View Full Version : Duncan to be named MVP
Definitely took me by surprise since I thought Kidd was a shoe-in.
05-06-2002, 07:03 PM
Well, if Kidd didn't falter somewhat at the end of the year....
But Duncan deserved it.
05-06-2002, 07:06 PM
Yep. no problems with him getting it, here. It's always a kind of bogus award anyway, like some people say, Shaq should get it every year. When did the voting take place? I realize it's supposed to be a regular season award, but if any voters saw the Spurs/Sonics game where Duncan didn't play, they would have to vote for Duncan. With the kind of numbers those guys throw up without him around, you could call them Duncan and the Donuts.
05-06-2002, 07:43 PM
Very well-deserved. Kidd was MVP to the Nets no question, but Shaq was Duncan's only competition as actual league MVP.
05-06-2002, 08:20 PM
duncan was the mvp this year... you can always give it to shaq..but, he did miss a little too much time
Great job by Duncan through the season. Now, go show the Lakers what you can do!
Why would a player on an East team deserve any award? It's embarassing.
05-06-2002, 10:34 PM
that's ludicrous mffl, how is it kidd's or pierce's fault they play in the east? they deserve it as much as anybody.
05-06-2002, 11:56 PM
<< that's ludicrous mffl, how is it kidd's or pierce's fault they play in the east? they deserve it as much as anybody. >>
They deserve it as much as any other also-rans--Dirk, Webber, McGrady, Garnett. Hands-down, the most valuable player in the league not named Shaq this season was Duncan. Any of those others would be traded for Duncan in a second by their teams.
<< that's ludicrous mffl, how is it kidd's or pierce's fault they play in the east? they deserve it as much as anybody. >>
It's not their fault that they play in the East but it is a fact that it is easier to pad stats in the East where the competition is not very good right now. A MVP in the East might be the 5th or 6th best player in the West. So how are they the MVP?
05-07-2002, 12:12 AM
Why would a player on an East team deserve any award? It's embarassing.
They would be top 10 maybe but not MVP. Good call.
Duncan deserves this MVP. Good choice IMHO.
05-07-2002, 09:35 AM
Top 10 "maybe" Doc? Are you on crack? Paul Pierce, Tracy McGrady, and Jason Kidd are EASILY in the Top 10, Pierce in the Top 5.
And then all of you guys agreeing with MFFL, Ben Wallace isn't the defensive player of the year because he plays in the east and pads his stats....he doesn't deserve an award and neither does anyone else.
Do you realize how stupid your definition sounds? I'd read more carefully next time you guys post this crap.
So what, if Shaq and Duncan played for an East team next year they shouldn't be considered an MVP candidate? LOL, you guys are laughable.
05-07-2002, 09:39 AM
TiMVP is one of my top three favorite players to watch, but I'd have gone with Kidd this year.
madape's stats on Wallace
I am always skeptical of Eastern Conference centers who put up big numbers. The East is so weak, especially at the center position, that its hard to guage how good a player really is. Its kind of like Yao Ming getting 30 boards a game in the Chinese league.
What we can do, is look at how Wallace's fared against Western Conference teams. Here's his last 10 games against Western Conference playoff teams:
Apr 12 vs Spurs: Rebounds - 8, Blocks - 2, Points - 7
Apr 03 vs Kings: Rebounds - 11, Blocks - 2, Points - 12
Mar 22 at Lakers:Rebounds - 11, Blocks - 0, Points - 2
Mar 19 at Jazz: Rebounds - 15, Blocks - 2, Points - 2
Mar 15 vs Jazz: Rebounds - 13, Blocks - 6, Points - 9
Jan 23 vs Wolves:Rebounds - 14, Blocks - 1, Points - 6
Jan 08 vs Lakers:Rebounds - 12, Blocks - 3, Points - 8
Jan 07 at Wolves:Rebounds - 5, Blocks - 3, Points - 0
Jan 02 at Spurs: Rebounds - 12, Blocks - 2, Points - 12
Dec 22 at Sonics:Rebounds - 9, Blocks - 2, Points - 8
Thats an average of 11 rebounds, 2.3 blocks, 6.6 points
Decent stats, but it certainly doesn't scream "best big man in the NBA"
<< LOL, you guys are laughable. >>
Let's not get personal here. I just think your opinion is wrong and my opinion is right - there isn't any need to resort to namecalling. Leave that to JoeJoe and his clones.
