbosa, lost to Nate, KO'd Dustin. Pettis and Alvarez were champion. NateDiaz was a fighter who could stay for long in top 5 if he was active. If Alvarez and Pettis were champions, Nate Diaz could be as well.