PDA

View Full Version : Source: Nash to be MVP


shaw-xx
04-26-2006, 05:21 AM
Suns guard would be 10th player to win award in consecutive seasons

Paul Coro

The Arizona Republic

Apr. 26, 2006 12:00 AM

Suns star Steve Nash will be named the NBA's Most Valuable Player for a second straight season, according to a league source familiar with the voting.

The announcement may not come for two weeks, like last season's May 8 ceremony. The votes have been tabulated in what was expected to be a close race with LeBron James, Dirk Nowitzki, Chauncey Billups and Kobe Bryant.

Nash won the fourth-closest MVP vote last year, edging Shaquille O'Neal a year after Nash was not even an All-Star. advertisement

Nash, 32, impressed voters this season by posting career highs in scoring (18.8 points per game), rebounding (4.2 per game), field goal percentage (.512) and free-throw percentage (NBA-best .921). He led the league in assists again with 10.5 per game and finished sixth in three-point shooting (43.9 percent).

After Amar?Stoudemire's knee surgery deprived the Suns of their top scorer, Nash led the team to 54 wins and its first repeat division title with only Shawn Marion and Leandro Barbosa back for a full season.

Nash would be the first international and Suns player to win twice.

Only nine previous players repeated as MVP winners. Magic Johnson was the only point guard to do so.

www.azcentral.com/arizona...h0426.html

NXperience
04-26-2006, 06:53 AM
Wow I hope this is wrong and I just think this is undeserving he shouldn't be a repeat winner. But on the other hand it's the lesser of 3 evils (LeBron and Kobe the other ones)

FreshJive
04-26-2006, 07:24 AM
Poll: Nash headed to 2nd straight award
By Jerry Brown, Tribune
April 26, 2006
With nearly 60 percent of the ballots counted in early exit polls, it appears Steve Nash is headed for his second straight Most Valuable Player award. In a Tribune survey of 75 of the 127 writers and broadcasters who cast official MVP ballots with the NBA, Nash has a sizable lead over Cleveland's LeBron James for the award.

Related Links
Sports

Nash received 30 first-place votes, 24 second-place votes and 549 total points in the Tribune survey, giving him a 141-point lead over James — who has 408 points but only garnered 11 first-place votes.

Dirk Nowitzki ranks third in total points (370) and second in first-place votes (12), but the Dallas Morning News, citing several league sources, reported Tuesday that Nowitzki did not win the MVP award. Kobe Bryant of the Lakers, the league's leading scorer at 35.4 points per game, received 11 first-place votes and ranks fourth in total points (279), but 48 of the 75 writers polled had Bryant listed either fourth (18), fifth (17) or left him off their ballots completely (13). Chauncey Billups of Detroit placed fifth in the survey with 246 points and 10 first-place votes.

It would be Nash's second straight MVP award, placing him among NBA royalty — only eight other players have won back-to-back MVPs.

With Amaré Stoudemire injured and an almost completely different cast of characters — one that was picked by many to struggle to reach the playoffs — around him, Nash pushed and prodded the Suns to a 54-win season and befuddled the naysayers again.

In voting for Nash, Hubie Brown, the broadcast analyst and former coach, praised Nash’s leadership in light of the lost season of Stoudemire and the injury to big man Kurt Thomas.

“When you look at what Nash has done with six new players. . . They won their division, and he’s having his best year.

“That alone tells you what he’s done.”

Because of Nash, “All of their players get better looks. The shot clock is never in a bad situation. He makes it happen.”

Playing the second-most minutes in his career (2,796), the 32-year-old Nash set career highs in several categories including scoring (18.8 per game), rebounds (4.2), field goal percentage (.512), free throw percentage (a league-leading and franchise record .921) and minutes per game (35.4). Nash also led the league in assists for a second straight season (10.5), becoming the first NBA player since Jason Kidd (with the Suns in 1998-99, 1999-2000) to average 10 or more assists in back-to-back seasons.

Nash became only the fourth player in NBA history to shoot at least 50 percent from the field, at least 40 percent from 3-point range (.438, sixth in the NBA) and at least 90 percent from the line — joining Larry Bird (twice, 1986-87 and 1987-88), Reggie Miller (1993-94) and Mark Price (1988-89).

For the fifth consecutive season — three years with Dallas (2001-04) and two with Phoenix (2004-06) — a team with Nash at point guard led the NBA in scoring

madape
04-26-2006, 07:34 AM
let the whining begin!

spreedom
04-26-2006, 07:53 AM
I have no problem with Nash winning. To me it was a two-player race between Nash and Kobe.

mary
04-26-2006, 08:25 AM
Let the nut-hugging begin!

ocelot_ark
04-26-2006, 08:27 AM
This is bullshit.

jthig32
04-26-2006, 08:28 AM
I need gasoline and a match.

This is going to make certain areas of this board unbearable if we don't win the title this year.

sixeightmkw
04-26-2006, 08:40 AM
click, click, BBBBBOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM!!!!

I am dead

kg_veteran
04-26-2006, 08:44 AM
The award is now meaningless.

madape
04-26-2006, 08:47 AM
I'm a little suprised by this. I had convinced myself it would be LeBron.

Well, good for Nash anyway... but this is just more dirt rubbed in the wound for Maverick fans.

Drbio
04-26-2006, 08:47 AM
I hate it, but the guy was the reigning MVP and he had a better year this year than last.

Still...the award has become a joke.

kg_veteran
04-26-2006, 08:48 AM
I'm surprised by it, too.

Shaquille O'Neal has one MVP award, but Nash has two?

Meaningless award.

sixeightmkw
04-26-2006, 08:49 AM
*****still.....twitching........a......little....* ****

***BBBBBBBOOOOOOOMMMMM******

dead

dirno2000
04-26-2006, 08:50 AM
John Stockton just turned over in his grave...

TripleDipping
04-26-2006, 08:55 AM
Whatever... Nash can clear his mantle space for a meaningless award. We'll see them in WCF and show him and the Suns and all the Nash-nut-hugger-lover who's the real thing.

u2sarajevo
04-26-2006, 08:56 AM
Congratulations to Steve. He can't help it if he's the media darling. He fought hard for our team and I'm not going to slam him (although he can suck it).

Good luck with the Clippers Stevie.

And to those concerned with "justice" for this award..... if the US court systems can't get it right all the time what makes you think the NBA can?

Okay.... I just hope we don't concentrate on this insignificant piece of metal when we have larger goals for our team. It sucks for the true MVP, but I don't think he would want us heaving hatred on his friend that had it handed to him.

Five-ofan
04-26-2006, 09:01 AM
People with 2 mvps should be top 20 players of all time. Nash isnt a top 150 player of all time. I cant believe people are this stupid. Everyone with a vote should lose their votes. This is a joke.

kg_veteran
04-26-2006, 09:04 AM
John Stockton just turned over in his grave...

No kidding.

mary
04-26-2006, 09:08 AM
I have no problem with Nash winning. To me it was a two-player race between Nash and Kobe.


Kobe wasn't even in the top-three.

kg_veteran
04-26-2006, 09:10 AM
People with 2 mvps should be top 20 players of all time. Nash isnt a top 150 player of all time. I cant believe people are this stupid. Everyone with a vote should lose their votes. This is a joke.

Players with at least 2 MVP awards:

Tim Duncan
Karl Malone
Michael Jordan
Magic Johnson
Larry Bird
Moses Malone
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Julius Erving
Wilt Chamberlain
Bill Russell
Bob Pettit

...Steve Nash.

You have four of the greatest centers of all time, five of the greatest forwards of all time, the two greatest guards of all time...and Steve Nash.

FINtastic
04-26-2006, 09:10 AM
Seriously, I don't think the voters even try any more. They just find who everyone else thinks the consensus is and vote for them. Seems like more of a popularity contest to me.

MavsFanFinley
04-26-2006, 09:32 AM
Congrats Nash. Thank goodness it wasn't Kobe.

madape
04-26-2006, 09:33 AM
Whatever... Nash can clear his mantle space for a meaningless award. We'll see them in WCF and show him and the Suns and all the Nash-nut-hugger-lover who's the real thing.

hmm.. not to bring back bad memories, but Nash and the Suns pretty much smashed us last year on the way to the WCF. He's already got one "real" victory on us (to go with his two "meaningless" trophies). I hope we do match up against him in the WCF. Prove it on the court, biatch!

mary
04-26-2006, 09:36 AM
Yeah..if there's a positive to this, at least Laker fans are pretty pissed off this morning :D

Nash 2
Kobe 0

Oh the indignation!

madape
04-26-2006, 09:45 AM
I've told this story on this board before, but I was at a party a couple of years ago. Nash and Dirk were there, too.

A hip-hop song came on the stereo. Nash stood up and yelled "OK everybody be quiet! This is my favorite song!"

I yelled back "Shut up, you Canadian asshole". He looked at me crazy, but didn't say anything back.

Then he danced with one of my friends. She told me he popped a boner on her leg.

Evilmav2
04-26-2006, 09:57 AM
I've told this story on this board before, but I was at a party a couple of years ago. Nash and Dirk were there, too.

A hip-hop song came on the stereo. Nash stood up and yelled "OK everybody be quiet! This is my favorite song!"

I yelled back "Shut up, you Canadian asshole". He looked at me crazy, but didn't say anything back.

Then he danced with one of my friends. She told me he popped a boner on her leg.

If I'm remembering the account of that business correctly, I'd bet that the long-absent poster Baselineguy as well as the soon to be wedded pledge Bean-Polo would recall that party and incident as well...

vjz
04-26-2006, 10:05 AM
More motivation for Kobe... hope he brings it against the Suns, and make the series close.

Nash was great this year, but he is possibly the worse defender ever to win an MVP award...

I wonder how Cuban's taking it... you let a player go, and he wins 2 straight MVP awards?! Wow!

sike
04-26-2006, 10:23 AM
John Stockton just turned over in his grave...
he's dead???!!!!



;)

sike
04-26-2006, 10:24 AM
easily the worst two time winner of all time....easily the worst defensive MVP ever......soooooo overrated: right player, right surrouding cast, right coach, no defensive focus....this is sickening....

is it fair to say that NAsh is the most one-demensional MVP of all time?

birdsanctuary
04-26-2006, 10:30 AM
Let him have it, I'll pass and take a Finals MVP for Dirk...

sike
04-26-2006, 10:34 AM
Let him have it, I'll pass and take a Finals MVP for Dirk...
I'm not sure thats how it works ;)

chumdawg
04-26-2006, 10:34 AM
Congratulations, Stevie Boy! No one runs an offense like you do. Five years running now, you leading the highest-octane offense in the league. With two different franchises and several different casts of teammates. Wow!

And at your age, no less. Just when your old boss thought you would be breaking down, you go and post all those career highs a couple years later. If you can keep doing it till you are 40, like Stockton did, you have nine years left to keep honing your skills. Nine! You might even get another big contract.

Good for you, Stevie. Former Mav done good.

sike
04-26-2006, 10:35 AM
Congratulations, Stevie Boy! No one runs an offense like you do. Five years running now, you leading the highest-octane offense in the league. With two different franchises and several different casts of teammates. Wow!

And at your age, no less. Just when your old boss thought you would be breaking down, you go and post all those career highs a couple years later. If you can keep doing it till you are 40, like Stockton did, you have nine years left to keep honing your skills. Nine! You might even get another big contract.

Good for you, Stevie. Former Mav done good.
much hate for chum!

Five-ofan
04-26-2006, 10:47 AM
I love steve nash and im glad hes been successful but anyone who doesnt realize what a joke this is, is either a member of nashs family or just doesnt understand bball history. Oh well, Vince didnt get the heisman he deserved either and that turned out ok.

oscarzeta
04-26-2006, 11:01 AM
Right. All those voters who are former NBA players and coaches know less than those of us on this board. Hubie Brown must not know anything about basketball. Right.

I would be willing to bet that most of the players would vote for Nash. At the All-Star game they asked a few high profile players from around the league and they all said Nash was the MVP. But they must not know anything about basketball either, right?

Hey, I thought Dirk should have won it, but it was a close call. A ton of respected people like Nash for MVP too. To say that these people just don't know basketball is disingenuous at best.

jthig32
04-26-2006, 11:03 AM
The people that voted for Nash do not know basketball. Period.


<--------------- Disingenuous at best, apparantly.

dirno2000
04-26-2006, 11:14 AM
he's dead???!!!!



;)

could be...have you seen him?

sike
04-26-2006, 11:35 AM
could be...have you seen him?
why yes...I pay him $30 bucks every Saturday to rake my yard....



*doesn't that sound like Stockton?*

MavKikiNYC
04-26-2006, 11:39 AM
Congrats to Nash. But this is some effed up balloting, IMO.

He's great fun to watch---all the more in Phoenix than in Dallas, because I hate watching PGs who can't defend.

As for how Cuban must be taking it--his team gets better, and is in as good or better position to challenge for a title. My guess is he's taking it just fine.

sike
04-26-2006, 11:45 AM
Congrats to Nash. But this is some effed up balloting, IMO.

He's great fun to watch---all the more in Phoenix than in Dallas, because I hate watching PGs who can't defend.

As for how Cuban must be taking it--his team gets better, and is in as good or better position to challenge for a title. My guess is he's taking it just fine.

like I said, Kiki, has there ever been such a one demensional MVP???

it must be nice to play on a team with Shawn Marion and 3 other good shooters....I just wonder why the media has so quickly adopted Nash and have been so slow to do so for Dirk?

