Great MVP Race - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Janett_Reno · 03-24-2007, 06:16 PM

Points
-------
1.Dirk-25.1
2.Nash-19.1

Rebounds
------------
1.Dirk-9.5
2.Nash-3.5

Ast
----
1.Nash-11.6
2.Dirk-3.5

FT %
------
1.Dirk-90.1 and shoots 7 a game.
2.Nash-88.3 and shoots 3 a game.

FG %
------
1.Nash-53.6 and shoots 13 per game
2.Dirk-50 and shoots 17.5 per game

3 Pt %
--------
1.Nash-47.2 and shoots 4.7 3's per game
2.Dirk-41.8 and shoots 2 per game

Blocks
-------
1.Dirk-1
2.Nash-0

Steals
---------
1.Nash-.08
2.Dirk-.07

Turn Overs
-------------
1.Dirk-2.2
2.Nash-3.8

Minutes Per Game
----------------------
1.Dirk-36.53
2.Nash-35.23

Record
----------
1.Dirk-57/11
2.Nash-52/16

--------------------------------------------------

To me, this is close as it get's. I guess you could put Lebron up there. Maybe it is more up there for MVP but if nothing drastic changes, i feel it is close to a dead heat between Nash and Dirk. If you define MVP and say who is the most important to his team, i feel both are. Remember this race is not based on who wins a title and i feel Phx style will get them an early exit in the playoffs but this is based on reg season. I feel Dirk was closer than what he was given last year. I am amazed that Nash can keep playing at this pace. I thought Dirk had over taken Nash untill Nash erased a 7 point lead in under a minute of the game to give Phx a miracle win at Dallas. Could this MVP race come down to who has the better record in the reg season? Just like the game in Dallas, it was sad to see either team lose and it will be sad to see either these guys not win MVP. I would hate to see Dirk get beat again as i feel he deserves it but i will not complain(if nothing major changes), on if either man wins MVP. Both men have improved their game this year. Dirk does play better defense this year. Has it ever been a co-mvp winners of any year and if not, does someone vote for the tie breaker if it ends in a tie?

LRB · 03-24-2007, 06:47 PM

The most important stat is team wins/losses. Unless there is a very compelling argument otherwise, the MVP should be the best player on the team with the Best record. Mavs have the clear best record in the league. Nash doesn't appear to have any clear cut statistical advantage over Dirk. Dirk has won 2 out of 3 head to heads with Nash including a game winning shot. Nash played great in clutch time in 1 win out of 3 head to head games. Nash's team lost 2 out of 3 head to head games.

I can't see any compelling argument to give Nash the MVP over the best player on the best team.

DevinHarriswillstart · 03-24-2007, 09:01 PM

Don't forget Kobe, you can be sure he is right back in it and rightfully so.

dude1394 · 03-24-2007, 09:05 PM

Forget kobe, not even close. His team is 12th in the league. Almost in the middle. Forget it.

SeattleMavsFan · 03-24-2007, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Forget kobe, not even close. His team is 12th in the league. Almost in the middle. Forget it.

you could also argue the fact that without kobe, they are dead last. kobe's play has been incredible. not that I think he should have MVP over Dirk because I don't. But knowing the media and it's blatant hatred for Dirk & the Mavs, I can see them putting Kobe in the mix quite easily...

dude1394 · 03-24-2007, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleMavsFan

you could also argue the fact that without kobe, they are dead last. kobe's play has been incredible. not that I think he should have MVP over Dirk because I don't. But knowing the media and it's blatant hatred for Dirk & the Mavs, I can see them putting Kobe in the mix quite easily...

They were on something like an 11 game losing streak WITH kobe. Kobe's been on the team all year. Luke Walton is the mvp of that team it appears.

MVP doesn't stand for Mostly Valuable Player. He's got to get his team to the top of the league for MVP. Hell if you are putting kobe in there for his team's ineptitude, might as well put Garnett in there every year.

dirno2000 · 03-24-2007, 09:48 PM

Last year Kobe averaged 35 a game but finished 4th in MVP voting (one spot behind dirk) because his team was the 7th seed in the West. This year the Lakers are destined for a 6th or 7th seed and Kobe is "only" averaging 31. Why would he be a bigger player this year?

