Dirk for MVP - Page 4 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Thespiralgoeson · 03-22-2006, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Well, two years ago they were ousted in the first round, and last year they needed seven games after getting down 2-0. If the proof is in the pudding, I suspect Charles is going hungry.

Chum, the Mavericks have gotten out of the first round, what, 4 of the last 5 years? Has a 60 win team EVER lost in the first round? If the proof is in the pudding, then I suspect that's the reason Charles so fat.

Five-ofan · 03-22-2006, 09:22 AM

Over the last 5 years im pretty sure only san antonio has made it to the second round every year with dallas making it 4 of 5 years. The funniest part is forgetting whether or not the mavs have proven anything in the playoffs, what the hell has denver proved? Besides if you get denver you probably get homecourt. Chuck is a douche bag.

Five-ofan · 03-22-2006, 09:44 AM

BTW did anyone else notice that after the game when sager asked dirk about mvp that he didnt mention anyone else? That is the first time ive seen dirk be asked about mvp and not mention little stevie. He was still humble and didnt come out and say of course im the mvp, are you blind? But it was nice to see him come out and not defer to anyone for mvp. Also it hasnt been mentioned and it was said in passing but im suprised no one mentioned that chuck said the spurs were gonna win the west and when asked about if dallas had a chance he said well the spurs are in good shape, they have a 2 game lead on dallas. Really? I know chuck doesnt do much work but come on. How hard is it to read the standings?

Thespiralgoeson · 03-22-2006, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Also it hasnt been mentioned and it was said in passing but im suprised no one mentioned that chuck said the spurs were gonna win the west and when asked about if dallas had a chance he said well the spurs are in good shape, they have a 2 game lead on dallas. Really? I know chuck doesnt do much work but come on. How hard is it to read the standings?

I noticed that too. That (again) shows us one of two things: either A. Chuck is an idiot, or B. he doesn't actually pay attention to the NBA.

TheBlueVan · 03-22-2006, 12:02 PM

im predicting it now, denver is upset in the first round by memphis, so we will see PHX in the semis

Five-ofan · 03-22-2006, 12:07 PM

memphis will have a better record so thats not really an upset

dirno2000 · 03-22-2006, 06:46 PM

I think he was alluding to the fact that SA leads the season series so in essence they do have a two game lead.

TheBlueVan · 03-22-2006, 07:13 PM

yeah dirno i think youre right

in regards to memphis, im just basing it on seeding, not record. i actually think either them or the clippers would KILL denver. sacramento would have a hard time

Thespiralgoeson · 03-22-2006, 07:14 PM

Well so far the season series is 2-1, so actually that would still only be a one game lead.

As for Denver vs. the Clipps, that's one series I would really like to see. I'm not nearly as sure as you are that the Clipps would kill Denver. As far as I'm concerned, that one's a toss-up. Sacramento OTOH, I could very easily see getting past Denver.

dirno2000 · 03-22-2006, 07:33 PM

"Well so far the season series is 2-1, so actually that would still only be a one game lead."

As of now, the Mavs need to make up 2 games on the Spurs in the loss column.

Even if we win the game in April, odds are the division records will be the same and they'll have the advantage in conference record. So unless Memphis pulls off the upset in SA we're probably going to need to make up two games.

endrity · 03-23-2006, 01:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirno2000

"Well so far the season series is 2-1, so actually that would still only be a one game lead."

As of now, the Mavs need to make up 2 games on the Spurs in the loss column.

Even if we win the game in April, odds are the division records will be the same and they'll have the advantage in conference record. So unless Memphis pulls off the upset in SA we're probably going to need to make up two games.

If we win, we will have one less loss in the division, and therefore have the number one seed.

dirno2000 · 03-23-2006, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by endrity

If we win, we will have one less loss in the division, and therefore have the number one seed.

The spurs are 11-2 in the division and we're 11-3. If we beat them and both teams win out in the division then that race will end in a tie.

Five-ofan · 03-23-2006, 12:57 PM

They lost so we are tied now but i know what you meant dirno i just dont give barkley that much credit.

Milles · 03-23-2006, 02:43 PM

ESPN types voiced their choices for MVP.

12 Writers
7 for Nash
3 for Wade
1 for Kobe
1 for Parker - This guy said he would probably change his vote to either Nash or Dirk, leaning towards Nash.