Five-ofan
04-26-2006, 11:50 AM
Dirk plays in dallas. Nash doesnt.

jthig32
04-26-2006, 11:50 AM
Dirk plays in dallas. Nash doesnt.

True dat, double true!

Maybe the Cowboy bias has seeped over to basketball.

AxdemxO
04-26-2006, 12:51 PM
To those on here that are haters when it comes to Nash winning .........you should stop. Just because he played for us and left doesnt mean that you need to hate on him.

Point is he deserved it more than any of the other guys. The only other guy that should have been considered is Dirk...and we all know how that goes. Soo if its not Dirk it mite as well be Nash. Better that Kobe or LeBron gettin it.

spreedom
04-26-2006, 01:11 PM
Kobe wasn't even in the top-three.

To me it was a two-player race between Nash and Kobe.

And everyone that's saying Nash needs to be a top-20 player of all-time needs to get a clue. He's the biggest difference-maker in the league today. The "he has to be a top 20 player of all-time" argument is the biggest cop-out I've heard so far. He was clearly the MVP this year and the race wasn't even really close.

kg_veteran
04-26-2006, 01:16 PM
To me it was a two-player race between Nash and Kobe.

And everyone that's saying Nash needs to be a top-20 player of all-time needs to get a clue. He's the biggest difference-maker in the league today. The "he has to be a top 20 player of all-time" argument is the biggest cop-out I've heard so far. He was clearly the MVP this year and the race wasn't even really close.

Biggest difference-maker in the league by what objective standard?

If it's just a popularity contest, then they should just say so. But if it's genuinely a "most valuable" player award, then there should be an objective standard. Using objective comparisons to past MVPs, Dirk measures up and Nash falls short. In fact, everyone but Dirk falls short.

Dtownsfinest
04-26-2006, 01:32 PM
Sigh@us giving up on Nash because he was breaking down. All he has is two MVP awards. Only way to make me feel better about the Nash departure is if a championship is brought to Dallas. Get on it Mavs. :)

Props to Nash. A great achievement. Not many can say they were back to back MVP's. Easily one of the best players in the league and though I think the whole "make your teammate better" argument for MVP is overrated if there's a player out there who does it its Nash. Props to the best point guard in Mavs franchise history.

dirno2000
04-26-2006, 01:54 PM
Nash and KG, winners of the last three MVP awards, will probably retire without ever playing in the NBA finals. If this happens, they'll be the first two winners to hold that distinction.

Either the media is really cheapening what used to be the greatest MVP award in sports or we're watching the worst era in modern basketball.

No wonder there’s such a rush to coronate King James.

madape
04-26-2006, 01:55 PM
Best player to ever put on a Maverick uniform?

u2sarajevo
04-26-2006, 01:56 PM
Best player to ever put on a Maverick uniform?Let's not get carried away.....

kg_veteran
04-26-2006, 01:56 PM
Best player to ever put on a Maverick uniform?

Thanks for making a fantastic argument for how stupid Nash as two-time MVP really is.

Everyone and their dog knows that Dirk is a better player than Nash.

spreedom
04-26-2006, 01:56 PM
Biggest difference-maker in the league by what objective standard?

If it's just a popularity contest, then they should just say so. But if it's genuinely a "most valuable" player award, then there should be an objective standard. Using objective comparisons to past MVPs, Dirk measures up and Nash falls short. In fact, everyone but Dirk falls short.


The award isn't an objective standard. That's what makes the MVP award great. If it was objectively given to the best all-around player in the league, Michael Jordan would have won at least ten of them. But he didn't, because the award winner is determined subjectively. Is that the way it "should" be? Maybe. I think it's fairly telling, however, that Nash also won the GM and executives poll.

And come on.. the voters RARELY don't get it right. I think 5 years from now it will be pretty clear that Nash deserved this win. He turned a team that most predicted would finish near the bottom of the playoff bracket into a 53 game winning team, with every important piece around him having a career season. Who even heard of Boris Diaw before this season? And now look.. he's the MIP and averaged like 13, 7 and 6. Think he'd be doing that if he was in Atlanta? Nope. He's a product of a system that is only successful because Nash is quarterbacking it.

It's not a coincidence that the Suns are a great team with Nash at the helm.

spreedom
04-26-2006, 01:59 PM
Best player to ever put on a Maverick uniform?


That would be Jason Kidd, for the record...

dalmations202
04-26-2006, 01:59 PM
Meaningless award.

Nash would have never been a MVP in Dallas even turning in the exact same numbers or doing exactly the same thing here that he did in Phoenix. Follow the money.

It has become a popularity contest where voters with ties to the Suns are voting. If Amare would have played this year, he most likely would have been the MVP.

When voters can make a guy an MVP who is not the best scorer on his team, not the best defender on ANY team, not in the top 50 players for steals as a PG, not the only All-star on the team, and can be SHUT OUT in a game in which he played over half the minutes of the game ----- THERE IS PROOF THAT IT IS A POLITCAL, POPULARITY CONTEST.

Yeah, all the "investors" from TNT, ESPN, and ex-players who invested in Phoenix just made another marketing buck, but just devalued the award by millions.

F'em.

sike
04-26-2006, 02:05 PM
Best player to ever put on a Maverick uniform?
Now you’re just trying to get under fans skin, ape.

Best former mavs player who's won two MVPs? yes. Best Mavs Player??? Please. Ro Blackman, Jason Kidd, Dirk N....all better players than Nash.

kg_veteran
04-26-2006, 02:06 PM
The award isn't an objective standard. That's what makes the MVP award great. If it was objectively given to the best all-around player in the league, Michael Jordan would have won at least ten of them. But he didn't, because the award winner is determined subjectively. Is that the way it "should" be? Maybe. I think it's fairly telling, however, that Nash also won the GM and executives poll.

I didn't say "best all-around player in the league." I said "most valuable" player. I think both can be objectively determined.

The problem with subjectively determining the winner with no objective criteria is that this appears to be a recent trend. In the past, there was an unwritten criteria that was pretty religiously followed. Not so much so anymore.

Re: the GM and executive's polls, I haven't seen those results, but if the GMs around the league voted him the MVP, that just proves to me how cheapened the award has become that intelligent basketball people could hold such a subjective and uninformed opinion.

If you were to take a poll and the GMs around the league had to start a team with one player, just for next year, Nash wouldn't even be top 5.

And come on.. the voters RARELY don't get it right. I think 5 years from now it will be pretty clear that Nash deserved this win.

Wrong. 5 years from now it will be pretty clear that Nash was a deviation from the previously accepted criteria for the award.

He turned a team that most predicted would finish near the bottom of the playoff bracket into a 53 game winning team, with every important piece around him having a career season.

The Suns were predicted by many to win their division even without Stoudemire. Who else in the Pacific, exactly, was going to stop them?

As for every important piece around him having a career season, that's just not true. Sure, Diaw has looked great in Phoenix, but who else? Marion's scoring average went up a couple of points (with more shots available because Stoudemire was gone), but Raja Bell was more productive last year in Utah, and Kurt Thomas was more productive last year in New York.

It's not a coincidence that the Suns are a great team with Nash at the helm.

Your definition of "great" is pretty watered down, IMO, if you think the Suns are great at this point.

ddh33
04-26-2006, 02:22 PM
I vomited in my mouth when I heard this.

Steve Nash just officially became the most overrated player in NBA history.

What makes me sick is not that Dirk should have won it. I can handle that, believe it or not. Lebron did things this season that only 2-3 other people have done. Kobe did things that only 3-4 others have done. Neither of them won it. If you want to reward a great player on a great team, then where was our guy?

No matter how you stack it up, the wrong person won this award...again.

Thank God the Finals MVP usually straightens this mess out.

And yes, they should now rename the award. Just call it the most popular player, or let the fans vote on it.

Steve Nash...ranked right along with Jordan and Bird and Chamberlain, ahead of Shaq and apparently was ahead of Stcokton. Oh God, I'm going to be sick again.

Dtownsfinest
04-26-2006, 02:23 PM
Nash and KG, winners of the last three MVP awards, will probably retire without ever playing in the NBA finals. If this happens, they'll be the first two winners to hold that distinction.

Either the media is really cheapening what used to be the greatest MVP award in sports or we're watching the worst era in modern basketball.

No wonder there’s such a rush to coronate King James.


Well that's just it. The MVP award doesn't factor in what occurs in the playoffs. Its a regular season award. None of the legit candidates have won a championship except Kobe and he did that with a completely different team.

spreedom
04-26-2006, 02:27 PM
Fine KG.. give me a formula to objectively name the MVP without fail.

What a stupid thing to do to an award.. it should measure intangibles as well as on-court statistics; no formula can measure intangibles.

Dtownsfinest
04-26-2006, 02:27 PM
I vomited in my mouth when I heard this.

Steve Nash just officially became the most overrated player in NBA history.

What makes me sick is not that Dirk should have won it. I can handle that, believe it or not. Lebron did things this season that only 2-3 other people have done. Kobe did things that only 3-4 others have done. Neither of them won it. If you want to reward a great player on a great team, then where was our guy?

No matter how you stack it up, the wrong person won this award...again.

Thank God the Finals MVP usually straightens this mess out.

And yes, they should now rename the award. Just call it the most popular player, or let the fans vote on it.

Steve Nash...ranked right along with Jordan and Bird and Chamberlain, ahead of Shaq and apparently was ahead of Stcokton. Oh God, I'm going to be sick again.

I think that's a little Nash departure hate isn't it? Nash was a legit candidate for the award. He went from having the most dominant player in the league one year and the next not have him at all. Everyone wrote Nash off due to him not having Amare for the year. His team clearly overachieved and i'd credit that to Nash and D'Antoni. If you wanted to give it to a point guard I would've given it to Billups myself but you can't deny the year Nash and Phoenix had. He may be overrated(who isn't on this board?) but the success Nash has had without his team's best player is underrated.

spreedom
04-26-2006, 02:30 PM
I didn't say "best all-around player in the league." I said "most valuable" player. I think both can be objectively determined.

The problem with subjectively determining the winner with no objective criteria is that this appears to be a recent trend. In the past, there was an unwritten criteria that was pretty religiously followed. Not so much so anymore.

Re: the GM and executive's polls, I haven't seen those results, but if the GMs around the league voted him the MVP, that just proves to me how cheapened the award has become that intelligent basketball people could hold such a subjective and uninformed opinion.

If you were to take a poll and the GMs around the league had to start a team with one player, just for next year, Nash wouldn't even be top 5.



Wrong. 5 years from now it will be pretty clear that Nash was a deviation from the previously accepted criteria for the award.



The Suns were predicted by many to win their division even without Stoudemire. Who else in the Pacific, exactly, was going to stop them?

As for every important piece around him having a career season, that's just not true. Sure, Diaw has looked great in Phoenix, but who else? Marion's scoring average went up a couple of points (with more shots available because Stoudemire was gone), but Raja Bell was more productive last year in Utah, and Kurt Thomas was more productive last year in New York.



Your definition of "great" is pretty watered down, IMO, if you think the Suns are great at this point.



Well since you seem to know every fact that goes into analyzing the game of basketball, I shouldn't even bother trying to state my opinion. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

dude1394
04-26-2006, 02:30 PM
Best player to ever put on a Maverick uniform?

Obviously the best player to ever put on a uniform outside of jordan. He's right there with Magic Johnson, Larry Bird etc.

He's automatically in the hof, must be listed with the top 20 players of all time.

spreedom
04-26-2006, 02:31 PM
I think that's a little Nash departure hate isn't it? Nash was a legit candidate for the award. He went from having the most dominant player in the league one year and the next not have him at all. Everyone wrote Nash off due to him not having Amare for the year. His team clearly overachieved and i'd credit that to Nash and D'Antoni. If you wanted to give it to a point guard I would've given it to Billups myself but you can't deny the year Nash and Phoenix had. He may be overrated(who isn't on this board?) but the success Nash has had without his team's best player is underrated.


Dirk's the most overrated player in the history of this board.

Epitome22
04-26-2006, 02:40 PM
Last year everyone blamed it on the fact that he had such an amazing supporting cast, and that the REAL MVP was Amare Stoudamire. After he plays a full season without Stoudamire, He has an even better season and the Suns still had a good year. Does anyone want to talk about the amazing talents of Boris Diaw, & other chumps that suddenly become good when playing with a PG who knows how to run an offense?

Steve Nash played an entire season without the team's most talented & gifted player. The other Star on the team, Shawn Marion, is completely incapable of creating his own shot & relies on assists to aquire the majority of his field goals. Other Suns stalwarts are a former point guard playing center(Diaw), and a 10th man on a good team playing Small Forward (Raja Bell) and with that cast, the Suns win 54 games, thanks to Nash.

This season, Nash had career-highs in points (18.8 points per game), rebounds (4.2 per game), field goal percentage (51.2 percent) and free throw percentage (92.1 percent -- best in the league). He was also the league-leader in assists (10.5) and shot nearly 50 percent from three-point range.

Some other choice Nash facts from 82games.com

Not only was his FT% .913% a league best, but he also had the fourth highest Clutch FT Percentage in the league (.923%) Dirk was 13th.

Four of the top 20 most effective pass-scorer combos in the league feature a man named Steve Nash.

The two players in the league most dependent upon a key assist in order to score a bucket both play with Steve Nash (Kurt Thomas & Boris Diaw)

In the passers most reliant on one scorer measure (I.E. easy assist gravy train player) Nash, who led the league in assists, and plays with multiple players who are dependent on him to score, did not even register. Basically, he has no gravy train player (ala Stockton to Malone) to beef up his assists, he spreads the ball around evenly to a bevy of mediocre players, who become better when playing with him.