SeattleMavsFan · 03-24-2007, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LRB

The most important stat is team wins/losses. Unless there is a very compelling argument otherwise, the MVP should be the best player on the team with the Best record. Mavs have the clear best record in the league. Nash doesn't appear to have any clear cut statistical advantage over Dirk. Dirk has won 2 out of 3 head to heads with Nash including a game winning shot. Nash played great in clutch time in 1 win out of 3 head to head games. Nash's team lost 2 out of 3 head to head games.

I can't see any compelling argument to give Nash the MVP over the best player on the best team.

I can't either and us Mavs fan can't either but the media can easily give compelling arguments for Nash (not that they have any info to back it up...)

Five-ofan · 03-24-2007, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Forget kobe, not even close. His team is 12th in the league. Almost in the middle. Forget it.

they are exactly dead middle of the mavs and grizzlies. they are a half game closer to the worst record in the league then the best.

Usually Lurkin · 03-24-2007, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

they are exactly dead middle of the mavs and grizzlies. they are a half game closer to the worst record in the league then the best.

man, speaking of Memphis, can you imagine how bad they would be without Pau's 21pts on 54%, 2 blks, 9rbs, and 3 assts? Pau should be MVP cause if you took him out, they'd be demoted to the developmental league.

Wait, no, it's gotta be Arenas. If you took him off of Washington, they'd tank. Or LeBron, cause without him . . . Or Jermaine Oneal . . . Or Kevin Garnett. Maybe the award could be shared by every team's best player, 'cause if you took off their best player, those teams would be considerably worse than they are with their best player. Yeah, that's the good logic.

Janett_Reno · 03-24-2007, 11:27 PM

Just think, Gasol want's out of Memphis and Mem want's to trade him. I am guessing West isn't stupid and get's something good for Gasol. Gasol is a really good player. I am not a Kobe fan at all but i know how good he is but his team just isn't up that far in the mix that i think he will factor in the mvp race that much. I might be wrong and i do understand his team wouldn't be much at all without him.

Record wise i just feel Dirk and Nash are ahead of the other's by a good distance. I agree also Luke Walton is better than i ever knew because he seems to be a player to do alot good and hold a team together.

Whoever mentioned Garnett is right, if we did not factor in a team's record Garnett with sheer numbers would be way up in the race every single year. Kobe would also and Lebron.

I say who finishes first in the west, Dallas or the Suns, this will factor who wins MVP. Dirk has the inside track but if Phx finishes first then i say they will give it to Nash.

Five-ofan · 03-24-2007, 11:52 PM

phx is closer to san antonio for third than dallas for first.

LRB · 03-25-2007, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleMavsFan

I can't either and us Mavs fan can't either but the media can easily give compelling arguments for Nash (not that they have any info to back it up...)

No the media can only give contrived and nonrelevant reasons for Nash or any other candidate other than Dirk. Because the Media thinks that Nash has a bettter haircut than Dirk is not a compelling argument.

LRB · 03-25-2007, 01:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleMavsFan

you could also argue the fact that without kobe, they are dead last. kobe's play has been incredible. not that I think he should have MVP over Dirk because I don't. But knowing the media and it's blatant hatred for Dirk & the Mavs, I can see them putting Kobe in the mix quite easily...

So Kobe is keeping his team from getting better. Based on your argument, if not for Kobe, then the Fakers would have a lottery pick. Instead they are a one manshow that's destined to keep making 1st round exits in the playoffs.

Kobe stats suck to high heaven by the way. The most important stat for any player is wins. Other stats are only meaningful in how they apply to getting wins. And playoff wins are much more important than regular season wins. Kobe is average at best in producing regular season wins this year and it's projected that he will be piss poor at producing playoff wins. I have a better chance at running a sub 4 minute mile in June than the Fakers do of winning a championship.

So how valuable are Kobe's contributions compared to the top 4 seeds in each conference? Not very. Dirk, Nash, Duncan, LeBron, etc. are making much more valuable contributions. Kobe is a stat whore. Sure compared to Paul Pierce, Pau Gasol, or even Kevin Garnett Kobe shines. But he's only slightly above mediocre for a team star at best. Hell, I think TMac is more deserving that Kobe of for MVP consideration.

chumdawg · 03-25-2007, 01:55 AM

LRB, I agree with you in some measure. Wins are what it's all about. But two things. One, Kobe has already proven that he can be the man on a championship team. And two, if you will go back and look at the MVP award, it is most certainly NOT historically given automatically to the best player on the best team. (That in itself is an awfully shallow definition of MVP, if you think about it.)