05-07-2002, 11:06 AM
I want you to go on the record as saying Ben Wallace shouldn't have been the defensive player of the year this season AND that no player in the East should win an award no matter how well they play...write that for me so I can fully grasp your opinion and make it clear to the rest of the board.
05-07-2002, 12:01 PM
i dont' have a problem with ben wallace winning the defensive player of the year award..but i would have had a big problem if kid would have won the MVP
<< I want you to go on the record as saying... >>
when's the trial going to begin?
05-07-2002, 12:55 PM
I don't have a problem with Duncan winning the MVP, but I would not have been mad if Kidd got it either. I don't care if he was playing pee wee league, the guy made a difference on a last place team and made them the best in the east. Doesn't matter how bad the east is. That was my point about Kidd making a difference.
I keep hearing people saying the Nets have emerged because of the growth of Martin, Van Horn... Whatever. The East was weak last year also and in a weak conference, there's no excuse for a team to have 20 wins or whatever they had last year. Insert Kidd and take out Marbury and they get an additional 30 wins. He was a good candidate and if he got it, then it wouldn't have been a bad thing at all. IN MY OPINION of course.
05-07-2002, 01:11 PM
I'l go on record as saying that Duncan and Shaq are far better definsively than Wallace. If Duncan was in the East, he'd bring down 20 boards and 6 blocks a night.
05-07-2002, 01:15 PM
Uhhmmm make that 30 boards and 12 blocks.. And that's EXACTLY why Mutombo truly bothers me right now. He's the ONLY TRUE center in the East and he can't dominate, it's ridiculous.
05-07-2002, 01:16 PM
If Wallace was in the Wast, he'd might put up numbers slightly better than Erik Dampier.
05-07-2002, 01:50 PM
madape- i'll pretend i didn't hear that last comment.
05-07-2002, 02:00 PM
<< Uhhmmm make that 30 boards and 12 blocks.. And that's EXACTLY why Mutombo truly bothers me right now. He's the ONLY TRUE center in the East and he can't dominate, it's ridiculous. >>
But you have to remember that Mutombo is older than Stockton. At least, he certainly moves like he is.
05-07-2002, 02:50 PM
Hales - The Dampier comparison was meant mainly for shock value. While Dampier is bigger and can block shots a little better, Wallace is clearly a better rebounder.
I think a better comparison would be Adonal Foyle. It may sound crazy, but I've always liked this guy. Like Wallace, Foyle is a little small to play in the West, but boy can he block some shots. Pretty good rebounder too. If you put him in the East, I think he'd put up some monster numbers.
<< I want you to go on the record as saying Ben Wallace shouldn't have been the defensive player of the year this season AND that no player in the East should win an award no matter how well they play...write that for me so I can fully grasp your opinion and make it clear to the rest of the board. >>
Wallace should not have been the defensive player of the year - it should have been Duncan. Dominating a weak conference does not make him the best defensive player. Duncan was only slightly less dominating in a much stronger conference.
No player from the East should win >ANY< NBA award - they should go to the BEST players of the BEST teams (except ROY which usually goes to a player on a bad team anyway). And the best teams are in the West. Detriot is a perfect example of my opinion. Detriot has won three major awards and they would have struggled to make the playoffs if they were in the West. Philly won a lot of awards last year, and then put up very little resistance to the Lakers in the Finals. I fully beleive that if Detriot and the Clippers were to switch conferences, their win totals would switch too.
I don't see anyone rushing to give the Clippers any awards so why should Detriot get them.
05-07-2002, 03:34 PM
So if Kobe or Duncan were to play in the east next year, they should be automatically taken out of the mvp voting by your theory, correct?
<< So if Kobe or Duncan were to play in the east next year, they should be automatically taken out of the mvp voting by your theory, correct? >>
It would depend on the team they went to. Put either of them in Atlanta, then of course they shouldn't be a MVP. Put them in New Jersey or Boston then the TEAM would be a top notch team (as good as any in the West) and the players would THEN be worthy of awards.
