Well-written "Nash for MVP" article by Skip Bayless

[vjz]

Nash is your MVP
By Skip Bayless

Link

For most of this NBA season, you heard almost nothing but resigned MVP sighs from analysts and columnists: "Well, it looks like you have to give it to Steve Nash again."

But a month or so ago, you began to hear another ball start rolling: Dwyane Wade's. Then D-Wade's deflated and here came Dirk Nowitzki's. Then Dirk's was suddenly dwarfed by LeBron's! Remember? Just two weeks ago you kept hearing, "That's it. LeBron James has to be MVP."

But now the giant bowling ball you hear thundering down the lane toward the MVP pins is … Kobe's!

Over the last four days, you heard several analysts on ESPN and TNT make a case-closed case for Kobe Bryant. You read a number of NBA columnists and beat writers joining the Kobe chorus. And you figure Kobe clinched it when Page 2's Bill Simmons, who knows his NBA as astutely as he does his sports movies, forgave and forgot and gave his MVP to the player who flew like an Eagle this season.

I'm a big fan of Kobe the basketball player. Was before all that ugly business in Eagle, Colo. Remained so even after Kobe ratted out Shaq to the investigators.

No doubt Kobe proved to be the most talented and driven player on the planet this season. But the most valuable?

Only if basketball games are won by the team with the highest scorer.

That's why, I suppose, Kobe has beaten Steve Nash 81-0 in the MVP race.

Kobe, of course, went Terrell Owens on the Toronto Raptors, scoring 81, mostly on jump shots. This would have been astonishing even if the Raptors had played H.O.R.S.E defense, which was pretty much all they played. It was tough to tell who was more mesmerized by this Jan. 22 performance at Staples, Jack Nicholson or the Raptors.

Then on March 27 at New Jersey, Nash disappeared like Jimmy Hoffa. Five shots, zero makes. Zero free-throw attempts. Zero points.

The Nets led by 19 at the half on the way to a 110-72 wipeout. And voters finally had their excuse. That was the end of the "Nash again" talk. No way was this Nash Rambler going to win a second straight MVP with a goose egg on his résumé.

But he should.

In fact, big picture, that game should strengthen Nash's MVP case. Before the season started, a lot of analysts and columnists expected Nash's Suns to suffer some blowout road losses -- especially against teams that had won eight in a row, as the Nets had. After all, the Suns had lost Amare Stoudemire to injury and Joe Johnson and Quentin Richardson to free agency. Heck, by March 27, they had lost their only legitimate post defender, Kurt Thomas, who wound up playing only 53 games.

And Nash's Suns have won 53 games and the Pacific Division! They're the 53-28 second seed in the still-tougher Western Conference! If they hadn't clinched so early, and Nash hadn't rested his battered body of late, they would have come even closer to last year's NBA-best 62-20 record!

I'm sorry, but Nash's 53 wins are even more astonishing than Kobe's 81.

Nash didn't play Sunday against Kobe's team at Staples. Kobe's team leaped to a 16-1 lead and won easily. Kobe, MVP? Wait a second, with Nash, the Suns won the season's first three games against Kobe's seventh-seeded Lakers.

Case closed … for Nash.

For the record, I picked Kobe's team to make the playoffs. I did not pick Nash's. Honestly, did you? I couldn't imagine how, even with Shawn Marion, Nash's team could finish even .500 with Raja Bell and Boris Diaw and Leandro Barbosa and Eddie House and James Jones playing significant minutes.

Now, you say, "Diaw's turning into a player." But did you think that last season when Diaw played in Atlanta? No, Nash is turning him into a player.

A Western Conference GM warned me after his team played Nash's in a preseason game -- and I didn't listen. He said: "I'm telling you, the Suns are going to be good. That damn Nash is at it again."

Now I believe.

One year ago, I wrote that Shaquille O'Neal deserved the MVP over what appeared to be the cuddly little runaway bandwagon choice, Nash. How, I asked, could Nash be MVP when it was unclear whether he was the best player on his own team? Stoudemire, of course, was emerging as the strongest force in Arizona this side of the noon sun.

But Nash won.

And now, averaging a career-high 19 points and a league-leading 10.5 assists, Nash (without Stoudemire) clearly has had an even better season than last year's. But the MVP should come from the West's seventh seed?