I think we all know that the Lakers of this year would be high lottery material without Kobe Bryant. I, for one, respect what he's been able to do for his team. Consider that the Warriors have Baron Davis and Jason Richardson and Biedrins and Pietrus and Ellis and Barnes and they STILL may be on the outside looking in on the playoffs. Yet Kobe has D-League material around him, more or less, and he has his team in the playoffs.

You shouldn't dismiss Kobe because his team is 7th in the West. If he'd been traded at the deadline to Dallas, his team would be #1 in the West.

That said, it's still Dirk's award this year.

LRB · 03-25-2007, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

LRB, I agree with you in some measure. Wins are what it's all about. But two things. One, Kobe has already proven that he can be the man on a championship team. And two, if you will go back and look at the MVP award, it is most certainly NOT historically given automatically to the best player on the best team. (That in itself is an awfully shallow definition of MVP, if you think about it.)

I think we all know that the Lakers of this year would be high lottery material without Kobe Bryant. I, for one, respect what he's been able to do for his team. Consider that the Warriors have Baron Davis and Jason Richardson and Biedrins and Pietrus and Ellis and Barnes and they STILL may be on the outside looking in on the playoffs. Yet Kobe has D-League material around him, more or less, and he has his team in the playoffs.

You shouldn't dismiss Kobe because his team is 7th in the West. If he'd been traded at the deadline to Dallas, his team would be #1 in the West.

That said, it's still Dirk's award this year.

Kobe was the 2nd best player on 3 championship teams. Without Snack, Kobe hasn't proven that he can lead a team out of the 1st round, much less to a championship.

Kobe's teammates aren't the greatest, Kobe is the biggest reason the Lakers were blown up and have crappy talent. And Dirk's surrounding talent isn't all world. Hell Josh Howard is the 2nd best player and 28 teams bypassed him in the draft and 29 coaches failed to vote him an all-star. And look what the Piston's are doing with rejects.

It's not about the talent that you have or don't have, it's what you do with the talent you do have. Kobe hasn't shown me much aside from slightly above average regular season wins and gaudy scoring numbers.

As for the MVP not always being the best player on the best team, all I'm saying is that is the place to start. If there is a compelling argument on why some other player is more deserving, then fine choose some other player. But all things being at least very close to equal, then go with the best player on the best team. I don't see how that is a very shallow definition. What's more important scoring a couple of points more than an opposing player or winning the game? Well, some and especially the media may think that it's scoring a couple of more points. But I'm old school and think winning the damn game is more important. If that's what you call shallow, then call me shallow all day long.

chumdawg · 03-25-2007, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LRB

Kobe was the 2nd best player on 3 championship teams. Without Snack, Kobe hasn't proven that he can lead a team out of the 1st round, much less to a championship.

Kobe's teammates aren't the greatest, Kobe is the biggest reason the Lakers were blown up and have crappy talent. And Dirk's surrounding talent isn't all world. Hell Josh Howard is the 2nd best player and 28 teams bypassed him in the draft and 29 coaches failed to vote him an all-star.

Do you realize how bad the talent surrounding Kobe has been? They do have some decent players, but those players have not been healthy for much of the season. Their supporting cast is TERRIBLE, absolutely awful. If they make the playoffs, they will have BY FAR the least talented roster from two to whatever that any playoff team has ever had. They are that bad.

But they have Kobe.

The dude is transcendent. You have to give credit where credit is due.

Five-ofan · 03-25-2007, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Do you realize how bad the talent surrounding Kobe has been? They do have some decent players, but those players have not been healthy for much of the season. Their supporting cast is TERRIBLE, absolutely awful. If they make the playoffs, they will have BY FAR the least talented roster from two to whatever that any playoff team has ever had. They are that bad.

But they have Kobe.

The dude is transcendent. You have to give credit where credit is due.

hyperbole aside that team isnt signifigantly different than lebrons team. odom has been hurt which does make the team almost as bad as people have been saying it was for years but they are still decent.

chumdawg · 03-25-2007, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

hyperbole aside that team isnt signifigantly different than lebrons team. odom has been hurt which does make the team almost as bad as people have been saying it was for years but they are still decent.