My question is that if the team isn't an elite team then why should the players on that team be considered elite players? That's putting the cart in front of the horse.
05-07-2002, 04:35 PM
i agree with you on that point MFFL.
05-07-2002, 05:47 PM
Philly won a lot of awards last year, and then put up very little resistance to the Lakers in the Finals.
Well teams from the West put up very little resistance against the Lakers last year too. If I'm not mistaken, they didn't lose a game in the playoffs last year until they go to the finals right.. So if you look at it that way, the ONLY team that gave them a game last year in the playoffs was a team from the East.
05-07-2002, 06:36 PM
the lakers fell asleep in one game...
the east sucked last year and it sucks in comparison to the west this year.
05-07-2002, 06:43 PM
<< Philly won a lot of awards last year, and then put up very little resistance to the Lakers in the Finals.
Well teams from the West put up very little resistance against the Lakers last year too. If I'm not mistaken, they didn't lose a game in the playoffs last year until they go to the finals right.. So if you look at it that way, the ONLY team that gave them a game last year in the playoffs was a team from the East. >>
Actually, that's part of my problem with this year's awards. Last year, the Least did suck but at least Philadelphia looked like the unquestioned top team there as they won all the awards. This year, Detroit is just one of the pack and yet they deserve 3 awards?
I don't object to any award individually, its just hard for me to justify something like half of the major season awards all going to a team which is *at best* a middle of the road playoff team.
05-07-2002, 06:47 PM
a team that might not make the playoffs in the west
05-07-2002, 08:35 PM
There is NO East player in the top 3. Ben Wallace deserved his award so I'm not sure why you are babbling about him. But NO east player deserved the MVP over Duncan.
05-08-2002, 10:31 AM
Well like I said before, I can see why Duncan got it, but I would not have been upset nor surprised if Kidd got it.
05-08-2002, 10:42 AM
Sorry Doc but you're wrong...I'm fine with Duncan getting it but Kidd could have just as easily taken it home.
05-08-2002, 10:44 AM
i hate the east media bias
kidd deserved it about as much as AI did last year..not that deserving when compared to some in the west
05-08-2002, 10:46 AM
the east media bias? murph, i live in the east and anyone here will readily admit the west is better...there is no bias in terms of mvp voting.
05-08-2002, 10:57 AM
yes..there's an eastern media bias in general..not just ivolving basketball..involving all sports
and to think kidd had everything to do with the nets turnaround is ludicrous.. half this teams roster either wasn't with them last year or was injured for more than half the season..
people missing significant games due to injury:
Martin (missed 14 i believe)..
plus, they added three rookies.
without kidd and with marbury..this team is almost as good as they were last year
05-08-2002, 11:28 AM
<< without kidd and with marbury..this team is almost as good as they were last year >>
Which means what? That they'd have won almost 26 games? So is this an argument that Kidd's contribution to the Nets' season wasn't the far-and-away leading factor in the team's increased success?
Kidd got a conference-winning performance (and set a team record for wins, I believe) out of a group of unproven players with NO track record of having played on a winner. If you want to talk stats, talk about season win-differential. Kidd wins hands-down.
Duncan is a great player and performer, and along with Dirk, Kobe and Kidd is one of the major reasons that I have any interest in pro ball these days. He had a great season, worthy of MVP consideration. No major problem with him winning the award, although I think Kidd had a bigger impact on his team this year.
But it's the hallmark of a weak argument when you have to belittle the opposing point of view to make your case. Belittling Kidd's contribution to the Nets' turnaround and their most succesful season in 15 years as a way of supporting Duncan's own spectacular season bespeaks a provincialism of its own and a bias at least the equal of that postulated regarding the eastern media, both of which can make you make statements as foolish as the one above.
05-08-2002, 11:37 AM
first of all murph i never said kidd was responsible for the entire turnaround of the nets...but, he does deserve the bulk of the credit.
instead of hating the east so much why don't you actually watch the games instead of concerning yourself with this stupid competition you have running with Doc on who can have the most post padding threads...jeez man, you always think you are right about everything, even things you don't know about...learn some humility.
and please, don't comment on games you don't watch. did you see kidd take over in game 5 vs. indiana? obviously not, and guess what? he's been doing that all season long...pay attention next time, you;re missing a great show.