I was really surprised that not one of them voted for Dirk. Good heavens, some of them picked Kobe and Parker. Dirk was mentioned in the also ran category and there was hardly a mention of Billups.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?id=2379911

bernardos70 · 03-23-2006, 03:13 PM

Appalling.

dirno2000 · 03-23-2006, 04:18 PM

I just saw that and it was appaling.

Seriously, Steve Nash can't be a two time MVP can he? The following players have won multiple MVP's:

Bob Pettit
Wilt Chamberlin
Bill Russell
Kareem Abdul-jabbar
Moses Malone
Larry Bird
Magic Johnson
Karl Malone
Tim Duncan
Michael Jordan
Steve Nash????????????????

John Stockton was never MVP but Nash is on the verge of winning two? Somethings not right about that.

chumdawg · 03-23-2006, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirno2000

I just saw that and it was appaling.

Seriously, Steve Nash can't be a two time MVP can he? The following players have won multiple MVP's:

Bob Pettit
Wilt Chamberlin
Bill Russell
Kareem Abdul-jabbar
Moses Malone
Larry Bird
Magic Johnson
Karl Malone
Tim Duncan
Michael Jordan
Steve Nash????????????????

John Stockton was never MVP but Nash is on the verge of winning two? Somethings not right about that.

I'm afraid that you woefully underestimate just how good Nash is.

NXperience · 03-23-2006, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I'm afraid that you woefully underestimate just how good Nash is.

And I'm afraid you overrate him to no extent ... Yes he's good but he doesn't belong there hell I wouldn't put Dirk there (And I'm a big Dirk fan) I think it's just a joke that Nash has a MVP and the Stocktons and Kidd (who have taken their teams to the NBA Finals ok Stockton had Malone) have none.

Ah and sorry I hope this didn'T sound too harsh.

dirno2000 · 03-23-2006, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I'm afraid that you woefully underestimate just how good Nash is.

I don't think he's in the same class as Bob Pettit, Wilt Chamberlin, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul-jabbar, Moses Malone, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Karl Malone, Tim Duncan or Michael Jordan. You do?

chumdawg · 03-23-2006, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirno2000

I don't think he's in the same class as Bob Pettit, Wilt Chamberlin, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul-jabbar, Moses Malone, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Karl Malone, Tim Duncan or Michael Jordan. You do?

It's tough to make comparisons between guards and bigs. But I do think that Nash compares quite favorably with at least Malone and Duncan. And I also don't think it matters much how Nash compares to Jordan or Bird.

orangedays · 03-23-2006, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

It's tough to make comparisons between guards and bigs. But I do think that Nash compares quite favorably with at least Malone and Duncan. And I also don't think it matters much how Nash compares to Jordan or Bird.

Malone

14-time All-Star, 11-time All-NBA First Team, 2nd leading scorer in NBA history. Also named one of the "50 Greatest Players in NBA History". Reached the NBA Finals twice. Is the only player ever to register at least 35,000 points, 10,000 rebounds, 4,000 assists, and 2,000 steals.

Duncan

3-time NBA Champion, 8-time NBA All-Star, 8-time All-NBA First Team, 6-time NBA All-Defensive First Team (2-time Second Team), 3-time NBA Finals MVP

Nash

4-time All-Star, 1-time All-NBA First Team, 2-time All-NBA Third Team...GQ Best Dressed List ('05)?

Let's say we only look at Duncan and Malone. What about Nash makes you think he compares favorably?

dirno2000 · 03-23-2006, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

It's tough to make comparisons between guards and bigs. But I do think that Nash compares quite favorably with at least Malone and Duncan. And I also don't think it matters much how Nash compares to Jordan or Bird.

Technically you're right, it should only matter who Nash compares to his peers. But like I said, if he's the best this era has to offer then the league is at an all time low.

I tend to look at the award more holistically so I think that there is some additional status that goes along with being a two time MVP. Pettit was before my time, but if you take out Moses Malone, I could make a good argument for each of those players being the best ever at their respective positions. Nash is a great player but there’s nothing transcendent about him.

sike · 03-23-2006, 04:19 PM

As long as the Mavs keep winning....I think Dirk is actually turning out to be the favorite.

a.weidner · 03-23-2006, 04:35 PM

Nash is just sooo unbelievably good. How could he only been overlooked like that for 8 seasons?
From two All NBA 3rd team nominations prior to last season straight to two times MVP. What a difference 2 assists per game make...
And all that without ever having reached the finals, without ever having averaged over 20 points in a season, without ever having wasted a drop of sweat playing d...

Steve Nash:
career averages of 13 ppg and 7 apg, 2 times MVP...