"Nash has also led from his point-guard position the three greatest offenses since the NBA began tracking turnovers (2003-04 Dallas, 2004-05 Phoenix and 2002-03 Dallas), as measured by differential between the team's Offensive Rating and league average. Here is how I have them, defining possessions as .96*(FGA + (.44*FTA) - OR + TO):

Team Year ORtg League Diff
--------------------------------------
Dallas 2003-04 114.1 104.2 9.9
Phoenix 2004-05 116.6 107.4 9.2
Dallas 2001-02 114.0 105.8 8.2
Denver 1981-82 116.3 108.5 7.8
Chicago 1996-97 115.8 108.0 7.8
Dallas 2002-03 112.7 104.9 7.8 "

"An 82games study last year showed Stoudemire, along with Marion, was one of the NBA players most dependent on a single teammate (Nash, natch) for an assist. How much credit does Nash deserve for Stoudemire going from promising youngster to MVP candidate? A lot, I would say."

"If we look at all these different players, some very clear patterns emerge. For the most part, players tend to shoot better when Nash is on the court. The more important and more subtle effect, however, is that players slashed their turnover rate. (No regular improved their turnover rate alongside Nash the last two seasons; Jacobsen's was unchanged.) As I touched on in the discussion of Stoudemire, the reason for this is that Nash delivers the ball to players in position to shoot and without them having to do virtually any work for their shot besides getting open, as opposed to shooting off of a dribble or two."

"If there is a common thread amongst Nash's recent teams, besides their ultra-efficient offenses, it is that they rarely if ever turn the ball over. The 2002-03 and 2003-04 Mavericks recorded the two lowest turnover rates since the league began tracking turnovers in 1973-74, and the 2001-02 incarnation ranks fourth. (The 2004-05 Suns are also in the top 25 of all time.)"

Since this will be heated, I'll just go ahead and say it. Even accepting for argument's sake that Nash, while great these past 2 seasons has none the less been overrated; In My Opinion, in the last 2 seasons, Nash>Dirk

ddh33
04-26-2006, 02:45 PM
I think that's a little Nash departure hate isn't it? Nash was a legit candidate for the award. He went from having the most dominant player in the league one year and the next not have him at all. Everyone wrote Nash off due to him not having Amare for the year. His team clearly overachieved and i'd credit that to Nash and D'Antoni. If you wanted to give it to a point guard I would've given it to Billups myself but you can't deny the year Nash and Phoenix had. He may be overrated(who isn't on this board?) but the success Nash has had without his team's best player is underrated.

By the same argument, Dirk lost the MVP of the league and got better two years in a row - including winning 60. And just for the record, Dirk probably would not have been #1 on my ballot.

Yes, Nash was a legit candidate for the award. He was last year too. Yes, Nash should be all NBA first team. But Shaq should have won last year, and there were three better candidates this year. Somehow, Nash was both of them when he didn't deserve either.

Dtownsfinest
04-26-2006, 02:53 PM
And that's the reality of things. If Nash got the MVP last year playing alongside Amare how do you justify him not being a candidate this year not having him at all and still having a great record?

madape
04-26-2006, 02:56 PM
Obviously the best player to ever put on a uniform outside of jordan. He's right there with Magic Johnson, Larry Bird etc.

He's automatically in the hof, must be listed with the top 20 players of all time.

I assume you're being sarcastic, but I do beleive that this MVP makes Nash a shoe-in for the HOF. Whether he will be considered to be one of the super-elite players in NBA history will be determined, I think, by his playoff success over the next couple of years. If he wins a title, I think you have to put him above Stockton, if he's not there already.

My guess is that among point guards, he'll end up being a consensus top 5.. behind guys like Magic and Isaiah.. maybe around Cousy, Frazier, Archibald, etc..

Dtownsfinest
04-26-2006, 03:01 PM
By the same argument, Dirk lost the MVP of the league and got better two years in a row - including winning 60. And just for the record, Dirk probably would not have been #1 on my ballot.

Yes, Nash was a legit candidate for the award. He was last year too. Yes, Nash should be all NBA first team. But Shaq should have won last year, and there were three better candidates this year. Somehow, Nash was both of them when he didn't deserve either.


Dirk lost Nash but in return he recieved Devin Harris, Jerry Stackhouse and Jason Terry. That more than made up for Nash's departure not to mention the emergence of Jos Howard. I'm not denying that Dirk wasn't a candidate but take consideration what team he's playing on. People discredit Kobe because his team's record isn't as good as other playoff contenders but look who he's playing alongside? Is he suppose to be #1 in the NBA? They're suppose to have a better record than the Mavs and Spurs? Those teams have superior rosters compared to the Lakers. What Kobe has done is amazing. No one posses a threat on the offensive side of the ball therefore Kobe will see more double teams than other superstars in this league with reliable #2's. Look at Nash's roster. No one wanted James Jones, Boris Diaw or Eddie House. Raja Bell has become a journeyman as well. Tim Thomas was cut from the freakin' Chicago Bulls and scores 20 in his debut. When we bring up MVP we talk about what that player does to the teammates he plays alongside. Diaw may have been what sold the voters to Nash. Shawn Marion is great. I won't discredit anything he's done this year but he just like Kirilenko can't lead a team to the playoffs by themselves. They can't have a offense ran through them either. That's when Nash comes into play. Give credit to Nash and move on. He's had a great year and honestly I have no problem with Nash, Billups, Bron, Kobe or Dirk winning the award. All are legit contenders. Its a toss up as far as i'm concerned.

madape
04-26-2006, 03:31 PM
Dirk lost Nash but in return he recieved Devin Harris, Jerry Stackhouse and Jason Terry. That more than made up for Nash's departure not to mention the emergence of Jos Howard. I'm not denying that Dirk wasn't a candidate but take consideration what team he's playing on. People discredit Kobe because his team's record isn't as good as other playoff contenders but look who he's playing alongside? Is he suppose to be #1 in the NBA? They're suppose to have a better record than the Mavs and Spurs? Those teams have superior rosters compared to the Lakers. What Kobe has done is amazing. No one posses a threat on the offensive side of the ball therefore Kobe will see more double teams than other superstars in this league with reliable #2's. Look at Nash's roster. No one wanted James Jones, Boris Diaw or Eddie House. Raja Bell has become a journeyman as well. Tim Thomas was cut from the freakin' Chicago Bulls and scores 20 in his debut. When we bring up MVP we talk about what that player does to the teammates he plays alongside. Diaw may have been what sold the voters to Nash. Shawn Marion is great. I won't discredit anything he's done this year but he just like Kirilenko can't lead a team to the playoffs by themselves. They can't have a offense ran through them either. That's when Nash comes into play. Give credit to Nash and move on. He's had a great year and honestly I have no problem with Nash, Billups, Bron, Kobe or Dirk winning the award. All are legit contenders. Its a toss up as far as i'm concerned.

Harris and Stackhouse were already here when Nash left, as was Josh Howard. Jason Terry was a panic move that Cuban made after he lost Nash. In fact, I fully beleive that if not for the Nash debacle, we could have turned the goods we traded for Terry into something REALLY special. I'm thinking Vince Carter here, but it could have been anything. A giant expiring contract attached to a decent to good player like Antoine Walker can usually get you a pretty nice return (something much nicer than Jason Terry).

orangedays
04-26-2006, 03:57 PM
...but the success Nash has had without his team's best player is underrated.

You know, you're right. That reminds me of this foreign guy who played in the NBA. Funny thing. His team lost a two-time MVP, then went on to win 58 and 60 games in the next two seasons. Under a rookie coach no less!

I can't remember the guy's name, but you're right...Nash is so underrated.

vjz
04-26-2006, 04:06 PM
Last year everyone blamed it on the fact that he had such an amazing supporting cast, and that the REAL MVP was Amare Stoudamire. After he plays a full season without Stoudamire, He has an even better season and the Suns still had a good year. Does anyone want to talk about the amazing talents of Boris Diaw, & other chumps that suddenly become good when playing with a PG who knows how to run an offense?

Steve Nash played an entire season without the team's most talented & gifted player. The other Star on the team, Shawn Marion, is completely incapable of creating his own shot & relies on assists to aquire the majority of his field goals. Other Suns stalwarts are a former point guard playing center(Diaw), and a 10th man on a good team playing Small Forward (Raja Bell) and with that cast, the Suns win 54 games, thanks to Nash.

This season, Nash had career-highs in points (18.8 points per game), rebounds (4.2 per game), field goal percentage (51.2 percent) and free throw percentage (92.1 percent -- best in the league). He was also the league-leader in assists (10.5) and shot nearly 50 percent from three-point range.

Some other choice Nash facts from 82games.com

Not only was his FT% .913% a league best, but he also had the fourth highest Clutch FT Percentage in the league (.923%) Dirk was 13th.

Four of the top 20 most effective pass-scorer combos in the league feature a man named Steve Nash.

The two players in the league most dependent upon a key assist in order to score a bucket both play with Steve Nash (Kurt Thomas & Boris Diaw)

In the passers most reliant on one scorer measure (I.E. easy assist gravy train player) Nash, who led the league in assists, and plays with multiple players who are dependent on him to score, did not even register. Basically, he has no gravy train player (ala Stockton to Malone) to beef up his assists, he spreads the ball around evenly to a bevy of mediocre players, who become better when playing with him.

"Nash has also led from his point-guard position the three greatest offenses since the NBA began tracking turnovers (2003-04 Dallas, 2004-05 Phoenix and 2002-03 Dallas), as measured by differential between the team's Offensive Rating and league average. Here is how I have them, defining possessions as .96*(FGA + (.44*FTA) - OR + TO):

Team Year ORtg League Diff
--------------------------------------
Dallas 2003-04 114.1 104.2 9.9
Phoenix 2004-05 116.6 107.4 9.2
Dallas 2001-02 114.0 105.8 8.2
Denver 1981-82 116.3 108.5 7.8
Chicago 1996-97 115.8 108.0 7.8
Dallas 2002-03 112.7 104.9 7.8 "

"An 82games study last year showed Stoudemire, along with Marion, was one of the NBA players most dependent on a single teammate (Nash, natch) for an assist. How much credit does Nash deserve for Stoudemire going from promising youngster to MVP candidate? A lot, I would say."

"If we look at all these different players, some very clear patterns emerge. For the most part, players tend to shoot better when Nash is on the court. The more important and more subtle effect, however, is that players slashed their turnover rate. (No regular improved their turnover rate alongside Nash the last two seasons; Jacobsen's was unchanged.) As I touched on in the discussion of Stoudemire, the reason for this is that Nash delivers the ball to players in position to shoot and without them having to do virtually any work for their shot besides getting open, as opposed to shooting off of a dribble or two."

"If there is a common thread amongst Nash's recent teams, besides their ultra-efficient offenses, it is that they rarely if ever turn the ball over. The 2002-03 and 2003-04 Mavericks recorded the two lowest turnover rates since the league began tracking turnovers in 1973-74, and the 2001-02 incarnation ranks fourth. (The 2004-05 Suns are also in the top 25 of all time.)"

Since this will be heated, I'll just go ahead and say it. Even accepting for argument's sake that Nash, while great these past 2 seasons has none the less been overrated; In My Opinion, in the last 2 seasons, Nash>Dirk

Except for your last line, great post, reps for you !!

Dirkenstien
04-26-2006, 04:21 PM
Absolutely rediculous. Whatever..better Nash than Kobe.

Dtownsfinest
04-26-2006, 04:30 PM
You know, you're right. That reminds me of this foreign guy who played in the NBA. Funny thing. His team lost a two-time MVP, then went on to win 58 and 60 games in the next two seasons. Under a rookie coach no less!

I can't remember the guy's name, but you're right...Nash is so underrated.


Nash wasn't a two time MVP playing for the Mavericks therefore Dirk lost a all star who his team had written off. And let's forget that the Mavericks added Dampier, Stack, Harris and JET. Those guys don't equal up to Nash I suppose.

Dtownsfinest
04-26-2006, 04:32 PM
Harris and Stackhouse were already here when Nash left, as was Josh Howard. Jason Terry was a panic move that Cuban made after he lost Nash. In fact, I fully beleive that if not for the Nash debacle, we could have turned the goods we traded for Terry into something REALLY special. I'm thinking Vince Carter here, but it could have been anything. A giant expiring contract attached to a decent to good player like Antoine Walker can usually get you a pretty nice return (something much nicer than Jason Terry).


Yea I think the writing was on the wall after the Mavs traded for Harris and Stack. I do agree had we kept Nash we could've traded Walker's contract for a significant piece. A piece that could potentially be a all star along Dirk right now.

orangedays
04-26-2006, 05:15 PM
Nash wasn't a two time MVP playing for the Mavericks therefore Dirk lost a all star who his team had written off. And let's forget that the Mavericks added Dampier, Stack, Harris and JET. Those guys don't equal up to Nash I suppose.

Dirk lost Nash. Why Nash left is irrelevant.

You do realize that Marion, NOT Amare, was the 2nd most important player on the 04-05 Suns? (by a large margin...check out the +/-). Sure, Stoudemire was a beast - but he wasn't the main reason why the Suns were so successful.

Look at where the minutes are distributed this year - Diaw, Bell, Jones, House, Thomas - the only player from last year's team (outside of Nash and Marion) who gets significant minutes is Barbosa.

You think that what Diaw, Bell, Jones, House, Thomas bring to the table isn't any better than what the four Dallas players you named bring? Preposterous. Check the stats.