You think so? You could sit down Dirk and Kobe, and the Mavs would beat the Lakers roughly ten times out of ten.

Five-ofan · 03-25-2007, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

You think so? You could sit down Dirk and Kobe, and the Mavs would beat the Lakers roughly ten times out of ten.

id put it at about 7-8 out of 10 which is a coincidence because if you stand dirk and kobe back up thats about how many the mavs win anyway

LRB · 03-25-2007, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Do you realize how bad the talent surrounding Kobe has been? They do have some decent players, but those players have not been healthy for much of the season. Their supporting cast is TERRIBLE, absolutely awful. If they make the playoffs, they will have BY FAR the least talented roster from two to whatever that any playoff team has ever had. They are that bad.

But they have Kobe.

The dude is transcendent. You have to give credit where credit is due.

And what do they get in the end other than at best an early May exit from the playoffs and missing out on the lottery. Is Kobe doing anything to make this team significantly better? If he is, I'm missing it. Dirk lost the MVP and his team got better. Dirk lost Fin and his team got better. The biggest difference between Dirk's supporting cast's play and Kobe's isn't talent, it's leadership. Hell look what Snack who Kobe was instrumental in getting rid of is doing with Dshoulder down. The Heat aren't exactly stacked with talent.

Kobe is still more about getting his numbers than winning a championship. Sure he improved some for a while this season. But he seems to have regressed, and even before then he had a hell of a long ways to go.

Kobe can put on one of the most entertaining shows to watch in the NBA. He's a walking highlight reel. But he's got a long ways to go to be the 1st banana on a contending team.

And I disagree with you over the Fakers being the least talented playoff team from two to the end of the bench. They are definitely the most underperforming from two to the end of the bench. And Kobe is primarily responsible for them not having better talent. I can't give credit to the cancer for not having good talent when the cancer is why they don't have good talent.

chumdawg · 03-25-2007, 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LRB

The biggest difference between Dirk's supporting cast's play and Kobe's isn't talent, it's leadership.

Wow. I'm all for Dirk love, but you just threw Howard, Terry, Harris, Stackhouse, Damp, Diop and the rest WAY under the bus.

Wow.

Flacolaco · 03-25-2007, 03:02 AM

Wait...WAIT!!

Who is this Kobe?

How many games has his team won?

LRB · 03-25-2007, 03:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Wow. I'm all for Dirk love, but you just threw Howard, Terry, Harris, Stackhouse, Damp, Diop and the rest WAY under the bus.

Wow.

Nope, I just threw Kobe under the bus. Howard, Terry, Stackhouse, Damp, Diop all have been in their recent past been seen as undesirables by a good many if not most NBA team's. They came to Dallas and have thrived. Leadership comes from two major sources. 1) Avery and 2) Dirk. Kobe has Phil Jackson who I equate as at the very least close to Avery's level. That leaves Dirk versus Kobe. The problem with the Fakers isn't their lack of talent, it's they play piss poor as a team. Dallas isn't dominating because they have the best talent, they don't. They dominate, because they get far more out of their talent than anyone else. No team plays as well as a team as Dallas on both ends of the court. This isn't the Bulls or Lakers where you have 2 of the best talents in the game with a well crafted supporting cast. Dirk may be a great player, but he's not yet at the level of MJ or Shaq at their primes. Howard is far short of a Pippen or Kobe as far as 2nd banana.

Thespiralgoeson · 03-25-2007, 03:33 AM

If the Mavs win more than 65 games (which they will) then Dirk has to win the award. Just has to.

LRB · 03-25-2007, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

id put it at about 7-8 out of 10 which is a coincidence because if you stand dirk and kobe back up thats about how many the mavs win anyway

sort of like winning 3 out of 4 regular season games this year?

kriD · 03-25-2007, 04:02 AM

It all comes down to April 1st.

Forget everything else.

dude1394 · 03-25-2007, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

hyperbole aside that team isnt signifigantly different than lebrons team. odom has been hurt which does make the team almost as bad as people have been saying it was for years but they are still decent.

Problem may be Phil Jackzen. He's showing that he can't get it done unless he has two of the top 5 players on the planet.