Nash might one day enter the hall of fame as the only multiple MVP never to have played in an NBA final.
But that's ok. He doesn't have to, he is just that good in the regular season, isn't he?
I mean his team is on pace for a 55 wins season. I mean 55 wins, thats just so inconceivable, so beyond believe, so extraordinary. Simply awe-inspiring. This has never ever been heard of before: A team with only two all-stars on pace for over 55 wins!
And Shawn Marion is obviously overrated. 21.5 points, 12.3 rebounds, 1.9 steals, 1.85 Blocks, he sure can fill up a stats sheet.. But without Nash? Boy, he would probably average a meager 20, 21 points per game.

On a sidenote: Nash ranks 2nd in turnovers per game in just 36 minutes.
Per 48 minutes he averages more then 1 turnover more then both Iverson and Kobe.

orangedays · 03-23-2006, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a.weidner

Nash is just sooo unbelievably good. How could he only been overlooked like that for 8 seasons?
From two All NBA 3rd team nominations prior to last season straight to two times MVP. What a difference 2 assists per game make...
And all that without ever having reached the finals, without ever having averaged over 20 points in a season, without ever having wasted a drop of sweat playing d...

Steve Nash:
career averages of 13 ppg and 7 apg, 2 times MVP...

Nash might one day enter the hall of fame as the only multiple MVP never to have played in an NBA final.
But that's ok. He doesn't have to, he is just that good in the regular season, isn't he?
I mean his team is on pace for a 55 wins season. I mean 55 wins, thats just so inconceivable, so beyond believe, so extraordinary. Simply awe-inspiring. This has never ever been heard of before: A team with only two all-stars on pace for over 55 wins!
And Shawn Marion is obviously overrated. 21.5 points, 12.3 rebounds, 1.9 steals, 1.85 Blocks, he sure can fill up a stats sheet.. But without Nash? Boy, he would probably average a meager 20, 21 points per game.

On a sidenote: Nash ranks 2nd in turnovers per game in just 36 minutes.
Per 48 minutes he averages more then 1 turnover more then both Iverson and Kobe.

I think spiral's 'bout to sue someone.

All because of Steve Nash.

Arne · 03-23-2006, 04:45 PM

Yeah, it's truely sad to see whom these guys from ESPN picked...

capitalcity · 03-23-2006, 04:52 PM

Further evidence that espn is a joke...

NXperience · 03-23-2006, 05:29 PM

Well what do you expect ... the Mavs have all the depth of the world so the injurys are no excuses ... ah and did I mention the system that helps the Mavs ... it simply can't be Dirk.
I really do think they wouldn't mention him if he put up 30/10/5 cause Nash simply makes his team better and Dirk not ^^

And do I have to mention Dirk is "just" 4/1/2 away from averaging this

bernardos70 · 03-23-2006, 06:45 PM

No, but it's irrelevant to bring up who has won in the past to argue against him. We're talking about this season's MVP, not any other season.

With that said, he's not this season's MVP.

dirno2000 · 03-23-2006, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bernardos70

No, but it's irrelevant to bring up who has won in the past to argue against him. We're talking about this season's MVP, not any other season.

I agree to an extent. My point is that only the elite of the elite have won the award multiple times and Nash doesn't fit in that group.

He should be judged against his peers but if he's a two time MVP then we're watching the worst era of NBA basketball in the past 30-40 years.

Hitman · 03-23-2006, 08:09 PM

I saw that ESPN article and was very suprised to see Dirk not mentioned. I think he is the favorite, personally. If he can average 26, 9, and 3 with his high shooting percentages and the Mavs have the best record in the West, it is his.

That said -- Steve Nash IS so freaking good it is crazy. So much fun to watch, and Chum is right-- it doesn't matter how he compares to Jordan and Bird -- only Wade and Nowitzki.

chumdawg · 03-23-2006, 08:32 PM

The fact that he quarterbacked not one, but TWO different teams to 60-win seasons. The fact that the offenses he has run have been next to unstoppable. The fact that he not only can distribute the ball as well as, if not better than, Stockton or Kidd or the other PG greats, but also can score at a tremendous clip and shoot the ball with unparalleled accuracy, particularly in crucial game situations. The fact that his free-throw shooting is the surest bet in the NBA. That he is getting better as he ages, when every other point guard has gotten worse. I could go on...

dirno2000 · 03-23-2006, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

The fact that he quarterbacked not one, but TWO different teams to 60-win seasons. The fact that the offenses he has run have been next to unstoppable. The fact that he not only can distribute the ball as well as, if not better than, Stockton or Kidd or the other PG greats, but also can score at a tremendous clip and shoot the ball with unparalleled accuracy, particularly in crucial game situations. The fact that his free-throw shooting is the surest bet in the NBA. That he is getting better as he ages, when every other point guard has gotten worse. I could go on...