Book it: If Nash had played for the Lakers this season, and Kobe had played for the Suns, the Lakers would be the second seed and the Suns would have missed the playoffs.

Nash would turn Lamar Odom into Marion (if not more) and all of a sudden Smush Parker and Devean George and Luke Walton and Sasha Vujacic would start running and spotting up and draining 3s, and Kwame Brown and Brian Cook would outsprint other postmen for thundering dunks, and the Lakers would actually look like they were having fun playing basketball.

When you play with Nash, you know you're going to consistently get the ball exactly where you're best with it -- and when you're most open. Nash is a 12-man team. Kobe is a one-man show. Nash needs teammates. Kobe needs a stage.

A Suns source said: "Do not underestimate the leadership impact Nash has. He routinely organizes team dinners on the road -- and guys actually like it! You don't see that very often in the NBA."

Certainly not with Kobe's team.

If Kobe were a Sun, Marion would feel as if he were on the dark side of the moon. Marion would split time between waving unsuccessfully for the ball and complaining to the media. Kobe would take one look at House and Jones and shoot.

Heck, in Los Angeles, Nash would be making Jim Jackson look like an integral cog -- as Nash did last season in Phoenix.

It's as if Nash's teammates believe he'll make them better than they have a right to be. They know Nash is like some ambidextrous mutant life form with eyes set so wide that he can see 360 degrees. They know he can change directions while dribbling or flying the way nobody in the league can. They know Nash -- who's a mere 6-foot-3 -- can make forests of much taller defenders look hapless.

They can't keep him out of the lane or his team off the scoreboard. And they can't keep him from finding a teammate wide open for a 3-pointer.

Think about this: The Phoenix Suns have made an NBA record 824 3s. And they lead the league in 3-point percentage at 39.8. So they're making 3s almost as well as a lot of teams make 2s.

That's mostly because of Nash.

No, he isn't capable of playing lock-down, man-to-man defense. On the fifth game of that trip that began in Jersey, Nash couldn't begin to control Detroit's Chauncey Billups, who went for 35. Yet Nash's goal is for his team to outscore yours -- and that night at the Palace, the Suns made the Pistons sweat by scoring 102. Detroit hung on to win by seven.

That's Nash.

John Stockton was a little better on the pick-and-roll. Magic Johnson was better running the break and, obviously, at creating mismatches because he was 6-9. Yet even Magic couldn't run this Phoenix attack quite as magically as Nash does.

I started watching his Amare-less games early this season and got addicted. Nash has this in common with Michael Jordan: Almost every night he does something you've never seen before.

In three fewer games, Nash has 115 more assists than Billups and 142 more than Jason Kidd. Nash's team leads the league by far in scoring at 108.4 a game. Seattle is next at 102.5.

Yet Kobe suddenly seems to be the MVP front-runner because he's leading the league in scoring at 35.4 a game. I spoke Monday to two media members with votes who said they were going with Kobe -- and that they'd spoken with several others who were doing likewise.

Voters are human. They talk to each other. Sometimes it works out that they pass around the MVP to make sure a deserving candidate gets at least one trophy. During Jordan's reign, he arguably should have won seven of the last eight years he played. But Charles Barkley won one and, somehow, Karl Malone won two.

This had a little something to do with how accessible and entertaining Charles and Karl were for media interviewers. That was a small reason Nash won last season. And that might be a small factor in the new, more open and media-friendly Kobe's turning into this season's front-runner.

But this is the season Nash deserves MVP strictly on single-season achievement. This isn't a "good guy" award or a "white guy" award. It is no longer Nash's "turn."

He's simply the most valuable, by far. In what has been billed as the most wide open race ever, this one shouldn't even be close.

[sixeightmkw]

it's nice to throw in some big words and stuff like that, but dude has to get out of Nash's jock before he smells like cock. The entire premise behind the Nash for MVP arguement is that no one could run the Phoenix offense like Nash can. And this makes him an MVP? WTF. Nash couldn't do what Dirk does in a million years, he couldn't do what Lebronm does in a million years, he couldn't do what Kobe does in a million years, and you know why? Cause each offense is set up totally around those guys. Geez dude, please get out of Nash's freakin jock strap.