FINtastic
04-26-2006, 05:23 PM
I really don't see how Nash is an MVP in this league. I just don't. For some reason, every positive thing that happens to the Suns is something Nash did, while any negative thing that happens to the Suns is proof that Nash is MVP (i.e. when the Suns lose to a team like the Spurs without Nash). Seriously, shouldn't Mike D'Antoni get some credit for boosting the scoring averages of his players by running a ridiculously high-octane system? What about Shawn Marion who does everything for that team (scores, rebounds, blocked shots, you name it) and gets unnoticed? Marion does so much for that team, but he hardly gets a mention.

Does anyone want to talk about the amazing talents of Boris Diaw, & other chumps that suddenly become good when playing with a PG who knows how to run an offense?

I'm sorry but after watching Boris Diaw this year (and I've monitored his stats closely because he is on my fantasy team), I've realized that dude can play. I don't think he was "created" by Nash, he was just badly poorly used by Atlanta. The reason he is being widely considered one of the Most Improved Players isn't just because he is scoring more, it's because he also rebounds and passes very well. Seriously, do you really Diaw's great assist and rebound numbers are solely Nash's doing? I don't. Did you take a a look at what Diaw did during the last 2 games that Nash was sitting out? That's right, triple doubles in both games (one of them with Nash-like 16 assists). He sure didn't need Nash to look good on those nights. Seriously, I don't buy this ridiculous notion that Nash "turned Boris Diaw into a good player." Boris Diaw was already a good player, he just need to play under a coach like D'Antoni who would best utilize his multi-faceted game.

Not to mention, Raja Bell had two very solid years in Utah before coming to Phoenix. He's not mincemeat either. His jumper was showing solid improvement each year, and he was put in a run and gun system in Phoenix that made good use of that.

I don't think Phoenix's solid year is all Nash's doing, even though for some reason, Nash is the only one the media wants to give credit for the success of Phoenix.

FINtastic
04-26-2006, 05:28 PM
Yea I think the writing was on the wall after the Mavs traded for Harris and Stack. I do agree had we kept Nash we could've traded Walker's contract for a significant piece. A piece that could potentially be a all star along Dirk right now.

Who in their right mind would have traded a potential all-star for antoine walker? I don't care how nice the expiring contract is, no one makes that type of trade. Seriously, in all the years in the past when we had players with expiring contracts, did we ever get an all-star caliber player in return? Nope, we got players along the lines of Juwan Howard, NVE, and Keith Van Horn. Nice players, sure, but they certainly aren't going to be mistaken for all-stars (at least at that point in their careers). Jason Terry was about as good of a return as we were going to get for Walker. Sure you can say that we could have gotten better, but that is wishful thinking at best.

FINtastic
04-26-2006, 05:35 PM
Also, if we use that logic that players are only good when they play alongside Nash, shouldn't Joe Johnson be having a pretty bad year this year? Turns out he had a pretty fine year even without the greatest player ever at making his teammates better.

grndmstr_c
04-26-2006, 05:45 PM
Last year everyone blamed it on the fact that he had such an amazing supporting cast, and that the REAL MVP was Amare Stoudamire. After he plays a full season without Stoudamire, He has an even better season and the Suns still had a good year. Does anyone want to talk about the amazing talents of Boris Diaw, & other chumps that suddenly become good when playing with a PG who knows how to run an offense?

Steve Nash played an entire season without the team's most talented & gifted player. The other Star on the team, Shawn Marion, is completely incapable of creating his own shot & relies on assists to aquire the majority of his field goals. Other Suns stalwarts are a former point guard playing center(Diaw), and a 10th man on a good team playing Small Forward (Raja Bell) and with that cast, the Suns win 54 games, thanks to Nash.

This season, Nash had career-highs in points (18.8 points per game), rebounds (4.2 per game), field goal percentage (51.2 percent) and free throw percentage (92.1 percent -- best in the league). He was also the league-leader in assists (10.5) and shot nearly 50 percent from three-point range.

Some other choice Nash facts from 82games.com

Not only was his FT% .913% a league best, but he also had the fourth highest Clutch FT Percentage in the league (.923%) Dirk was 13th.

Four of the top 20 most effective pass-scorer combos in the league feature a man named Steve Nash.

The two players in the league most dependent upon a key assist in order to score a bucket both play with Steve Nash (Kurt Thomas & Boris Diaw)

In the passers most reliant on one scorer measure (I.E. easy assist gravy train player) Nash, who led the league in assists, and plays with multiple players who are dependent on him to score, did not even register. Basically, he has no gravy train player (ala Stockton to Malone) to beef up his assists, he spreads the ball around evenly to a bevy of mediocre players, who become better when playing with him.

"Nash has also led from his point-guard position the three greatest offenses since the NBA began tracking turnovers (2003-04 Dallas, 2004-05 Phoenix and 2002-03 Dallas), as measured by differential between the team's Offensive Rating and league average. Here is how I have them, defining possessions as .96*(FGA + (.44*FTA) - OR + TO):

Team Year ORtg League Diff
--------------------------------------
Dallas 2003-04 114.1 104.2 9.9
Phoenix 2004-05 116.6 107.4 9.2
Dallas 2001-02 114.0 105.8 8.2
Denver 1981-82 116.3 108.5 7.8
Chicago 1996-97 115.8 108.0 7.8
Dallas 2002-03 112.7 104.9 7.8 "

"An 82games study last year showed Stoudemire, along with Marion, was one of the NBA players most dependent on a single teammate (Nash, natch) for an assist. How much credit does Nash deserve for Stoudemire going from promising youngster to MVP candidate? A lot, I would say."

"If we look at all these different players, some very clear patterns emerge. For the most part, players tend to shoot better when Nash is on the court. The more important and more subtle effect, however, is that players slashed their turnover rate. (No regular improved their turnover rate alongside Nash the last two seasons; Jacobsen's was unchanged.) As I touched on in the discussion of Stoudemire, the reason for this is that Nash delivers the ball to players in position to shoot and without them having to do virtually any work for their shot besides getting open, as opposed to shooting off of a dribble or two."

"If there is a common thread amongst Nash's recent teams, besides their ultra-efficient offenses, it is that they rarely if ever turn the ball over. The 2002-03 and 2003-04 Mavericks recorded the two lowest turnover rates since the league began tracking turnovers in 1973-74, and the 2001-02 incarnation ranks fourth. (The 2004-05 Suns are also in the top 25 of all time.)"

Since this will be heated, I'll just go ahead and say it. Even accepting for argument's sake that Nash, while great these past 2 seasons has none the less been overrated; In My Opinion, in the last 2 seasons, Nash>Dirk
I appreciate the stats even if I disagree with your conclusion. Still, a few things I'd like to add to the conversation:

1) Re: Marion's and Diaw's supposed dependence on Nash for their superior statistics, the assisted fg% argument kind of falls apart once you realize that both guys had a superior efg% with Nash on the bench this year than they did with Nash on the floor (see 82games' player pair stats for the relevant data).

2) Re: clutch play, it's worth noting that Dirk holds a sizable +/- and winning percentage advantage over Nash in this respect going off 82games, stats. Nash's on-court +/- in clutch situations was +6.4 per 48, and his winning percentage was 52.5% (21-19). Dirk was at +16.6 and 68.3% (28-13), respectively. That clutch winning percentage, by the way, is the best of any of the MVP candidates, Billups included.

3) Regarding TO's, it should be noted that not only was Dirk's personal TO ratio considerably better than Nash's (see knickerblogger.net), his net TO +/- was superior to Nash's as well (with Dirk off the court the Mavs turned the ball over 16 times per 48, and with him on the court only 12 times per 48, whereas Nash was at 13 off-court and 12 on-court; see 82games for those numbers).

Stranger
04-26-2006, 05:52 PM
John Stockton just turned over in his grave...

I heard he was at a sympathy party with Isiah Thomas, Jerry West, Gary Payton, and Jason Kidd. Oscar Robertson tried to come, but they wouldn't let him in because he has one MVP award.

chumdawg
04-26-2006, 05:59 PM
The award isn't an objective standard. That's what makes the MVP award great. If it was objectively given to the best all-around player in the league, Michael Jordan would have won at least ten of them. But he didn't, because the award winner is determined subjectively. Is that the way it "should" be? Maybe. I think it's fairly telling, however, that Nash also won the GM and executives poll.

And come on.. the voters RARELY don't get it right. I think 5 years from now it will be pretty clear that Nash deserved this win. He turned a team that most predicted would finish near the bottom of the playoff bracket into a 53 game winning team, with every important piece around him having a career season. Who even heard of Boris Diaw before this season? And now look.. he's the MIP and averaged like 13, 7 and 6. Think he'd be doing that if he was in Atlanta? Nope. He's a product of a system that is only successful because Nash is quarterbacking it.

It's not a coincidence that the Suns are a great team with Nash at the helm.Tremendously well spoken.

chumdawg
04-26-2006, 06:13 PM
Last year everyone blamed it on the fact that he had such an amazing supporting cast, and that the REAL MVP was Amare Stoudamire. After he plays a full season without Stoudamire, He has an even better season and the Suns still had a good year. Does anyone want to talk about the amazing talents of Boris Diaw, & other chumps that suddenly become good when playing with a PG who knows how to run an offense?

Steve Nash played an entire season without the team's most talented & gifted player. The other Star on the team, Shawn Marion, is completely incapable of creating his own shot & relies on assists to aquire the majority of his field goals. Other Suns stalwarts are a former point guard playing center(Diaw), and a 10th man on a good team playing Small Forward (Raja Bell) and with that cast, the Suns win 54 games, thanks to Nash.

This season, Nash had career-highs in points (18.8 points per game), rebounds (4.2 per game), field goal percentage (51.2 percent) and free throw percentage (92.1 percent -- best in the league). He was also the league-leader in assists (10.5) and shot nearly 50 percent from three-point range.

Some other choice Nash facts from 82games.com

Not only was his FT% .913% a league best, but he also had the fourth highest Clutch FT Percentage in the league (.923%) Dirk was 13th.

Four of the top 20 most effective pass-scorer combos in the league feature a man named Steve Nash.

The two players in the league most dependent upon a key assist in order to score a bucket both play with Steve Nash (Kurt Thomas & Boris Diaw)

In the passers most reliant on one scorer measure (I.E. easy assist gravy train player) Nash, who led the league in assists, and plays with multiple players who are dependent on him to score, did not even register. Basically, he has no gravy train player (ala Stockton to Malone) to beef up his assists, he spreads the ball around evenly to a bevy of mediocre players, who become better when playing with him.

"Nash has also led from his point-guard position the three greatest offenses since the NBA began tracking turnovers (2003-04 Dallas, 2004-05 Phoenix and 2002-03 Dallas), as measured by differential between the team's Offensive Rating and league average. Here is how I have them, defining possessions as .96*(FGA + (.44*FTA) - OR + TO):

Team Year ORtg League Diff
--------------------------------------
Dallas 2003-04 114.1 104.2 9.9
Phoenix 2004-05 116.6 107.4 9.2
Dallas 2001-02 114.0 105.8 8.2
Denver 1981-82 116.3 108.5 7.8
Chicago 1996-97 115.8 108.0 7.8
Dallas 2002-03 112.7 104.9 7.8 "

"An 82games study last year showed Stoudemire, along with Marion, was one of the NBA players most dependent on a single teammate (Nash, natch) for an assist. How much credit does Nash deserve for Stoudemire going from promising youngster to MVP candidate? A lot, I would say."

"If we look at all these different players, some very clear patterns emerge. For the most part, players tend to shoot better when Nash is on the court. The more important and more subtle effect, however, is that players slashed their turnover rate. (No regular improved their turnover rate alongside Nash the last two seasons; Jacobsen's was unchanged.) As I touched on in the discussion of Stoudemire, the reason for this is that Nash delivers the ball to players in position to shoot and without them having to do virtually any work for their shot besides getting open, as opposed to shooting off of a dribble or two."

"If there is a common thread amongst Nash's recent teams, besides their ultra-efficient offenses, it is that they rarely if ever turn the ball over. The 2002-03 and 2003-04 Mavericks recorded the two lowest turnover rates since the league began tracking turnovers in 1973-74, and the 2001-02 incarnation ranks fourth. (The 2004-05 Suns are also in the top 25 of all time.)"

Since this will be heated, I'll just go ahead and say it. Even accepting for argument's sake that Nash, while great these past 2 seasons has none the less been overrated; In My Opinion, in the last 2 seasons, Nash>DirkSee, when you look at it like that, you get an inkling of just how great this guy is. What a truly unique player, in terms of the impact he makes on a team.

chumdawg
04-26-2006, 09:42 PM
Just a public service announcement: the back-to-back MVP is getting ready to tip off tonight on TNT. You might want to watch.

FINtastic
04-26-2006, 09:51 PM
If I really wanted to watch someone who didn't deserve an MVP, I'd pop in some Phoenix tapes from last year.

chumdawg
04-26-2006, 09:54 PM
Kobe is trying to step against Nash, creating an argument. This is great TV!

Murphy3
04-26-2006, 09:55 PM
Chum, don't forget to mind the step children.

chumdawg
04-26-2006, 10:14 PM
Chum, don't forget to mind the step children.Huh?

You still sore about your boy getting shut out? Even so, I don't understand that.

Murphy3
04-26-2006, 10:21 PM
Mad about Dirk not winning the MVP? No. I think second place is probably where he deserves to be.

dude1394
04-26-2006, 10:45 PM
Congratulations to Steve Nash..The second best point guard in the history of the NBA!

I just never realized he was that good. My bad.

chumdawg
04-26-2006, 11:01 PM
Congratulations to Steve Nash..The second best point guard in the history of the NBA!