Not only did Stockton's shooting parallel Nash's, it exceeded it by quite a bit. He’s also responsible for 6 of the to 10 total assists seasons of all time. You can compare his passing (or Magic’s for that matter) with Nash’s. You have to go down to 31on that list to find Nash. He's not even the best player maker of his time. He's a guy who has benefited tremendously from playing for two great offensive coaches.

chumdawg · 03-23-2006, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirno2000

Not only did Stockton's shooting parallel Nash's, it exceeded it by quite a bit. He’s also responsible for 6 of the to 10 total assists seasons of all time. You can compare his passing (or Magic’s for that matter) with Nash’s. You have to go down to 31on that list to find Nash. He's not even the best player maker of his time. He's a guy who has benefited tremendously from playing for two great offensive coaches.

Give me offensive efficiency numbers for Stockton's and Magic's teams, compared to Nash's offensive efficiency numbers, and I will consider this line of thinking.

Arne · 03-24-2006, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

The fact that he quarterbacked not one, but TWO different teams to 60-win seasons.

Dirk will have done the same by the end of the season.

orangedays · 03-23-2006, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

The fact that he quarterbacked not one, but TWO different teams to 60-win seasons. The fact that the offenses he has run have been next to unstoppable. The fact that he not only can distribute the ball as well as, if not better than, Stockton or Kidd or the other PG greats, but also can score at a tremendous clip and shoot the ball with unparalleled accuracy, particularly in crucial game situations. The fact that his free-throw shooting is the surest bet in the NBA. That he is getting better as he ages, when every other point guard has gotten worse. I could go on...

I agree with you that what Nash has done has been impressive - it would be silly and capricious to dismiss his accomplishments. And I also agree with you that he deserves recognition for what he's done (something he has received in spades, e.g. the 2004-05 MVP Award). But where we diverge is when it comes to comparing him with players who are, arguably, two of the best who have ever played the game (in Malone and Duncan). It's true, this year, the only relevant comparison is between Nash, Dirk, Wade, etc. Nash is 'great' now...again, no debate there. But his greatness is confined to this year and to last year - I mean, there wasn't even any MVP talk when he led the Mavs to a 60-win season in '02-03 right? In terms of posterity...legacy...history...do you honestly believe that someone who has quarterbacked only two 60-win teams who haven't even made it to the NBA Finals is comparable to a fella who is one of the 50 greatest ever and another fella who is well on his way to joining that list?

In the big picture, I think you give Nash too much credit. One and two-third seasons of MVP ball is far too small of a sample-size for us to place him in the NBA stratosphere.

chumdawg · 03-23-2006, 08:59 PM

D2K-- You may be right about what it would say about the league if Nash won a second MVP. But maybe not. Just because the best player(s) in the game aren't transcendent like the best player(s) used to be does not automatically mean that the league as a whole has less talent. It would be an interesting exercise to compare an average team in today's league to average teams from years gone by.

On nash's lack of transcendence... I certainly don't think he's doing anything new, if that's what you mean. What I like most about the guy is that he is something of a throwback in terms of the PG position. I grant that part of Nash's appeal is that he is one of the few guys who plays the position like a Stockton did in older days. I lament the degradation of the PG position over the last several years.

OD-- You're probably right that Malone and Duncan played/play on a higher plane than Nash. But let it play out. Who knows, one day Nash might take a place among those all-time greats. If his Suns win a couple titles, he'd have to get some consideration, no? See, I think they are capable of that. And I think Nash would be the main reason it would happen, Stoudemire and Marion notwithstanding.

dirno2000 · 03-23-2006, 09:04 PM

So are we giving him full credit for those offensive efficiency numbers? If not then I'd judge his contribution by his points and assists.

chumdawg · 03-23-2006, 09:23 PM

Yes, we need give the respective PG's (Stockton and Magic and Nash and all the rest of them) full credit for offensive efficiency numbers.

dirno2000 · 03-23-2006, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Yes, we need give the respective PG's (Stockton and Magic and Nash and all the rest of them) full credit for offensive efficiency numbers.

Miami finished 2nd in the league in offensive efficiency last year. Does that mean that Damon Jones was the 2nd best passing PG in the league behind Nash?