[sixeightmkw]

"No, he isn't capable of playing lock-down, man-to-man defense. On the fifth game of that trip that began in Jersey, Nash couldn't begin to control Detroit's Chauncey Billups, who went for 35. Yet Nash's goal is for his team to outscore yours -- and that night at the Palace, the Suns made the Pistons sweat by scoring 102. Detroit hung on to win by seven."

I just loved this little snippet. They made Detroit sweat and made them score 102 points.

[Big Boy Laroux]

bayless is HORRIBLE.

[Hitman]

I agree that Nash is more of an MVP than Kobe.

[Hitman]

I can't wait until the give it to Kobe and the Lakers get swept out of the first round.

[sixeightmkw]

I also love this little quote.

"And Nash's Suns have won 53 games and the Pacific Division! They're the 53-28 second seed in the still-tougher Western Conference! If they hadn't clinched so early, and Nash hadn't rested his battered body of late, they would have come even closer to last year's NBA-best 62-20 record!"

And how many games behind Dallas are they?

[nah-vit-ski]

Man every single commentator and sports show host is saying, "....And they lost Joe Johnson, Quentin Richardson, and Amare Stoudemire!"

Shit, i don't mind losing those guys if I get Boris Diaw, Leandro Barbosa, Raja Bell, Tim Thomas, And Kurt Thomas.

Not that Nash hasn't done anything to help those guys but you have to give them some credit too.

[u2sarajevo]

Rock me!!!!!

Shot clock got me!!!!!

I cheered for at least a week when Skip left the Ticket. No more Skip shots, life was good.

[dude1394]

I just could not put nash up with bird, jordan as a multiple mvp winner, I just could not do it. So two season in Phoenix and he's an automatic HOF'r? I guess so but I certainly don't think so.

[dude1394]

the statement about winning the division drives me about the nuttiest. Marc Stein said the same thing... Suns won their division but Mavs didn't, so dirk gets less credit. As if the suns would have won it in the midwest.

I like Stein, but that one made me take him down a peg or two. He might as well have picked denver, they won the division as well????

[grndmstr_c]

No MVP article that makes only a token mention of Dirk should be considered well-written.

[Five-ofan]

Anyone from dallas should know that bayliss is an idiot. Nash has made diaw a player? How exactly is it then that diaw has had 2 triple doubles without nash? I made the same argument in another thread but to shorten it up here goes. You cant make players better, you can only put them in easier positions to succeed. Dirk does this to almost the same extent nash does largely do to the mismatches he creates as well as the doubles. The mismatches lead to teams guarding jho with a 4(tim duncan is an example.) which puts marion in an easier position to succeed just the same as nash does by hitting jump shooters for jumpers. With all that said Nash is leading an at least equally talented team to less wins with lesser individual numbers. You have to either have more wins or better numbers to have a case for mvp.

[chumdawg]

What a tremendously compelling article. He made several points that I had not considered before. Before reading this, I was thinking Dirk would have my virtual vote for MVP. Now I am changing over to Nash.

Nash is a twelve-man team. Nash does things every night that you have never seen before.

So true, so true. It may well be the case that we are witnessing the ascent of the best player to play the *game* of basketball in the last ten years. The game. No one, not since Jordan and Stockton in their primes, plays the game as well as Nash does.

[Murphy3]

Chum, you would like Skip Bayless.. Only you would find anything that he would say 'compelling'. It speaks very poorly of you.

[chumdawg]

Care to challenge any of the (very compelling) points Bayless made in his article?

Or does your ad hominem argument stand?

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

So true, so true. It may well be the case that we are witnessing the ascent of the best player to play the *game* of basketball in the last ten years. The game. No one, not since Jordan and Stockton in their primes, plays the game as well as Nash does.

Chum, please explain to me what your definition of the *game* of basketball is. Because I really have no clue what you're saying. Because as far as I'm concerned, the *game* of basketball has seen an assload of players over the past ten years who were a hell of a lot better than Nash.

[chumdawg]

I'm sorry for being vague. What I meant was five-on-five play, versus one-on-one play. clear enough?