05-08-2002, 11:56 AM
the only argument is that kidd isn't deserving of the mvp...
and thankfully, he didn't win it
he's given way too much credit for the turn around with the team..
and hales, i've watched too many eastern conference games..
the conference isn't very good
and congrats for taking over a game against indiana...did you see nash take over the game against sacramento? Hell, let's name him league MVP
05-08-2002, 11:58 AM
Might as well just write a million times:
"I know nothing about NBA basketball."
It would be a great post pad, and not too controversial.
05-08-2002, 12:15 PM
because i don't believe that Kidd deserves the MVP does not mean that I do not know anything about basketball. Several members of this board and experts around the country have echoed my sentiments..
i did not say that kidd didn't have a good year..or that he wasn't a very good player
i will not get into the personal attacks with you..
05-08-2002, 12:16 PM
I'm in agreement Hales. I've heard that argument before, my question is then what happen the year prior when Marbury, Kittles and Van Horn were all there. Granted Byron Scott wasn't there nor was Martin or ToddMac but that team was also terrible. However Marbury made the All-Star team and he was doing his thing but his team was terrible.
My thing is Kidd makes players around him better because he's so unselfish, he's a TRUE point guard. Everyone can talk about his lack of offensive ability, however when HE HAS to provide scoring, he does. Game one against Charlotte for instance, the man scored 8 of the Nets last 10 points, which were ALL HUGE baskets because Charlotte was right there. He gives the team exactly what they were missing prior to him being there. SIGNIFICANTLY enough to warrant an MVP...
Like I said, I don't have a problem with Duncan because he gives the same to his team. Is Duncan more important to his team, that's debatable. However, this I do know, take Kidd off that team and put another ALL-Star caliber point guard there, that team does nothing!! How do I know, because that was the state of affair they were in before he came. Now do the Spurs go to the playoffs with a healthy Robinson, even IN the west, probably. Why do I say that, because it's happened before. However I won't take anything away from Duncan because as I said, he is MVP caliber, but so is Kidd and EVEN in the East.
05-08-2002, 12:22 PM
i'm not saying kidd isn't deserving at all... but playing in the east lessens taking the team to the #1 spot..
he's simply not as deserving as someone such as duncan in my opinion
and your claim that the nets would do nothing if you put another all-star guard on the team..well, that's VERY debateable
05-08-2002, 12:23 PM
I didn't see the voting, but I'm sure there are people who considered Nash as MVP.. Atleast in Dallas there was.
05-08-2002, 12:24 PM
<<Several members of this board and experts around the country have echoed my sentiments..>>
They're echoing you? Or you're parroting what you hear on the radio? (Again.)
<< i will not get into the personal attacks with you. >>
First time for everything, huh.
<< and your claim that the nets would do nothing if you put another all-star guard on the team..well, that's VERY debateable >>
Easy debate to win. One word: Marbury. I win.
05-08-2002, 12:25 PM
<< Like I said, I don't have a problem with Duncan because he gives the same to his team. Is Duncan more important to his team, that's debatable. However, this I do know, take Kidd off that team and put another ALL-Star caliber point guard there, that team does nothing!! How do I know, because that was the state of affair they were in before he came. Now do the Spurs go to the playoffs with a healthy Robinson, even IN the west, probably. Why do I say that, because it's happened before. However I won't take anything away from Duncan because as I said, he is MVP caliber, but so is Kidd and EVEN in the East. >>
Not a chance Kid. Robinson *was* healthy for most of the year. And he averaged 12.2 points a game. At one time, Robinson was an MVP player himself. But then at one time Olajuwan was a championship MVP player. Age has caught up with both. The Canadian T-Mac is as good a center as Robinson is these days.
05-08-2002, 12:33 PM
Well that's why I didn't say they would definately. However the reason why I said there's a chance is because if you took Duncan off that team, they would have utilized Robinson ALOT more than they did this year. NOW, would he have been able to be sufficient enough to get them to the playoffs, I don't know. Probably not, but who knows maybe he could have or maybe his back would have went out a lot sooner, I don't know that, but I do know for a FACT that Kidd has elevated his team to a playoff caliber team. Whether that team was in the east or west.