I just never realized he was that good. My bad.

Dude:

I know how much you like this in the political forum:

SCOREBOARD!

dude1394
04-27-2006, 12:28 AM
Dude:

I know how much you like this in the political forum:

SCOREBOARD!

I happen to agree with you. Because he has been twice-voted MVP and only Magic Johnson has won it as a point guard. He MUST be the second best point guard in the history of the NBA. Because of the SCOREBOARD. :)

That's what the voters are saying and they must be correct because it's on the board.

chumdawg
04-27-2006, 12:31 AM
Thank you.

Thespiralgoeson
04-27-2006, 01:01 AM
I think the scoreboard is broken.

rabbitproof
04-27-2006, 01:24 AM
If this MVP doesn't win the championship this year, he's the most phony MVP ever.

If he does, he validates everything and sticks it to Cuban to boot.

It's all on you, Canada.

chumdawg
04-27-2006, 02:27 AM
It's a regular-season award, rabbitproof. Of course, this is not to diminish the tremendous performance Nash had in the post-season last year, which may have well factored into folks' deciding that Nash was again the spot-on-balls Most Valuable Player they could come across this year

rabbitproof
04-27-2006, 03:03 AM
Very good point, Chumdawg. I'm forgetting it's a regular season award. All the same, I feel the league's most valuable player in consecutive seasons ought to have a Finals win somewhere in his reign of the league. That being the best should equal to being a champion somewhere, even if they are two different types of seasons. Perhaps I'm being unfair.

Nonetheless, I'm done overvaluing the MVP award. Enjoy it, Nash.

I'm interested in playing for the bigger marbles now.

Thespiralgoeson
04-27-2006, 03:23 AM
A great poster on this board (I forget which one) made a comment so clever, I really wish I'd thought of it;

Nash can have the Heisman. Dirk will take the Rose Bowl.

orangedays
04-27-2006, 09:21 AM
A great poster on this board (I forget which one) made a comment so clever, I really wish I'd thought of it;

Nash can have the Heisman. Dirk will take the Rose Bowl.

Who dat is?

capitalcity - he ain't all jokes and jokes.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 09:23 AM
This was a give up vote. There were so many prospects for MVP this year that they just said, well, Phoenix wasn't supposed to do this good so, lets give it to him

Five-ofan
04-27-2006, 10:35 AM
The problem i have with the "nash made diaw" argument is that whats makes diaw good this year is his assists and rebounds not his scoring. Nash cant get him assists or boards.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 10:44 AM
I don't know if anyone heard the Musers take on the MVP but I totally agree with it. You can't use the "make the team better" excuse. It should be about who is the best player period. That is why I would consider the only candidates to be Lebron, Dirk, and Kobe. Yes, Lebron and Kobe score alot of points and do alot of amazing things, but that is because they are the only option on the team. Everything runs through them and everything is designed for them. Dirk has a couple of different options. He doesn'thave to take every shot and a lot of times during the game they will go away from Dirk and be able to score at will. Nash should have never been considered this year. Just like the Musers said,. what if Amare comes in next year and averages 50 ppg and 30 rpg but they only win 50 games. He can't be considered as MVP cause the team didn't improve.

Murphy3
04-27-2006, 10:46 AM
Why can't you use the 'make the team better' aspect as part of your criteria?

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 10:52 AM
if we use that criteria, then why wasn't ben Gordon in the MVP race, why wasn't Gilbert ARenas in the MVP voting, why wasn't Dwayne Wade there at the top, why wasn't Pau Gasol in there, why wasn't Chris Paul in there, why wasn't Vince Carter in there or Jason Kidd, or Tony Parker, or Manu Ginobli, or Jermaine Oneil, or or or or or......

you could go on forever. All of those teams would be lost without their stars and they would not be in the playoffs without those guys. But none, except for mabey Dewayne would be considrered the best player in the NBA. If that is the criteria used for the MVP voting, which it definately was in Nash wins,then the MVP would be even more wide open

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 10:54 AM
and it has been said before on here, NASH IS NOT EVEN THE BEST PLAYER ON THE SUNS<

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 10:57 AM
Nash now joins an elite group of back to back winners. Look at this shit. This is totally ridiculous.

Bill Russell
Wilt Chamberlane
Kareem Abdul Jabar
Moses Malone
Majic Johnson
Michael Jordan
Tim Duncan

and now

STEVE FREAKIN NASH<
the MVP has always been about who is the best player in the NBA that season. ALWAYS. It has never been about who has been what ever Ric Bucher said in his column.
So all you NASH lovers out there, you mean to tell me that Nash has been the BEST, I mean BEST player in the NBA this year? Total idiocy.

Nemesis
04-27-2006, 01:11 PM
Nash has been the best player in the NBA THIS year sixeightmkw, for alot of different reasons other than statistics i.e. Kobe Bryant. You take him away from that team and they would fall off the map THIS year (which is a good argument for the Laker's and Kobe granted) . So that argument is very weak. If your and the "Musers" second argument were true then Michael Jordan would have been MVP from 1984 - 1998. Give or take a couple of years. So that argument is completely absurb and I find it totally based on emotion. Nash had it won at the All-Star break.

Five-ofan
04-27-2006, 01:25 PM
The problem is you are a damn fool if you think nash has been the best player in the nba this year. Nash is top 15. To say he is the best player in the nba is a freakin joke. That isnt why they voted him mvp though just a response. The problem i have is that i talked to a friend of mine yesterday who isnt a big basketball fan(he watches maybe 15 games year just because i make him) but he watches ATH and he told me hey the arguments those guys made for nash make alot of sense(this is because I have been telling him for 3 weeks it had to be lebron or dirk.) The problem is that there are ALOT of people like that and alot of them are mvp voters. They hear that Nash has no help and Dirk has way too much help(amazing that they forget that help when they predict the mavs will get destroyed by the spurs) They say that the only reason any of these guys are in the nba is steve nash. Never mind that Raja Bell was good enough to get a MLE contract playing in UTAH. Never mind that Marion was a star before Nash. Never mind that Boris Diaw has a higher +/- than Nash. Nm that...... I can go on for a while. The point is they hear it and they believe it. No they may not get their opinion on that from that particular show but when you hear something over and over again, ie nash is the mvp or he has no help yada yada yada, unless you feel strongly about it you will be swayed by what you hear. I can hear that nash is the mvp and should be an infinite amount of times and it will do nothing but annoy me. However if you dont have a strong feeling one way or another hearing it over and over again will make you think that if its so obvious to so many it must be true. I have given up on the mvp voters. They are a collective group of retards with an iq that is the numerical equivalent of Kate Moss' pants size.

Male30Dan
04-27-2006, 01:31 PM
They are a collective group of retards with an iq that is the numerical equivalent of Kate Moss' pant size.

Personally, I would have went with nose sores caused by cocaine, but I guess that would have been a higher number!

Nemesis
04-27-2006, 01:42 PM
Some of you are too emotional to think or argue about this clearly. What do you think, five-0fan, someone is feeding them the line "Nash for MVP" every 180 seconds when they hit the button. Or they are getting some kind of shock treatment. "Ouch, ok, ok, Nash for MVP!!" Please.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 01:54 PM
Nash has been the best player in the NBA THIS year sixeightmkw, for alot of different reasons other than statistics i.e. Kobe Bryant. You take him away from that team and they would fall off the map THIS year (which is a good argument for the Laker's and Kobe granted) . So that argument is very weak. If your and the "Musers" second argument were true then Michael Jordan would have been MVP from 1984 - 1998. Give or take a couple of years. So that argument is completely absurb and I find it totally based on emotion. Nash had it won at the All-Star break.
in absolutely NO WAY was Nash the best player in the NBA this year. If you think that, then you are a Nash homer. This isn't a Dirk thing either. Lebron should be the MVP. He is and has been the best player in the NBA all year long. Nash runs a wacked out offense and that is IT. He has an inkling better stats than he had here in DAllas and he would have never even been an afterthought to be MVP in those years. And I am so freakin sick of the argument that if you take him off the team blah blah blah. That does not make an MVP. Please read my post above and you would easily see that every team minus their all star would fall off the map. Actually, Marion's +/- on off court is better than Nash's so actually, if Marion weren't on the team, they would fall off the map. Does that make him the MVP or what?

Five-ofan
04-27-2006, 01:58 PM
No i think they watch shows and read articles and they all say Nash is the mvp or when they watch the games that are national tv nash is always mentioned. Like i said hear it enough with no strong feelings and you will go with what you heard alot. IE everyone said phoenix didnt miss a beat. Yes they did. They went from having the best record in the nba to the 3rd best in the conference and from a truly elit regular season team to a good but not great team. That is missing a huge beat.

Five-ofan
04-27-2006, 02:01 PM
Actually if you take dirk off the mavs and nash off the suns i think the suns have at least an equal record. Since the mavs are signifigantly better now that means dirk is more valuable than nash even if you want to use that way of measuring it. IT had to be dirk or lebron. Just had to be. If Lebron had won fine. It would have been a tough decision between him and dirk but nash wouldnt have been close. For him to win is just an effing joke.

kg_veteran
04-27-2006, 02:10 PM
Anyone who is honest about it should admit that Nash is the weakest MVP in NBA history. Both years.

Nemesis
04-27-2006, 02:11 PM
Nash MVP. I guess all the voters have lost their rocker and your biased emotional rant is right on target. Hmm. This debate has lost its luster. Have fun crying about it. We have an NBA championship to feast our eyes on.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 02:14 PM
Nash now joins an elite group of back to back winners. Look at this shit. This is totally ridiculous.

Bill Russell
Wilt Chamberlane
Kareem Abdul Jabar
Moses Malone
Majic Johnson
Michael Jordan
Tim Duncan

and now

STEVE FREAKIN NASH<
.
Hell, I left off the last white dude to get MVP, Larry Bird.
Nash comes no where near sniffing their jocks with a 20 ft straw.

chumdawg
04-27-2006, 02:22 PM
Anyone who is honest about it should admit that Nash is the weakest MVP in NBA history. Both years.What about Walton in '78 or Cowens in '73? For that matter, how do you compare Nash to Cousy in '57?

I think it's time that we open our eyes to the fact that we are witnessing the best point guard of the past ten years, and perhaps the next ten. I understand that a lot of people are biased against the "little guys" in basketball, but you still have to recognize the greatness that we are witnessing.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 02:28 PM
hhmmmm, better point guards in the leage right now than Nash?
Tony Parker
Chauncey Billups
possibly Jason Kidd
Welp, theres 3 right there. So IMHO, I am not witnessing the BEST point guard of the past 10 years.

Yes, I know. Nash is a great point guard. He did alot of great things while he was here. He is a focal point of the Suns offense. But he is NOT an MVP, nor is he or will he be the BEST point guard in the league of the past 10 years or future 10 years.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 02:30 PM
hhmmmm, better point guards in the leage right now than Nash?
Tony Parker
Chauncey Billups
possibly Jason Kidd
Welp, theres 3 right there. So IMHO, I am not witnessing the BEST point guard of the past 10 years.

Yes, I know. Nash is a great point guard. He did alot of great things while he was here. He is a focal point of the Suns offense. But he is NOT an MVP, nor is he or will he be the BEST point guard in the league of the past 10 years or future 10 years.
oh, and it only took one year for Chris Paul to be better than Nash.

a.weidner
04-27-2006, 02:47 PM
What about Walton in '78 or Cowens in '73? For that matter, how do you compare Nash to Cousy in '57?

I think it's time that we open our eyes to the fact that we are witnessing the best point guard of the past ten years, and perhaps the next ten. I understand that a lot of people are biased against the "little guys" in basketball, but you still have to recognize the greatness that we are witnessing.

What greatness are we witnessing exactly? A 54-wins-season and a possible first round exit, by a team with 2 MVP contenders? i see...

If I were to choose a PG of the last decade in his prime, to build a team around. I would
take Stockton or Kidd. I certainly would not take Nash. Heck, I would have a hard time taking Nash over Payton.
Funny that of these 4 players Nash is the only one who's got an MVP award, I mean two of course.

kg_veteran
04-27-2006, 02:51 PM
What about Walton in '78 or Cowens in '73? For that matter, how do you compare Nash to Cousy in '57?

In 1978, Walton put up 18.9 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 5.0 apg, and 2.5 bpg. He had a PER of 24.8. His team had the best record in the West. I'll admit that Walton is also one of the weakest MVPs, but Nash and his PER of 22.0 last year and 23.2 this year are still weaker.

I guess I could give you Cowens, but he did post 20 ppg, 16 rpg, and 4+ apg, right? And his team won 68 games. At best, I'd call that a push for worst MVP ever.

I think it's time that we open our eyes to the fact that we are witnessing the best point guard of the past ten years, and perhaps the next ten.

I think John Stockton, Gary Payton, Sam Cassell, and perhaps Jason Kidd would argue differently.

Look, I think he's a great player. I just have a different view of how he rates historically than you do, apparently.

BTW, as for the next 10 years, who knows? You might be right. We can take that up as we go along, I suppose.

I understand that a lot of people are biased against the "little guys" in basketball, but you still have to recognize the greatness that we are witnessing.

I'm not. I really think he's a great player. I do think the Mavs are better off without him. I realize that opinions may differ on that subject. And I'm okay with that.