[TVI]

I agree. This was a very well-written article. I haven't heard anything (beyond sheer homerism) that challenges Skip's points. This should not be so easily dismissed.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Not really, no. If you're talking about who has the best understanding of how to run an offense and seeing the floor, sure, I'll concede that he's probably the best since Stockton, although I think you could make an equally strong case for Kidd.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Not really, no. If you're talking about who has the best understanding of how to run an offense and seeing the floor, sure, I'll concede that he's probably the best since Stockton, although I think you could make an equally strong case for Kidd.

Doubtless they are in a class by themselves. (And isn't it shocking to think how far back third place is?) The intangibles probably go to Nash, though. For one thing, he has had to overcome Don Nelson's circus-tent systems and the absence of Amare Stoudemire this year. And of course, he does have that MVP award.

Then again, Kidd did make a conference final.

But Nash has been far more durable than Kidd.

I'll agree, that's an interesting debate. I think Nash has the better of it thus far. But all things considered, I'd probably be okay with either one of them when it comes to that distinction, with the nod going to Nash for offensive prowess and for staying on the court.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Then again, Kidd did make a conference final.

As well as back-to-back finals appearances. Of course his conference has been appallingly weak, but it's still no small accomplishment.

[Five-ofan]

What point does he make that makes you consider nash? That he is leading a team without amare to the 3rd best record in the west??? Dirk is leading a team without amare to the second best record in the west. Nash isnt in the top 30 players of the last 10 years let alone the best. Exactly what does he do that we havent seen before? He runs an extremely up tempo offense very well and hes the best pick and roll point since stockton. Yeah that is great but it doesnt make him close to the best player of the last 10 years. As for the argument that you changed it to afterwards i would argue that kidd and a young gp were better pgs than nash. Nash is a better distributor than gp was but overall its pretty clear that payton was better in his prime. Nash is not the mvp. He shouldnt finish higher than 4th or 5th at best.

[madape]

Nash has proven his detractors wrong time and time again. First they said "without Dirk, he's nothing". Then they said "without Amare, he's nothing". now what is it? Did someone actually contribute his success this year to the presense of Boris Diaw?

The guy is inarguably the best at his position in the game. He's a franchise player that does nothing but with games with whoever he plays with. He makes stars out of mediocre players. He makes superstars out of good ones. He is in the process of revolutionalizing the way offenses work in the NBA. No one is better at running an offense, and when all is said and done I think you can probably say that no point guard has ever run an offense as well in the history of the NBA. Nash is a special kind of player.

His critics already look like fools. Yet they won't shut up. Perhaps 2 MVP trophys and a championship ring will. He's my vote for MVP. And if the Mavs get knocked off but the Spurs or Grizz, I'll be pulling for the Suns to win the championship.

[Five-ofan]

No the 2 mvp trophies wont prove anyone wrong except that idiots picked him to win an award that is becoming increasingly bad. By the argument that him getting there is what made marion better then why doesnt terry get credit for dirks improvement? I mean hell the nash backers make it seem like no one can ever improve on their own so it must mean that jason terry is solely responsible from dirks improvement from the twan year to the last 2. i mean it couldnt have had anything to do with the team just fitting together better and dirk working his ass off to make himself a better player. No that couldnt be it. I mean if that is the case than you could make an argument that maybe boris diaw actually did get better or that shawn marion might have gotten better and not that the all mighty steve nash made them into what they are. Good lord if steve makes everyone around him SOOOOO much better, shouldnt dirk have gone to like 12 and 8 after steve left considering that we all know jet isnt a true pg?

[sike]

"rock me".........*sigh*...........oh...and Troy is gay....

[u2sarajevo]

Originally Posted by sike

Troy is gay....

genius.... I forgot about that debacle.

Skip has proven himself to be a moron in the past. Not saying Nash isn't good, but I think that this article will only be held in high regard by those that "worship" Nash. It changed nothing in regards to my opinion of Nash, but again I know for a fact that Skip is a joke.

[harsh euro barge]

Here's a much better MVP article...

http://www.nysun.com/article/31235

By John Hollinger
April 19, 2006
A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Here's all you need to know about how close this year's NBA MVP race is: Up until about 24 hours ago, I didn't know who I was picking.

Given that today is the last day of the season, however, I finally had to make up my mind. But it isn't easy choosing among the several worthy candidates for this year's award. In particular, there are four players - Cleveland's LeBron James, Dallas's Dirk Nowitzki, the Lakers' Kobe Bryant, and Miami's Dwyane Wade - who seem to have almost nothing separating them.