05-08-2002, 12:40 PM
<< Well that's why I didn't say they would definately. However the reason why I said there's a chance is because if you took Duncan off that team, they would have utilized Robinson ALOT more than they did this year. NOW, would he have been able to be sufficient enough to get them to the playoffs, I don't know. >>
Its a definite "No". Kid, they wanted to utilize Robinson more all season long. Popovich, who is normally not a guy who calls his players out in public, was so frustrated that over the season there were several times that he came out and said that Robinson was not giving them what they needed/wanted from him. Without Duncan, the Spurs wouldn't have gotten a sniff at the postseason in the West. In the East they might have managed to hobble in.
05-08-2002, 01:07 PM
when you said another all-star point guard... i didn't mean you were speaking of just one point guard in particular...
however, i disagree.. on this team..with players back from injuries and with as bad as the eastern conference is..i seriously doubt that they wouldn't make the playoffs this year
05-08-2002, 02:55 PM
Well Hoops, like I said you could be right there however I guess I'm still not 100% sold on that fact but I do recognize the importance Duncan is to the Spurs, there's no disputing that.
Also Murph, say what you'd like. The Nets is a team that over the past two years (excluding this year) with essentially the same team has won no more than 26 games in a weak Eastern conference then. Insert Kidd they get more than 50 wins, even in a weak conference. My point is, the Eastern conference is NO stronger than it has been over the prior two years. So if they couldn't win before, then why are they able to win now?
Could it be Kittles?
Well Kittles didn't play last yea because of injury, but did the team hurt that much not having his 13.4 points he averaged this year? Probably not considering the prior year he played when the team won 24 games he averaged 13 points that year too. So let's say no!
Could it be Martin?
Martin got hurt the year before so maybe the fact that he was healthy this year made a difference? Probably not considering he ONLY played in 5 more games this year than he did last year. And actually as a rookie he averaged 14.9 points this year he averaged 12.0 and his rebounds were down, so I think it's safe to say NO there also
Could it be Van Horn?
This could be a factor considering the year before the Nets did miss his almost 18 pts per game for almost half the season? Well considering he's averaging only 14 pts this season but yet he's MUCH more happy this season compared to years before, so let's say NO, that's not the reason.
Could it be MaCullogh?
This is a no because McCullough averages 9 pts per game and 6 rebounds a game, the center position the year prior averaged 8 pts a game and almost 6 rebounds so it would be safe to say that's a wash!
Well let's see, then that leaves POINT GUARD..
Well the team lost their leading scorer of 24 points a game so how could Kidd make up for that?
Well Kidd couldn't because he only averages 14 points per game. Howeverhe gets 10 assists a game which is 2 more than Marbury averaged. He averaged 7 rebounds which is four more than Marbury averaged. He averages a littel more than two steals a game which Marbury didn't quite average a steal a game. Both averaged 3 TO's.
The bench this year scores more than the bench prior. What that says to me is KIDD is doing a better job of distributing the ball and keeping everyone happy. While Marbury was concerned with making sure his stats were good so he can make the ALL-STAR team! KIDD can run a team better than Marbury does and it shows in their record, in the teams happiness and chemistry. It's all there for you.
05-08-2002, 03:10 PM
thekid, i know kidd had a great year
the nets have a group of guys that are young and were going to improve regardless of who was running the point..however, having kidd helped speed up the process...
However, if you put a decent point guard in the mix with this team..this year (marbury excluded because he IS a cancer)..this nets team would have been a 5-6 seed in the east.
yes, kidd had a very good year..but duncan is a guy that is the ONE reason why his team made the playoffs..and, he put up better numbers
he had a better year in a better conference
saying all of that, i just can't see giving the award to kidd
05-08-2002, 03:43 PM
Better conference, I won't dispute because that's pretty much a fact.
However saying he had a better year or that he is SOLE reason they (Spurs) made the playoffs, that's subjective and as I said before that's a matter of opinion. I disagree with the opinions that say that Kidd isn't as or more important to his team. I can't see VERY few players in the NBA stepping in and giving the Nets that shot that they needed to get to the playoffs this year.. However not just that but to go from one of the WORST teams in a terrible conference to the best team in the conference says something.