Five-ofan
04-27-2006, 02:53 PM
Woah, tap the breaks. Im all aboard the nash isnt the mvp bandwagon, hell ill drive but he is the second best pg in the nba right now at worst(billups) with a very legit argument as to him being the best pg in the nba. To say chris paul is better than him is a joke. Parker too. Kidd was but he isnt now. As for the last ten years I would say Billups now, kidd In the early 2000s and Payton in the mid to late 90s would all have something to say about that. That said being top 10-20 all time at your position isnt bad. Hes had a great career. I obviously dont think he is the mvp and that he is overrated right now but you are going too far the other way.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 02:55 PM
Chris Paul = Better than Nash, plain and simple.

madape
04-27-2006, 02:58 PM
ridiculous

Five-ofan
04-27-2006, 03:00 PM
Chris paul is not better than steve nash. IF you want to argue that he will be eventually fine i can see that argument since he is alot better than nash was when he was young but right now the only pg with any kind of an argument as to being better than nash is billups.

kg_veteran
04-27-2006, 03:05 PM
Yeah, gotta gree with 5-0. Tap the breaks there. Nash is the best PG in the NBA right now. Maybe Paul is better in the future, but not now.

Scoobay
04-27-2006, 03:08 PM
What greatness are we witnessing exactly? A 54-wins-season and a possible first round exit, by a team with 2 MVP contenders? i see...

If I were to choose a PG of the last decade in his prime, to build a team around. I would
take Stockton or Kidd. I certainly would not take Nash. Heck, I would have a hard time taking Nash over Payton.
Funny that of these 4 players Nash is the only one who's got an MVP award, I mean two of course.

too true, too true... how quickly we forget GP's greatness in his prime. Maybe not as good as a passer, but the Glove's defense... no doubt about that.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 03:09 PM
Chris Paul, rated in the top 15, pretty much, in every statistical category in the NBA as a rookie.
Ranks #7 in the NBA in Assists Per Game(7.8) Ranks #17 in the NBA in Free-Throw Percentage(0.847)
Ranks #3 in the NBA in Steals Per Game(2.24) Ranks #17 in the NBA in Free Throws(394.0)
Ranks #5 in the NBA in Assists(611.0) Ranks #1 in the NBA in Steals(175.0)
Ranks #6 in the NBA in Assists Per Turnover(3.34) Ranks #7 in the NBA in Steals Per Turnover(0.96)
Ranks #16 in the NBA in Free Throws Per 48 Minutes(6.74) Ranks #6 in the NBA in Assists Per 48 Minutes(10.4)
Ranks #2 in the NBA in Steals Per 48 Minutes(2.99) Ranks #15 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking Per 48 Minutes(28.31)

Five-ofan
04-27-2006, 03:10 PM
Just let it go. You look worse trying to defend it.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 03:11 PM
Nash's line

Ranks #1 in the NBA in Assists Per Game(10.5) Ranks #16 in the NBA in Field-Goal Percentage(0.512)
Ranks #6 in the NBA in Three-Point Field-Goal Percentage(0.439) Ranks #1 in the NBA in Free-Throw Percentage(0.921)
Ranks #16 in the NBA in Three-Point Field Goals Made(150.0) Ranks #1 in the NBA in Assists(826.0)
Ranks #10 in the NBA in Assists Per Turnover(2.99) Ranks #1 in the NBA in Assists Per 48 Minutes(14.2)
Ranks #2 in the NBA in Total Turnovers(276.0) Ranks #10 in the NBA in Total Efficiency Points(1908.0)
Ranks #12 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking(24.15) Ranks #7 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking Per 48 Minutes(32.76)
Ranks #3 in the NBA in Turnovers Per Game(3.49) Ranks #1 in the NBA in Turnovers Per 48 Minutes(4.74)

Stranger
04-27-2006, 03:13 PM
Nash is definitely the best point in the NBA right now. He has entered into the conversation--alongside Stockton, Payton, and Kidd--for the best of the last ten years. Bill Simmons top points of all time is a very good ranking in my opinion:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Cousy
4. Isiah
5. Stockton
6. Payton
7. Frazier
8. Kidd
9. Nash
10. Archibald

Here's what he said about Nash:

9. Steve Nash
Positives: Has an excellent chance to win back-to-back MVP's, a sentence that looks so unbelievable in print, my eyeballs just popped out of my head Allan Ray-style ... exceptionally fun to watch on the offensive end ... helped bring back three dying art forms this decade: passing, fast breaks and crappy hair ... following the Janet Jones betting scandal, replaced Wayne Gretzky as the most popular athlete in Canada ... this ranking could go up or down depending on how the next few years pan out, but the bottom line is this: not only are Cousy, Oscar, Magic and Nash the only point guards that ever won MVP's, but Bird, Magic, MJ, Russell, Wilt, Duncan, Moses and Kareem were the only ones that went back-to-back. Yikes.

Negatives: Only made two third-team All-NBAs and two All-Star teams before last season ... struggled with injuries for his first five years (missing 73 games) ... an atrocious, ATROCIOUS defensive player ... looks like Jackie Earle Haley and James Blunt ... everyone forgets this now, but the Suns were ridiculed by nearly everyone (not me) for spending $60 million two summers ago on a guy with a bad back who couldn't play D ... definitely lucked out by peaking for consecutive seasons without a true dominant player in the league.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 03:13 PM
actaully, I think I just proved my point. Paul has almost identical stats without all of the turnovers. Not to mention the turnaround the Hornets had from last season. We can attribute that to Paul.

Get over the Nash homerism.

MavKikiNYC
04-27-2006, 03:20 PM
1. Magic--definitely.
2. Oscar--yes.
3. Cousy--maybe.
4. Isiah--absolutely not.
5. Stockton--yes.
6. Payton--no.
7. Frazier--no.
8. Kidd--should be #3.
9. Nash--Top 10? Fine. But not 2006 MVP.
10. Archibald--should be #6.

Where the hell is Maurice Cheeks?

Five-ofan
04-27-2006, 03:29 PM
Where the hell is KJ? Isiah should most definitely be on that list as as player. His excellence as a player almost matched his horribleness as an exec. No i dont think horribleness is a word either.

Arne
04-27-2006, 03:30 PM
The original point was "best point guard of the last and the coming decade". Is just not right.

Nash had two excellent years. During the last decade there were guys like Kidd, Payton, etc. who were better during that decade, since they just put up more seasons like the two that Nash just had.

And there's no doubt in my mind that Chris Paul will be better from next year on. At least he will become the better point guard in the next three years and therefore be more likely to be the point guard of the next decade.

Steve Nash has profited a lot from his new coach who created a system that was perfectly fitted for Nash, from Shawn Marion, who is the best moving player off the ball.

In both years one of his teammates was an MVP candidate, as well. It's just ridiculous that he will enter a elite circle of players who have won this trophy two times.

The only thing that keeps my spirit up is that he'll never ever be a finals MVP.

sixeightmkw
04-27-2006, 03:32 PM
agree completely Arne.

FINtastic
04-27-2006, 03:44 PM
Heck, it probably won't be too long before Raymond Felton passes up Nash as well.

orangedays
04-27-2006, 05:22 PM
Steve Nash has profited a lot from his new coach who created a system that was perfectly fitted for Nash, from Shawn Marion, who is the best moving player off the ball.

And most importantly, and this cannot be re-emphasized enough, Steve Nash has profited from playing in a league without a DOMINANT, high-profile, marketable, WINNING player. Now, in my opinion, only two of those criterion really matter - individual dominance and wins. Those are the best two quantifiable measures of success, no? If your stats are good, well hell you must be a good player. If your team is one of the winningest in the league and you are the best player (by far) on that team, well hell that must mean you are a GREAT player.

In the current amalgamation of the league, we have players who fit one, maybe two of those categories - LeBron and Kobe are dominant and marketable, but neither the Lakers nor the Cavaliers are an elite team in the NBA (and without signficant overhauls, they never will be). Dwayne Wade is high-profile and marketable, but it's arguable whether or not he's even the most important player on the Heat (and with all that talent, where's the dominance? They can't even bang out a respectable record aganst the league's top-4 teams). Chauncey is a winner, but he's not dominant and many dismiss him as being simply another cog on the well-oiled Pistons - perhaps with good reason, considering that the Pistons didn't start winning until they added Rasheed. Elton Brand? Not enough wins.

Set Nash aside (I think his candidacy has been dissected enough in this thread) - let's look at our homeboy, Dirk. First - he is, without a doubt, one of the top offensive forces in the league - #1 in PER; .480 FG%, .515 eFG%, 58.9% TS% (as a freakin' JUMPSHOOTER!!!); 26.6 ppg (look at the 6 players ahead of him in this category and tell me that those six players aren't taking greater than 30% of their teams' shots)...I could go on but Dirk's resume is long and you guys know what I'm talking about - Dirk is, in a word, dominant. Second - the Mavericks had the third best record in the league and 60 wins, a full 6 games ahead of the next best team (the Suns). So, individual dominance - check. Top-3 winningest team this season - check. I don't get it. A legitimate argument does not exist against Dirk unless it is laden with hypocrisy. Too much talent on the Mavs? Look at the Suns last year, g'bye Chauncey. No defense? Wrong, but if you insist...Steve-flippin'-Nash! The biggest knocks against Dirk? He's a Euro, he's quiet, he's not a high-flyer, he's not high-profile, he's not in-your-face, and he's not marketable - all of the things that, you know, help a team win championships.

And to steal a bit from the LeBron commercial: We are all witnesses? We are all witnesses to the travesty that is NBA MVP voting. These guys are voting for bicycle-alley-oop slam dunks, 20 ESPN top-10 slamma-jammas and 20 three-pointers a night, zero defense, and a closet full of trophies at the end of the year but not a single one that really matters. F*ck.

And a note:

Am I the only one who is not convinced that this year's version of the Suns is all that great? Is it just me or are they 9 games behind the Spurs for best record in the West? Is it just me or did they drop a game, AT HOME, to the Los Angeles Kobes the other night? This is not the same Suns team that steamrolled through the playoffs last year, sweeping the Grizz and beating the Mavericks in 6. I realize it's all conjecture at this point, but wait and see - this Suns team is going to get bounced sooner rather than later and Nash's ill-gotten back-to-back MVPs will be little consolation.

blahblehblah
04-27-2006, 07:32 PM
And most importantly, and this cannot be re-emphasized enough, Steve Nash has profited from playing in a league without a DOMINANT, high-profile, marketable, WINNING player. Now, in my opinion, only two of those criterion really matter - individual dominance and wins. Those are the best two quantifiable measures of success, no? If your stats are good, well hell you must be a good player. If your team is one of the winningest in the league and you are the best player (by far) on that team, well hell that must mean you are a GREAT player.

In the current amalgamation of the league, we have players who fit one, maybe two of those categories - LeBron and Kobe are dominant and marketable, but neither the Lakers nor the Cavaliers are an elite team in the NBA (and without signficant overhauls, they never will be). Dwayne Wade is high-profile and marketable, but it's arguable whether or not he's even the most important player on the Heat (and with all that talent, where's the dominance? They can't even bang out a respectable record aganst the league's top-4 teams). Chauncey is a winner, but he's not dominant and many dismiss him as being simply another cog on the well-oiled Pistons - perhaps with good reason, considering that the Pistons didn't start winning until they added Rasheed. Elton Brand? Not enough wins.

Set Nash aside (I think his candidacy has been dissected enough in this thread) - let's look at our homeboy, Dirk. First - he is, without a doubt, one of the top offensive forces in the league - #1 in PER; .480 FG%, .515 eFG%, 58.9% TS% (as a freakin' JUMPSHOOTER!!!); 26.6 ppg (look at the 6 players ahead of him in this category and tell me that those six players aren't taking greater than 30% of their teams' shots)...I could go on but Dirk's resume is long and you guys know what I'm talking about - Dirk is, in a word, dominant. Second - the Mavericks had the third best record in the league and 60 wins, a full 6 games ahead of the next best team (the Suns). So, individual dominance - check. Top-3 winningest team this season - check. I don't get it. A legitimate argument does not exist against Dirk unless it is laden with hypocrisy. Too much talent on the Mavs? Look at the Suns last year, g'bye Chauncey. No defense? Wrong, but if you insist...Steve-flippin'-Nash! The biggest knocks against Dirk? He's a Euro, he's quiet, he's not a high-flyer, he's not high-profile, he's not in-your-face, and he's not marketable - all of the things that, you know, help a team win championships.

And to steal a bit from the LeBron commercial: We are all witnesses? We are all witnesses to the travesty that is NBA MVP voting. These guys are voting for bicycle-alley-oop slam dunks, 20 ESPN top-10 slamma-jammas and 20 three-pointers a night, zero defense, and a closet full of trophies at the end of the year but not a single one that really matters. F*ck.