Somehow, I had to split hairs among these four, and so do the voters (I don't have a ballot), which should make this one of the closest MVP votes in memory. And unlike other close votes - such as Steve Nash vs. Shaquille O'Neal last season - this one figures to be a six-car pile-up. In addition to the four players I mentioned, Nash and Detroit's Chauncey Billups have all earned serious MVP talk around the country.

Let's start by eliminating the two obvious pretenders - Nash and Billups. Billups has been the best player on the best team (Detroit), but saying he's more valuable than anyone else in basketball is just batty. Detroit's strength stems from the combined effect of five quality starters rather than a single dominant one, and even in a career year, Billups didn't sustain nearly the quality of play that the Jameses and Bryants of the world did.

Then there's Nash. He was a questionable choice when he won last year's award, and may end up winning again this year. If so, it would be about the worst vote in league history.

For starters, an MVP should, at the very least, be the best player on his own team, and it's unclear that Nash qualifies in that department. Teammate Shawn Marion leads the Suns in points, rebounds, minutes, blocks, steals, field goals, field-goal attempts, and 2-point field-goal percentage. And for all the talk of how the Suns are doomed without Nash, Marion actually has a much greater on-court vs. off-court differential, which measures what happens to a team's scoring when its star leaves the floor (+8.6 points per 48 minutes for Marion, +4.8 for Nash).

Nash's candidacy is a triumph of emotion over reason. As super as he's been, and as surprisingly well as Phoenix has played without Amare Stoudemire, we can't just give Nash all the credit for every good thing that happens to every Phoenix player - but that's the step that people are taking in anointing him MVP.

The most frequently made argument in Nash's favor is that seven Suns are having career-highs in scoring, but this one is an obvious red herring. For starters, one of those seven is Nash himself. One of the others is Marion, barely squeaking past his previous career-high (21.7 to 21.2). And four of the other five players - Raja Bell, Leandro Barbosa, James Jones, and Boris Diaw - are getting so much more playing time than they every saw before that it would be shocking if they weren't averaging career bests.

The seventh player, Eddie House, has legitimately boosted his scoring. We could attribute his improvement to Nash were it not for one problem: House is Nash's backup. The two are almost never on the court at the same time.

Moreover, Nash is nowhere near the top of the leaderboard in Player Efficiency Rating (PER), my per-minute rating of a player's effectiveness. He ranks 14th, well behind the legitimate MVP candidates and Marion.

Thus, while Nash has been great, and the Suns remarkable, the leap of faith required to anoint him the most valuable player in the entire league doesn't hold water.

Eliminating the two point guards leaves us with James, Nowitzki, Bryant and Wade. On the court, the best player of the four was probably Bryant. In addition to his historic 81-point game, he's also the best defensive player of the four and single-handedly carried the Lakers to a playoff spot.

Nevertheless, I can't place him higher than fourth on my ballot. One of the reasons L.A. was so talent-starved in the first place was because Bryant couldn't get along with Shaq, which kind of subtracts from the "most valuable" argument. Plus, I've yet to see a shred of evidence that any of his teammates can stand him.

The next one to eliminate is Wade. Statistically, he's been just as good as Nowitzki and James. He ranks a close fourth in PER, and despite Shaq's presence, he had the greatest on-court off-court differential in the league (a whopping +15.5). On the other hand, Wade slumped a bit down the stretch, shot 13-of-76 from three-point range on the season, and one can't help but assign him at least a smidgen of the blame for Miami's slightly disappointing campaign.

That leaves us with Dirk and Le-Bron. As you can see in the chart, they rank first and second in my PER rankings (taking it to another decimal, Le-Bron leads 28.18 to 28.16). Both also led teams that generally outperformed expectations. Dallas won 60 games despite several injuries and a lack of superstar talent beyond Nowitzki. The Cavs, meanwhile, could win their 50th game tonight despite missing Larry Hughes for half the season and getting horrendous seasons from several supporting players (Damon Jones in particular.)