05-08-2002, 03:54 PM
<< However saying he had a better year or that he is SOLE reason they (Spurs) made the playoffs, that's subjective and as I said before that's a matter of opinion. I disagree with the opinions that say that Kidd isn't as or more important to his team. I can't see VERY few players in the NBA stepping in and giving the Nets that shot that they needed to get to the playoffs this year.. However not just that but to go from one of the WORST teams in a terrible conference to the best team in the conference says something. >>
I agree that there is a lot of subjectivity involved here. We only saw the Spurs play one game without Duncan, and that one was with Robinson too. We didn't see this year's version of the Nets (with everyone healthy, T-Mac in the line-up, K-Mart no longer a rookie, etc) without Kidd at all. That's one of the reasons I think "most valuable to his team" is such a flimsy basis for trying to pick league MVP in the first place. Andre Miller, Gary Payton, Steve Francis, T-Mac (the American one), etc are all clearly the MVPs on their teams and other than separating the playoff teams from the non-playoff teams, how do you distinguish that one player is definitely more valuable to his team than another?
I say Ducan deserved the MVP and Kidd didn't because I think Duncan is clearly a more valuable player than Kidd. If San Antonio called New Jersey a month from now when both are out of the playoffs and offered to trade them Duncan straight-up for Kidd, do you think New Jersey thinks twice about pulling the trigger? Conversely, if NJ called SA with that offer, do you really think Popovich does anything besides laugh and hang up the phone?
05-08-2002, 03:59 PM
that's not a fair argument hoops...age has a lot do with agreeing to a trade...the mvp of this season has nothing to do with who you would rather have in the long run...it's who had the best season THIS YEAR.
05-08-2002, 04:35 PM
Murphy, I don't think the conference really matters. The award is for the MVP of the year, not of the stronger conference(in this case is the west). It's not Kidds fault that he plays in the East, and me myself thought that Kidd deserved atleast Co-MVP. I don't know if it ever happened, but I do believe that Kidd and Duncan should have shared the award. Kidd may not be totally responsible but take him off of that team and they are a lottery team, or leave Marbury on and they are still a lottery team. Last year they were terrible and injuries wasn't it all, you had guys didn't want to play with Marbury who knew what it was all about so they slowed rehab up and what not to come back. You had guys that didn't get treatment on injuries simply because they knew what Marbury was all about and didn't want to play with him. Bring Kidd in, and everything changes. Not alot of injuries, if there were guys came right back. Kidd was at practice everyday, showing good leadership on and off the court while in Jersey. Played defense and offense, never took plays off. Yes Duncan had great numbers, 2nd to none but Kidd brought his lottery team from last year to the 1st place team in the East. I don't care if they do play in the East, hell 26 game or whatever it was is phenominal.
05-08-2002, 05:26 PM
Well Hoops you bring up an interesting point, however how many GM's would turn down a trade for Duncan. There's only ONE OTHER player in the league who a team would not pull the trigger for that trade and that would be Shaq.
Would the Magic trade McGrady for Duncan, YES. Would any GM trade a point guard for a big man, 9 times out of 10 YES. Regardless of that players value to the team. Would Cuban trade Duncan for Nash, YOU BETTER BELIEVE he would! So I think if you look at it that way, it's hard to judge it because of the distinct things you get in return.
Like I said, I don't have a problem with Duncan winning the MVP. Now let's say if someone like Kobe got it over Kidd (even being in the West) I would have been PISSED!
05-08-2002, 05:26 PM
walker...duncan had a better year against better competition..
05-08-2002, 06:18 PM
Kidd...I don't see the Magic trading T-Mac for Duncan, just my humble opinion.
05-08-2002, 06:20 PM
Personally, I would probably be torn, but if I really had to make a call for the success of my team, I would have to defer to Duncan.
05-08-2002, 06:22 PM
I agree Hales, bout the only person I see the Magic trading for is Shaq. Yea, they would get only get Shaq back if they were going to trade anyoone for T Mac. Mcgrady is easily a top 4-5 player in the league.
05-08-2002, 06:22 PM
character wise, duncan would definitely be my choice...mcgrady's a little prick sometimes.
05-08-2002, 06:49 PM
good call Hales.