And a note:

Am I the only one who is not convinced that this year's version of the Suns is all that great? Is it just me or are they 9 games behind the Spurs for best record in the West? Is it just me or did they drop a game, AT HOME, to the Los Angeles Kobes the other night? This is not the same Suns team that steamrolled through the playoffs last year, sweeping the Grizz and beating the Mavericks in 6. I realize it's all conjecture at this point, but wait and see - this Suns team is going to get bounced sooner rather than later and Nash's ill-gotten back-to-back MVPs will be little consolation.

great post orange day but as much as I agree with you about Dirk I also have to disagree with the contention that people who are voting/believing Nash or in fact Lebron & even Kobe for MVP are doing so because of "epsn, dunks, highlights etc." While I do beleive Dirk was the most deserving, a good argument can be made for the other candidates as well. IT IS NOT a travesty that dirk didnt win... Nash winning DOES not make the mvp award meaningless AND voting or thinking Nash/Lebron was the mvp etc is not a ridiculous
outlandish position held only by those who knows nothing about basketball or are somehow swayed by highlights and espn. I'm not saying you said all this OD just noting that its been one constantly stated on this board. I mean I'm not sure how ppl can make think this when many great basketball minds such as Hubie Brown, Larry Brown, jerry West, John Thompson & countless others have Nash or Lebron are all DESERVING of the MVP. Are all of them also baseing their votes, opinions on things that dont matter such as alleyoops and dunks etc? Are all of them in the pockets of the Sun's organization or are all of them suddenly in need of a basketball for dummies book as they have a differing opinion on who is the MVP?

spreedom
04-27-2006, 07:56 PM
I know now that it's fruitless to debate the Nash MVP award. All I want to say is whoever is claiming that the win is "ridiculous" needs to get their head examined.

dude1394
04-27-2006, 10:21 PM
I assume you're being sarcastic, but I do beleive that this MVP makes Nash a shoe-in for the HOF. Whether he will be considered to be one of the super-elite players in NBA history will be determined, I think, by his playoff success over the next couple of years. If he wins a title, I think you have to put him above Stockton, if he's not there already.

My guess is that among point guards, he'll end up being a consensus top 5.. behind guys like Magic and Isaiah.. maybe around Cousy, Frazier, Archibald, etc..

Yes but only to a small extent. He's obviously a first-round ballot (if they have that) to the hall of fame. He's been honored as one of the 20 best players to have ever played the game of basketball. Ever. The second best point guard to have ever played the game.

There's just no getting around it, the scoreboard says so. I expect Dirk will have to wait much longer to get in (if he does). He'll have to win a few more 1st round all-NBA votings and maybe get a championship to do so but he's no lock. Nash is a lock.

And obviously the mavs should have sent dirk away for Shaq or someone else and kept nash and nellie. Because how could you not keep one of the 20th best players of all time.

I mean I don't think that's true but who am I? I'm not the folks who vote on HOF's, the folks who think Nash is one of the top 20 of all time do. So he must be.

spreedom
04-27-2006, 10:32 PM
Two-time MVP.. the dude is going to make the Hall of Fame without a doubt, whether everybody on here likes it or not.

orangedays
04-27-2006, 10:34 PM
Two-time MVP.. the dude is going to make the Hall of Fame without a doubt, whether everybody on here likes it or not.

And whether he deserves it or not! Preach it spreedom! Shout it from the rooftops!

spreedom
04-27-2006, 10:41 PM
And whether he deserves it or not! Preach it spreedom! Shout it from the rooftops!


Neither you no anybody else can objectively determine whether he "deserves" it or not. If you don't think he deserves it, I support your right to have an opinion.. but you and I both know that a two-time MVP is going to make the Hall of Fame. I personally like him very much both as a player and a former Mav, and I can't wait to watch his induction.

orangedays
04-27-2006, 10:48 PM
Neither you no anybody else can objectively determine whether he "deserves" it or not. If you don't think he deserves it, I support your right to have an opinion.. but you and I both know that a two-time MVP is going to make the Hall of Fame. I personally like him very much both as a player and a former Mav, and I can't wait to watch his induction.

A person who is predicting the future by stating that Nash will, "make the Hall of Fame without a doubt", is attempting to give me a lesson on objectivity? Interesting.

Perhaps you would like to reword your post to say, "a two-time MVP should make the Hall of Fame"?

spreedom
04-27-2006, 10:51 PM
Now you're just being argumentative.. are you honestly telling me that Nash isn't going to make the Hall of Fame?

orangedays
04-27-2006, 10:57 PM
Now you're just being argumentative.. are you honestly telling me that Nash isn't going to make the Hall of Fame?

I'm not being argumentative - this isn't a simple matter of semantics, friend. And this has nothing to do with whether or not Nash will make the Hall of Fame. The fact of that particular matter is we do not know, truth? Therefore, it is facetious to state that he will be inducted into the HoF, "without a doubt". That is, in fact, an opinion.

Is it not a tad sanctimonious of you to chastise me for my lack of objectivity when it appears that the trait has escaped you as well?

spreedom
04-27-2006, 11:13 PM
I'm not being argumentative - this isn't a simple matter of semantics, friend. And this has nothing to do with whether or not Nash will make the Hall of Fame. The fact of that particular matter is we do not know, truth? Therefore, it is facetious to state that he will be inducted into the HoF, "without a doubt". That is, in fact, an opinion.

Is it not a tad sanctimonious of you to chastise me for my lack of objectivity when it appears that the trait has escaped you as well?


You won't scare me away with big words...

Well, maybe not. I just don't agree at all with your assertion that Nash doesn't deserve to make the Hall of Fame. I suppose Dirk does?

blahblehblah
04-27-2006, 11:16 PM
I'm not too sure about the critera requirements for induction into the basketball hall of fame... but if this was the equivalent of the MLB hall of fame in terms of selectivity and difficulty I would bet against Nash being a sure fire no doubt 1st ballot hall of famer. Of course I'd might be incline to take an even odds bet tho. =p

Umm spree... I dont think OD ever argued or asserted that Nash doesnt deserve the HOF. He merely stated the question.

spreedom
04-27-2006, 11:17 PM
I'm not too sure about the critera requirements for induction into the basketball hall of fame... but if this was the equivalent of the MLB hall of fame in terms of selectivity and difficulty I would bet against Nash being a sure fire no doubt 1st ballot hall of famer. Of course I'd might be incline to take an even odds bet tho. =p


The baseball hall of fame is stupid.. there are too many deserving players that won't ever get in..

orangedays
04-27-2006, 11:21 PM
You won't scare me away with big words...

Well, maybe not. I just don't agree at all with your assertion that Nash doesn't deserve to make the Hall of Fame. I suppose Dirk does?

Big words? :confused: Seriously? No need to be intimidated, it's just how I write.

You don't have to agree with any assertion. I don't give a damn. You, yourself, stated that opinions are not to be trifled with - something I wholeheartedly agree with. We will see whether or not Nash makes it into the Hall of Fame, until that time, your opinion is as good as mine.

And you're avoiding my point - well, I say my point but in reality it is the crux of your original point. I'll answer my question for you: Yes, it is silly of you to bring up objectivity when you lack it yourself. It's what we call hypocrisy.

And what does Dirk have to do with anything?

spreedom
04-27-2006, 11:31 PM
Big words? :confused: Seriously? No need to be intimidated, it's just how I write.

You don't have to agree with any assertion. I don't give a damn. You, yourself, stated that opinions are not to be trifled with - something I wholeheartedly agree with. We will see whether or not Nash makes it into the Hall of Fame, until that time, your opinion is as good as mine.

And you're avoiding my point - well, I say my point but in reality it is the crux of your original point. I'll answer my question for you: Yes, it is silly of you to bring up objectivity when you lack it yourself. It's what we call hypocrisy.

And what does Dirk have to do with anything?


The homerism on this forum for Dirk is mind-boggling.. and he's my favorite player too! But there is a zero percent chance that I can be convinced that Dirk is a more worthwhile MVP candidate than Steve Nash, and moreover a more worthy Hall of Fame candidate. Just for what that's worth.

And I never told you that it is a concrete fact that Nash will make the Hall of Fame. I just challenged you to say you honestly think he won't.

spreedom
04-27-2006, 11:32 PM
Nash is definitely the best point in the NBA right now. He has entered into the conversation--alongside Stockton, Payton, and Kidd--for the best of the last ten years. Bill Simmons top points of all time is a very good ranking in my opinion:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Cousy
4. Isiah
5. Stockton
6. Payton
7. Frazier
8. Kidd
9. Nash
10. Archibald


For what it's worth, I'd probably put Frazier up at either 3 or 4.. and Kidd probably second.

orangedays
04-27-2006, 11:37 PM
The homerism on this forum for Dirk is mind-boggling.. and he's my favorite player too! But there is a zero percent chance that I can be convinced that Dirk is a more worthwhile MVP candidate than Steve Nash, and moreover a more worthy Hall of Fame candidate. Just for what that's worth.

Fair enough, not clear why you would bring that up because we never talked about it but thanks for putting your opinion on the table...again.

And I never told you that it is a concrete fact that Nash will make the Hall of Fame. I just challenged you to say you honestly think he won't.

Here's me --> :)

Here's me calling you out:

Post #141

...the dude (Steve Nash) is going to make the Hall of Fame without a doubt.

And for sh*ts and giggles...

Post #143

...and I can't wait to watch his (Steve Nash's) induction.

spreedom
04-27-2006, 11:42 PM
Fair enough, not clear why you would bring that up because we never talked about it but thanks for putting your opinion on the table...again.



Here's me --> :)

Here's me calling you out:

Post #141



And for sh*ts and giggles...

Post #143


Sorry if those came across as me presenting them as facts, but that's not how they were intended; that's how they were interpreted. It's more exaggeration for me used to express the strong opinion I have that Nash will make the hall of fame.

orangedays
04-27-2006, 11:46 PM
Sorry if those came across as me presenting them as facts, but that's not how they were intended; that's how they were interpreted. It's more exaggeration for me used to express the strong opinion I have that Nash will make the hall of fame.

No problem.

In the end, it comes down to this:

I don't believe Nash deserves his MVP awards. I believe that the only reason why Nash has won the MVP not once but (possibly) twice is because there is no individually dominant, winning player in the current NBA. I believe that Dirk is the closest thing to an individually dominant, winning player and therefore, Dirk deserves the MVP over Nash. This holds especially this year because Nash is neither individually dominating nor particularly winning.

However, all of those things remain my beliefs. Unfortunately, the majority of NBA beat writers (and you) do not agree with me.

*shrug*

The O'Brien Trophy will make everything better.

spreedom
04-27-2006, 11:54 PM
No problem.

In the end, it comes down to this:

I don't believe Nash deserves his MVP awards. I believe that the only reason why Nash has won the MVP not once but (possibly) twice is because there is no individually dominant, winning player in the current NBA. I believe that Dirk is the closest thing to an individually dominant, winning player and therefore, Dirk deserves the MVP over Nash. This holds especially this year because Nash is neither individually dominating nor particularly winning.

However, all of those things remain my beliefs. Unfortunately, the majority of NBA beat writers (and you) do not agree with me.

*shrug*

The O'Brien Trophy will make everything better.



I don't get how Dirk is more individually dominating than say, Tim Duncan or even Kobe (who I believe has made the playoffs every year of his career except last year) especially when he's a pretty average-at-best defender..

dude1394
04-27-2006, 11:57 PM
I don't get how Dirk is more individually dominating than say, Tim Duncan or even Kobe (who I believe has made the playoffs every year of his career except last year) especially when he's a pretty average-at-best defender..

Funny that you bring this up when nash is an atrocious defender?

I think folks have different views of mvp, I know I do. I count wins more than points, more than stats. To be honest I expect the MVP to come from the top 4 teams each year. Now I don't really have a problem with steve winning it. I do have a problem with him winning it twice, he's just not that good imo.

orangedays
04-28-2006, 12:04 AM
I don't get how Dirk is more individually dominating than say, Tim Duncan or even Kobe (who I believe has made the playoffs every year of his career except last year) especially when he's a pretty average-at-best defender..

As a Steve Nash-proponent, do you really want to bring defense into the equation? No, I didn't think so.

A cursory glance at the stats will reveal that Dirk had a FAR...FARRRRR superior statistical year when compared to Duncan.

And compared to Kobe? Well, Dirk's eFG%, TS%, FG%, FT%, etc. are all higher. Not to mentioned that his PER is higher...but shucks let's not talk about that. Perhaps you mistook my two criteria for one. Let me list them again for you, in no particular order:

(1) individual dominance
(2) winning team

Where is Kobe's team in the standings?

spreedom
04-28-2006, 12:05 AM
Funny that you bring this up when nash is an atrocious defender?

I think folks have different views of mvp, I know I do. I count wins more than points, more than stats. To be honest I expect the MVP to come from the top 4 teams each year. Now I don't really have a problem with steve winning it. I do have a problem with him winning it twice, he's just not that good imo.


I don't believe Nash is any more individually dominating than Dirk is.. I think he's every bit the offensive player that Dirk is, however.

dude1394
04-28-2006, 12:07 AM
I don't believe Nash is any more individually dominating than Dirk is.. I think he's every bit the offensive player that Dirk is, however.

I guess so, he's a wonderful distributor. I think if he had to be the single scoring person like kobe/dirk he would suffer quite a bit.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 12:18 AM
As a Steve Nash-proponent, do you really want to bring defense into the equation? No, I didn't think so.

A cursory glance at the stats will reveal that Dirk had a FAR...FARRRRR superior statistical year when compared to Duncan.

And compared to Kobe? Well, Dirk's eFG%, TS%, FG%, FT%, etc. are all higher. Not to mentioned that his PER is higher...but shucks let's not talk about that. Perhaps you mistook my two criteria for one. Let me list them again for you, in no particular order:

(1) individual dominance
(2) winning team

Where is Kobe's team in the standings?


A cursory glance also reveals that Duncan has been a better all-around player than Dirk every season of their careers except maybe this year -- though Dirk still plays very little defense.

And throw all the numbers you want at me.. I still think Kobe is a far better player than Dirk is, on both sides of the floor.

And perhaps you mistook my criteria for your own.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 12:21 AM
I guess so, he's a wonderful distributor. I think if he had to be the single scoring person like kobe/dirk he would suffer quite a bit.


As you just said.. he's a distributor. He's an opportunistic scorer but not a number 1 option. And I've never said he is.

dude1394
04-28-2006, 12:24 AM
As you just said.. he's a distributor. He's an opportunistic scorer but not a number 1 option. And I've never said he is.