James has the edge in on-court offcourt differential, +13.0 to +7.7, but we would expect that. Nowitzki was backed up by the relatively competent Keith Van Horn, while James had lowlifes like Ira Newble and Luke Jackson replacing him, so the dropoff in Dallas was much less severe.

How can I decide between these two, then? Well, if I can't differentiate on quality, I have to go with quantity. James played 42.5 minutes per game, compared to 38.1 for Nowitzki. During the course of the season, he played nearly eight full games more than Nowitzki, and there's value in that.

Add in the fact that James came up the biggest down the stretch - right when Cavs fans were wondering if they would have another late-season collapse - and that he made several plays to win games in the final seconds, and you have a recipe for a Most Valuable Player. Let's hope the voters see it the same way.

[sixeightmkw]

good except for the last part aabout Lebron.

[EricaLubarsky]

Nash's candidacy is a triumph of emotion over reason

I'd say that about the statement,

Add in the fact that James came up the biggest down the stretch - right when Cavs fans were wondering if they would have another late-season collapse - and that he made several plays to win games in the final seconds, and you have a recipe for a Most Valuable Player."

LeBron is definitely most important to his team, but just because he came back from a half-season of absolutely miserable late-game performances to put a couple of nice performances together at the end does not lock him up for the MVP. It's also a triumph of emotion to say that LeBron deserves the MVP because his team didnt collapse like last year.

I still would give my vote to 1) Dirk, 2) LeBron, 3) Chauncey, 4) Marion, 5) Kobe, 6)someone else, 10-12) Nash. LeBron is right there-- his PER, his efficiency, his raw stats are all phenomenal.

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I still would give my vote to 1) Dirk, 2) LeBron, 3) Chauncey, 4) Marion, 5) Kobe, 6)someone else, 10-12) Nash. LeBron is right there-- his PER, his efficiency, his raw stats are all phenomenal.

Bingo.... nicely said and thought out.

[nashtymavsfan13]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I'm sorry for being vague. What I meant was five-on-five play, versus one-on-one play. clear enough?

Nash is clearly the best fundamental basketball player in my mind. He does play the game how it should be played. He's awesome to watch, and he's a fantastic player. Definetly one of the top PG's of all time in my mind, but I don't think he's this years' MVP. Dirk really does deserve it this year, but Lebron will probably get it.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by madape

His critics already look like fools. Yet they won't shut up. Perhaps 2 MVP trophys and a championship ring will. He's my vote for MVP. And if the Mavs get knocked off but the Spurs or Grizz, I'll be pulling for the Suns to win the championship.

Well I'm glad to see you're still here, cheering on your Mavs!!!

No, ape, his critics are the people that actually have some objective fucking opinions. His supporters are the same bunch of hypocritical idiots that spout out mindless bullshit like "defense wins championships" and then tell us that Phoenix and Detroit are going to break the Bulls' record for regular season wins.

2 MVP trophies will prove SOMETHING to me, ape. It will prove that the MVP award is truly worthless these days. Championship ring? Yeah, that would prove something, but it won't because it ain't gonna happen. Not this year anyway. The Suns don't have a snowball's chance in hell against the Spurs or the Mavs.

Steve Nash hasn't proven a goddamn thing to me this year that he didn't prove last year. I honestly don't have problem with him winning it last year, but this year the idea of him being the most valuble player in the NBA is just comical

[FreshJive]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

You cant make players better, you can only put them in easier positions to succeed.

Putting players in easier position to succeed is what is meant by the statement "he makes players better". What definition are you arguing against?

[madape]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Well I'm glad to see you're still here, cheering on your Mavs!!!

No, ape, his critics are the people that actually have some objective fucking opinions. His supporters are the same bunch of hypocritical idiots that spout out mindless bullshit like "defense wins championships" and then tell us that Phoenix and Detroit are going to break the Bulls' record for regular season wins.

2 MVP trophies will prove SOMETHING to me, ape. It will prove that the MVP award is truly worthless these days. Championship ring? Yeah, that would prove something, but it won't because it ain't gonna happen. Not this year anyway. The Suns don't have a snowball's chance in hell against the Spurs or the Mavs.

Steve Nash hasn't proven a goddamn thing to me this year that he didn't prove last year. I honestly don't have problem with him winning it last year, but this year the idea of him being the most valuble player in the NBA is just comical

wow, sounds lke someone offended you. Your hatred overwhelms you. How can anyone expect logic and reason out of someone who goes on a cursing fit every time someone compliments Steve Nash?