05-08-2002, 07:40 PM
<< that's not a fair argument hoops...age has a lot do with agreeing to a trade...the mvp of this season has nothing to do with who you would rather have in the long run...it's who had the best season THIS YEAR. >>
Age, salary cap, team composition, obviously have a lot to do with real trades, but I'm just using this to prove a point. Since its a hypothetical anyway, change it to this--
You are the Lakers. You have the mid-level exception to sign a guy for something over the limit and *only* the mid-level exception. Duncan and Kidd's agents call you with basically the same line: "In another year, Orlando has cleared the cap space to sign our guy to the max. But he has to do something this year. And he is willing to come play with your team for the one year for your mid-level exception."
You can have one of them. Potential doesn't matter because you won't be developing them, you are just renting them to help with a one-year championship run. Price doesn't matter because they have the same price tage. Age doesn't matter since you don't get to keep them after this year anyway. Which one do you take?
05-08-2002, 07:42 PM
<< Well Hoops you bring up an interesting point, however how many GM's would turn down a trade for Duncan. There's only ONE OTHER player in the league who a team would not pull the trigger for that trade and that would be Shaq.
Would the Magic trade McGrady for Duncan, YES. Would any GM trade a point guard for a big man, 9 times out of 10 YES. Regardless of that players value to the team. Would Cuban trade Duncan for Nash, YOU BETTER BELIEVE he would! So I think if you look at it that way, it's hard to judge it because of the distinct things you get in return. >>
Kid, I agree completely. And that is why I said and say that Duncan was the clear MVP with Shaq being his only rival. Duncan is the one player that any team in the league would trade their franchise player for--with the exception of Shaq. I think Duncan beats out Shaq this year simply because he was there for more games and was playing at a higher level more consistently than Shaq did this year.
05-08-2002, 07:45 PM
<< Kidd...I don't see the Magic trading T-Mac for Duncan, just my humble opinion. >>
I disagree. The Magic have been killing themselves for 2 years now, trading away anyone that might help McGrady get out of the 1st round (or even rest his back), just to make sure they can have a *chance* at Duncan when he finally comes free in 2003. If the Spurs offered that deal to them so they could go ahead and get Duncan *now*, they would leap on it faster than the Mavs would on Duncan for Dirk.
I agree that McGrady is a top 4-5 player. But Duncan is a top 2-3 player.
05-09-2002, 09:59 AM
I see what you're saying Hoops, BUT the only thing is I don't think because Duncan is the better player he was necessarily more valuable to his team this year.
For instance Iverson last year wasn't the best player in the league, but he had more of an impact on his team, even in the weak East. That's pretty much where I'm coming from. Well I'm going to stop because I don't want to make it seem as if Duncan is UNDESERVING because he is, I'm just saying that I feel Kidd is just as deserving.
05-09-2002, 10:00 AM
iverson was not deserving last year
05-09-2002, 10:21 AM
That's your opinion, and I'll let you know I COMPLETELY disagree with that one. That man SINGLE HANDEDLY carried that team to the finals... You can say others could have done it, but they didn't!
And like I said, they were the ONLY team that handed LA a loss in the playoffs last year too. LA played three Western conference teams before playing Philly too. Didn't mean much when it was all said and done, but the fact is, take that guy off the team last year and they don't make the playoffs, and forget about the finals.
05-09-2002, 10:31 AM
I just dont' think AI will ever be a part of a championship team because of the way he plays his game.... he's not efficient enough for it to be conducive to being a championship team
05-09-2002, 10:44 AM
Iverson was last year's MVP, no doubt.
05-09-2002, 10:48 AM
only because of the eastern media bias
05-09-2002, 10:50 AM
right, just like duncan getting the mvp over kidd this year was easte....oh wait, new jersey is in the freakin' east...hmmm...there goes that bias theory.
think before you speak, it will save you some embarrassment.
05-09-2002, 10:55 AM
the reason why kidd was close was because of the eastern media bias
if it was based upon the better season, the voting wouldn't have been this close
05-09-2002, 10:56 AM
murph, read my last statement...you know you're wrong, just admit it...don't be afraid.
05-09-2002, 12:31 PM
That depends on how you measure seasons??? It's not just numbers either.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.