Nor did I say you did. Just "discussing" his offensive abilities versus dirks. IMO if he had to carry a team offensively he couldn't do it, but dirk/kobe couldn't run a team like steve.

orangedays
04-28-2006, 12:27 AM
A cursory glance also reveals that Duncan has been a better all-around player than Dirk every season of their careers except maybe this year -- though Dirk still plays very little defense.

Uh...how is this in any way relevant to the MVP award this season?

And throw all the numbers you want at me.. I still think Kobe is a far better player than Dirk is, on both sides of the floor.

Here's how this reads:

"No No No! No facts are going to change my mind!!!"

And perhaps you mistook my criteria for your own.

Think before you post.

Your post was obviously an attack on my criterion for MVP: (1) individual dominance and (2) winning team.

You cleverly (note the sarcasm) chose to only use individual dominance to compare Dirk and Kobe. Here's the point: Even assuming that Kobe is a better individually dominating player than Dirk - the fact that Dirk's team has won 13 more games makes him a better MVP candidate.

Let me know if you can't understand that.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 12:29 AM
Uh...how is this in any way relevant to the MVP award this season?



Here's how this reads:

"No No No! No facts are going to change my mind!!!"



Think before you post.

Your post was obviously an attack on my criterion for MVP: (1) individual dominance and (2) winning team.

You cleverly (note the sarcasm) chose to only use individual dominance to compare Dirk and Kobe. Here's the point: Even assuming that Kobe is a better individually dominating player than Dirk - the fact that Dirk's team has won 13 more games makes him a better MVP candidate.

Let me know if you can't understand that.

An "attack" on your criteria? How about a difference in opinion?

I understand my right to have a different opinion than you, whereas you are trying to impose your opinion onto me as a fact. I won't let you bully me by allowing you to talk down to me.

Let me know if you can't understand that.

orangedays
04-28-2006, 12:36 AM
An "attack" on your criteria? How about a difference in opinion?

I understand my right to have a different opinion than you, whereas you are trying to impose your opinion onto me as a fact. I won't let you bully me by allowing you to talk down to me.

Let me know if you can't understand that.

*sigh*

Let's clear this up for you:

In Post #155, I stated that an NBA MVP needs to be an individually dominating player on a winning team. In Post #156, you ignored the 2nd part of my statement and said that, "I don't get how Dirk is more individually dominating than say...Kobe."

In Post #158, I gave you some evidence that could be used to support the argument that Dirk is a more 'dominant player' than Kobe. In Post #161 you went on to say that no matter what the statistics suggest, you'll always believe Kobe is the better player - while providing no substantiation for your opinion.

I don't know what's up with you tonight, but you are off the ball.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 12:40 AM
*sigh*

Let's clear this up for you:

In Post #155, I stated that an NBA MVP needs to be an individually dominating player on a winning team. In Post #156, you ignored the 2nd part of my statement and said that, "I don't get how Dirk is more individually dominating than say...Kobe."

In Post #158, I gave you some evidence that could be used to support the argument that Dirk is a more 'dominant player' than Kobe. In Post #161 you went on to say that no matter what the statistics suggest, you'll always believe Kobe is the better player - while providing no substantiation for your opinion.

I don't know what's up with you tonight, but you are off the ball.


No need to mention that I brought up the fact that Kobe has made the playoffs every year of his career except last year.. or the given fact that Kobe has 3 rings and a scoring title.

This entire thread is just a nice example of you thinking you're smarter than I am and trying to bully me into agreeing with you. All of this "*sigh*, let me explain this to you because you obviously don't get it" is just you smokescreening the fact that you and I disagree and I have every right to disagree with you, and that my opinion is every bit as valid as yours is. Live with it.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 12:41 AM
Nor did I say you did. Just "discussing" his offensive abilities versus dirks. IMO if he had to carry a team offensively he couldn't do it, but dirk/kobe couldn't run a team like steve.


Nash does carry the team offensively.. just not always as the leading scorer.

orangedays
04-28-2006, 12:42 AM
No need to mention that I brought up the fact that Kobe has made the playoffs every year of his career except last year.. or the given fact that Kobe has 3 rings and a scoring title.

Again, how is this at all relevant to this year's MVP discussion?

This entire thread is just a nice example of you thinking you're smarter than I am and trying to bully me into agreeing with you. All of this "*sigh*, let me explain this to you because you obviously don't get it" is just you smokescreening the fact that you and I disagree and I have every right to disagree with you, and that my opinion is every bit as valid as yours is. Live with it.

Wrong again. This entire thread is a nice example of you making a facetious claim. Me calling you out on it. You APOLOGIZING, then going on to make more facetious claims. Rinse, repeat.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 12:45 AM
Again, how is this at all relevant to this year's MVP discussion?



Wrong again. This entire thread is a nice example of you making a facetious claim. Me calling you out on it. You APOLOGIZING, then going on to make more facetious claims. Rinse, repeat.


Yeah, just keep telling me that I'm "wrong." You're just being a bully. And it's pretty lame. I said a couple of things that you interpreted as facts, but they were my opinions. I went on to share more opinions and you kept making posts that dissected everything I said in what I feel was a very patronizing manner.

And I think bringing up a legitimate MVP candidate in an MVP discussion is fairly relevant; wouldn't you agree?

orangedays
04-28-2006, 12:53 AM
Yeah, just keep telling me that I'm "wrong." You're just being a bully. And it's pretty lame. I said a couple of things that you interpreted as facts, but they were my opinions. I went on to share more opinions and you kept making posts that dissected everything I said in what I feel was a very patronizing manner.

I'm telling you that your assessment of this conversation was wrong. But that's irrelevant at this point - let's just let that go. It is not my intent to be a bully and I apologize if I come off as such.

And I think bringing up a legitimate MVP candidate in an MVP discussion is fairly relevant; wouldn't you agree?

That's not what you were doing, here are your exact words:

"Kobe has made the playoffs every year of his career except last year.. or the given fact that Kobe has 3 rings and a scoring title."

How is THAT relevant to this year's MVP discussion?

For that matter:

"Duncan has been a better all-around player than Dirk every season of their careers except maybe this year."

How is THIS relevant to this year's MVP discussion?

spreedom
04-28-2006, 12:59 AM
Your criteria for an MVP was, unless I understood you incorrectly, a singularly dominant player. I was giving examples of other players that were singularly dominant, such as Kobe and Duncan. It was a slight tangent from the MVP discussion, but so was all of the hall of fame discussion.

This thread is still open for discussion, isn't it? I think all of it has made sense so far.

Male30Dan
04-28-2006, 01:06 AM
Your criteria for an MVP was, unless I understood you incorrectly, a singularly dominant player. I was giving examples of other players that were singularly dominant, such as Kobe and Duncan.

Surely you understood that he was referring to guys that were dominant THIS year, (which Duncan certainly was not), when referring to the MVP of THIS year...

If not, I guess you simply misunderstood!

orangedays
04-28-2006, 01:07 AM
Your criteria for an MVP was, unless I understood you incorrectly, a singularly dominant player. I was giving examples of other players that were singularly dominant, such as Kobe and Duncan. It was a slight tangent from the MVP discussion, but so was all of the hall of fame discussion.

We were talking about the MVP situation this year weren't we? The context in which you brought those particular topics up seemed a bit off. The correct context is important, nay, critical in any discussion. But I digress from seeming the bully.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 01:08 AM
Surely you understood that he was referring to guys that were dominant THIS year, (which Duncan certainly was not), when referring to the MVP of THIS year...

If not, I guess you simply misunderstood!


Oh, I was just trying to figure out how exactly his definition of a dominant player was compared with mine. I don't think you could call a guy that has only had one good year or two a dominant player (not that Dirk hasn't been excellent for a few years, but I'm just saying).

spreedom
04-28-2006, 01:09 AM
We were talking about the MVP situation this year weren't we? The context in which you brought those particular topics up seemed a bit off. The correct context is important, nay, critical in any discussion. But I digress from seeming the bully.


I was more referring to what your definition of a dominant player is compared with mine.. and thought comparing players in previous seasons would make it easier for me to see it from your point of view.

Male30Dan
04-28-2006, 01:11 AM
Well spree, with Orange trying to make a case for Dirk as the MVP of THIS year, I would think he would be primarily comparing stats and "dominance" for this year. If I am wrong, I apologize for butting in.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 01:41 AM
I was actually looking at the discussion from the Hall of Fame standpoint..

Murphy3
04-28-2006, 11:13 AM
From the Hall of Fame standpoint? It would be a total 'shocker' if both Kobe and Dirk aren't in the Hall...

dude1394
04-28-2006, 11:14 AM
From the Hall of Fame standpoint? It would be a total 'shocker' if both Kobe and Dirk aren't in the Hall...

Kobe for sure as he's got championships and gaudy scoring numbers and plays in la-la land.

Dirk will be more problematic unless he wins a ring.

orangedays
04-28-2006, 11:26 AM
Well spree, with Orange trying to make a case for Dirk as the MVP of THIS year, I would think he would be primarily comparing stats and "dominance" for this year. If I am wrong, I apologize for butting in.

No Dan, you were very right. I think spreedom realizes his misunderstandings now.

Oh, I was just trying to figure out how exactly his definition of a dominant player was compared with mine. I don't think you could call a guy that has only had one good year or two a dominant player (not that Dirk hasn't been excellent for a few years, but I'm just saying).

Nobody thinks that. That wasn't even a topic of discussion. Even if we had touched on it - your point wouldn't be relevant seeing as how it is not applicable to the individual I am supporting (Dirk). We were discussing the MVP award for this season, why would you think that this was even on the table?

I was more referring to what your definition of a dominant player is compared with mine.. and thought comparing players in previous seasons would make it easier for me to see it from your point of view.

When I talk about dominant players, I'm talking about individual dominance quantified by statistics. I talked about BOTH individual dominance and winning...for the MVP award...this season.

You brought up TD and Kobe. You talked about their past accomplishments = irrelevant. Dirk has had a better statistical year than TD (significantly so), Dirk's team has won more games than Kobe (significantly so).

Your criteria for an MVP was, unless I understood you incorrectly, a singularly dominant player. I was giving examples of other players that were singularly dominant, such as Kobe and Duncan.

No, my criteria for MVP was a singularly dominant player who is on an elite, winning team. Neither TD nor Kobe fit that criteria this season. It wasn't simply a tangent - you were misconstruing the argument entirely. You've done it throughout the course of this thread...I just don't get how you can do it and not realize it...:confused:

Final Edit:

And please don't pull the bullying card again - that's not what I'm trying to do here. Just read through the exchange that we had in this thread and tell me you were messing with me or something...because otherwise alot of your responses were nonsensical.

Murphy3
04-28-2006, 12:14 PM
Kobe for sure as he's got championships and gaudy scoring numbers and plays in la-la land.

Dirk will be more problematic unless he wins a ring.
I don't see that at all. This is the basketball hall of fame..not MLB hall of fame. Dirk's impact on the game being the best Euro to play in the NBA along with many of his contributions to team Germany will be more than enough to get him into the Hall regardless of whether or not he wins a title.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 02:35 PM
Well I still do think you've been bullying me quite a bit and obviously I wouldn't feel bullied for no reason. Your remarks like "just tell me you were messing with me" and "he understands his misunderstandings now" are, to me, thinly veiled attempts to talk down to me and it really bothers me that you find that completely out of the question.

orangedays
04-28-2006, 02:38 PM
Well I still do think you've been bullying me quite a bit and obviously I wouldn't feel bullied for no reason. Your remarks like "just tell me you were messing with me" and "he understands his misunderstandings now" are, to me, thinly veiled attempts to talk down to me and it really bothers me that you find that completely out of the question.

I would really appreciate it, then, if you addressed the meat of the issue (we can start with my previous post).

I can play nice as long as the discussion follows a logical progression.

sixeightmkw
04-28-2006, 02:39 PM
This is becoming increasingly BORING>

spreedom
04-28-2006, 02:39 PM
My MVP criteria is different than yours, I guess that's all I have to say with regards to this topic.

orangedays
04-28-2006, 06:16 PM
If that's the best you can muster then so be it.

spreedom
04-28-2006, 06:26 PM
If that's the best you can muster then so be it.


I'll just be the lesser of two evils in this discussion and give you the last word. Have fun with it.

dude1394
04-29-2006, 05:37 PM
I don't see that at all. This is the basketball hall of fame..not MLB hall of fame. Dirk's impact on the game being the best Euro to play in the NBA along with many of his contributions to team Germany will be more than enough to get him into the Hall regardless of whether or not he wins a title.

We'll just disagree then. Kobe/Nash are locks..dirk isn't.

rabbitproof
04-29-2006, 09:58 PM
It's fair for people to compare Nash to Stockton because, you know, both will finish their careers as NON-champions.

blahblehblah
04-29-2006, 09:59 PM
Dirks more a locked to be in the HOF than Nash to win the new nba most resembling James Blunt player award.

Drbio
04-29-2006, 09:59 PM
It's fair for people to compare Nash to Stockton because, you know, both will finish their careers as NON-champions.
Ouch. :D

Good one.

sixeightmkw
05-01-2006, 08:53 AM
they better hurry and give Nash the trophy cause he won't be around ijn the second round to it.

Arne
05-01-2006, 09:39 AM
Dirk's a lock because of the championshsip he'll win this year...;)

aexchange
05-02-2006, 07:40 AM
looks like nash was presented with the mvp award early.

http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/1552/mvpnash6vp.jpg

:D

sixeightmkw
05-02-2006, 07:45 AM
hahahahahahahaah