The Suns have an easy path to the conference finals. They're playing just as well, if not better, than the Mavs or the Spurs have over the last month. I'm not going to say that they're the favorites to win it all, but they have a decent shot. They didn't have that before Steve Nash came. In fact, the Suns were one of the worst teams in the NBA. Nash has had a HUGE part in turnign them from absolute shit to one of the best teams in the NBA.. just like he had a HUGE part in turning this franchise from abslute shit to a championship contender.

He won the MVP last year. He's a favorite to win it this year. So fine, it's an objective award voted on my experts in basketball. You can dismiss if you want by claiming that everyone else in the world isn't as smart as you. But you can't dismiss winning and you can't dismiss playoff success (although some Mav fans like to do exactly that with the 02/03 Mavs). But a word of warning: If the Suns improve on their amazing season from last year by advancing even further into the playoffs this year, you'll just be left looking stupid again.

[chumdawg]

Remember all the talk about the Mavs being better off without Nash? Well...

Obviously we have seen Dirk improve his game in the two years since Cuban's embarrassing miscalculation that the Suns could only offer him $8MM per year and his decision not to match that was driven by personal grudge in lieu of basketball sense.

Equally obviously, we have seen Nash mature just as much if not more so.

We are left to consider a Mavericks team that won 60 games, went to the Western Conference Finals, and gave the all-universe Spurs everything they wanted and then some before Dirk went down with injury--a team that was on the rise, that had steadily improved each and every season, and that contained two All-NBA players, two MVP candidates, whose games were just beginning to reach the next level.

Whoever wins the MVP this year, if it's either Dirk or Nash, the sheer folly of that decision will be underlined--in a big, fat red marker. If Nash wins it, the Mavericks will have decided against a two-time MVP on the basis of a couple million bucks a year and the idea that Nash was getting ready to more injury prone than Devin Harris.

If Dirk wins it, then we are reminded that the '03 team, that team stuck on a steady ascent, comprised not one but two MVPs! Teams don't typically break up such combos.

But then again, something can be salvaged if the Mavs can win a championship this year.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by madape

wow, sounds lke someone offended you. Your hatred overwhelms you. How can anyone expect logic and reason out of someone who goes on a cursing fit every time someone compliments Steve Nash?

Read through a few of my posts. I'm pretty sure this is the only time I've gone on a "cursing fit." And I don't have any problem whatsoever about someone complimenting Nash, as clearly indicated by my agreeing with Chum that he's probably the best PG since Stockton.

The Suns have an easy path to the conference finals. They're playing just as well, if not better, than the Mavs or the Spurs have over the last month. I'm not going to say that they're the favorites to win it all, but they have a decent shot. They didn't have that before Steve Nash came. In fact, the Suns were one of the worst teams in the NBA. Nash has had a HUGE part in turnign them from absolute shit to one of the best teams in the NBA.. just like he had a HUGE part in turning this franchise from abslute shit to a championship contender.

He was the missing piece, no doubt. But keep in mind that they didn't have any point guard whatsoever before he came in. A fast-breaking team that's completely dependent on its ability to run the pick and roll is bound to be completely ineffective if it doesn't have a penetrating PG who can do so. But it's not like that team didn't have talent. That team was loaded with young, atheletic, offensively talented players last year, and it still is this year. And as I clearly stated above, I was fine with him winning it last year. And I firmly believe that he was the best player in the playoffs last year. But people act like every single thing that goes right with Phoenix is because of him. It's just not true.

He won the MVP last year. He's a favorite to win it this year. So fine, it's an objective award voted on my experts in basketball. You can dismiss if you want by claiming that everyone else in the world isn't as smart as you.

I never said any such thing whatsoever. I never stated that my IQ was higher than anyone else's, merely that I have an objective opinion.

But you can't dismiss winning and you can't dismiss playoff success (although some Mav fans like to do exactly that with the 02/03 Mavs). But a word of warning: If the Suns improve on their amazing season from last year by advancing even further into the playoffs this year, you'll just be left looking stupid again.

No, I can't dismiss playoff success, especially when there's not much to dismiss in the first place. You wanna talk about the 03 team, lets do it in another thread, because that debate has MUCH less to do with Steve Nash than it does with the team as a whole. Last year, the Suns made the Mavs look like chickens with their heads cut off, no question. But still, they got slaughtered by the Spurs like the Mavs got slaughtered by the Kings in 02 and in 04. I'm not diminishing what they accomplished, because it was quite amazing that their team was able to win that many games and advance to the conference finals. But still, they haven't proven anything that the Mavericks haven't proven, and none of their success last year makes Steve Nash the MVP this year. And sure, I'll look stupid if the Suns win the title, but if they couldn't beat the Spurs last year, I'm betting they won't do it this year. And if it's the Suns and the Mavs, you best believe I'm picking the Mavs.

And no, I can't dismiss winning games either. Which is why I'm not dismissing the Mavericks, and I'm not dismissing Dirk Nowitzki. The only remotely logical argument for Nash winning the award over Dirk this year is that Dirk had a better supporting cast, and I'm not buying it. You know, Dirk didn't have Amare Stoudemire either. The criteria for MVP seems to have changed from last year. You see, it was apparently clear to the voters last year that Dirk wasn't the MVP because having the third best record in conference simply wasn't good enough. Yet somehow, this year, it is... the Mavs of course being the lone exception in which even 2nd best in the conference is somehow less impressive than the Suns winning six fewer games in a weaker division with about a third of the injury problems. Yeah, they didn't have Amare, but in the latter part of the season, Dirk was missing 4 players from his supporting cast. Stack up the injuries from each teams, and I guarantee the Mavs' were at least as significant as the Suns', yet the Mavs still won more games anyway. And yet, Steve Nash is once again the favorite to win the award, and Dirk barely gets token respect from the so-called experts.

That's what I'm pissed about, Ape. I've no problem with people complimenting Nash. But I have a big problem with people overrating him so.

[chumdawg]

That team was loaded with young, atheletic, offensively talented players last year, and it still is this year.

Here's the deal, Spiral. EVERY team in the NBA is loaded with young, athletic, offensively talented players. It's the pro league, dude. You don't get there without having the goods. But that doesn't guarantee you success within the league. To have success within the league, it requires extraordinary players who transcend the high level of talent that everyone else has.

And of course, we all know this. We always talk about ill-fitting parts. We all see teams that have players of the highest caliber but that for one reason or another do not play well together.

Nash's teams always play well together. His Mavericks teams did, and his Suns teams do. If you like you can continue looking for other reasons those teams had such tremendous success. Or you can just accept it, and grant that Nash is the straw that stirs the drinks.

One other thing. The Suns were in NO WAY "slaughtered" at the hands of the Spurs. You did watch that series, right? (I'm sure that you did.) The Suns were either leading, tied, or within a basket in the final two minutes of every game in that series, save one. Trust me, with different bounces it could have gone the other way.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Here's the deal, Spiral. EVERY team in the NBA is loaded with young, athletic, offensively talented players. It's the pro league, dude. You don't get there without having the goods. But that doesn't guarantee you success within the league. To have success within the league, it requires extraordinary players who transcend the high level of talent that everyone else has.

Bull honkey. No team had anywhere near as much raw offensive firepower as the Suns.

Nash's teams always play well together. His Mavericks teams did, and his Suns teams do. If you like you can continue looking for other reasons those teams had such tremendous success. Or you can just accept it, and grant that Nash is the straw that stirs the drinks.

"Straw that stirs the drinks" for the Suns? Absolutely. Most Valuble Player in the NBA? No.

One other thing. The Suns were in NO WAY "slaughtered" at the hands of the Spurs. You did watch that series, right? (I'm sure that you did.) The Suns were either leading, tied, or within a basket in the final two minutes of every game in that series, save one. Trust me, with different bounces it could have gone the other way.

The exact same can be said of the Mavs/Kings in 04. Didn't three of those 5 games go down to the last possession? Or was it four? I don't remember. But regardless, the Kings won that series 4-1. The Mavs got slaughtered. Same goes for the Suns last year.

[madape]

Its yet to be seen who will have the last laugh...

but Nash was laughing pretty damn hard when he Mark Cuban and the Mavericks in last year's playoffs.