Usually Lurkin · 03-25-2007, 08:43 AM

LRBs last couple of posts are spot on. We all know now, after almost two seasons how good the Mavs players are. But this is still pretty much the same team that was going to be in a rebuilding year last season. I think the level of focus, the willingness to do what it takes to win, and the coherence of the team come from Avery and Dirk. There is absolutely no doubt that Dirk brings an infectious gym-rat attitude to the team. Usually when you talk about Kobe's attitude, you aren't thinking you want it to infect the others on the team (oh, man. . . so many jokes, so many jokes.).

I bet if you traded Dirk and Kobe a couple of years ago, the Lakers do a lot better, and the Mavs do worse. Lakers wouldn't be what the Mavs are now, cause Avery and the rest of the Mavs are better than Phil and the Lakes. And the Mavs wouldn't be as bad as the Lakers are now. But Dirk just makes a better team than does Kobe.

mary · 04-05-2007, 09:22 AM

I wonder if the League will give out a MVP award this year.

left texas · 04-05-2007, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

I wonder if the League will give out a MVP award this year.

Mary help me out. Are you just being sarcastic? I know you are not just trying to build you post count, so help this new guy to the forum out.

Oh the answer to your question is yes, to Dirk.

mffl03 · 04-05-2007, 09:49 AM

I'm settled it will be Dirk...there's no way the league can give the MVP 3 straight years to a guy on a team with no NBA Trophy...or Finals appearance for that matter

dalmations202 · 04-05-2007, 11:27 AM

Here is the problem with the Great MVP race.

There is no race.

Steve Nash has won it the last two years, and lead the league in nothing but assists. He won based on a perception.

If you can win based on perception instead of statistics and reality -- then what is it worth anyway.

There is no race, only perception based upon marketing for the MVP.

mqywaaah · 04-05-2007, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mffl03

I'm settled it will be Dirk...there's no way the league can give the MVP 3 straight years to a guy on a team with no NBA Trophy...or Finals appearance for that matter

Played it safe there, huh?

Dtownsfinest · 04-05-2007, 11:40 AM

Kobe definately is a candidate. You guys throw out the fact that without Kobe his team would be dogshit but its true. If Dirk or Steve were on that Laker team you think they'd be the #1 and #2 seed? Clearly Dirk and Steve have a better supporting cast than Kobe who has an unproven and underachieving one. He brought it upon himself of course but Kobe has played some of the best basketball i've ever witnessed from a professional. Lakers are fighting for a playoff birth in a conference clearly more dominant than it was at this time last year.

I don't believe the award should go to the player who's team has the best record. However, when a team is destined to win 65 games like the Mavericks are I don't think you can give the award to anyone else. But you're fooling yourselves if you think Kobe isn't a candidate. Lebron may be as well and rightfully so.

capitalcity · 04-05-2007, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalmations202

Here is the problem with the Great MVP race.

There is no race.

Steve Nash has won it the last two years, and lead the league in nothing but assists. He won based on a perception.

If you can win based on perception instead of statistics and reality -- then what is it worth anyway.

There is no race, only perception based upon marketing for the MVP.

Word.

Dtownsfinest · 04-05-2007, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalmations202

Here is the problem with the Great MVP race.

There is no race.

Steve Nash has won it the last two years, and lead the league in nothing but assists. He won based on a perception.

If you can win based on perception instead of statistics and reality -- then what is it worth anyway.

There is no race, only perception based upon marketing for the MVP.

What stats does Dirk lead in?

rabbitproof · 04-05-2007, 12:08 PM

Don't want to start MVP thread #89 so do you guys think Dirk's lack of desire (at least in interviews and in the paper) to win the MVP hurts his cause?

Do you hire the most deserving candidate if every time they were asked if they want the job or the project, "Oh, it'd be nice but it's not really my thing."?

I think Dirk will still win it but part of the reason why it's as interesting/closer then it should be is because Dirk views it as such a trivial matter.

left texas · 04-05-2007, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

Don't want to start MVP thread #89 so do you guys think Dirk's lack of desire (at least in interviews and in the paper) to win the MVP hurts his cause?

Do you hire the most deserving candidate if every time they were asked if they want the job or the project, "Oh, it'd be nice but it's not really my thing."?

I think Dirk will still win it but part of the reason why it's as interesting/closer then it should be is because Dirk views it as such a trivial matter.

It is a trivial matter. As it has been said the rings are what is important. Also, I don't see any of the other candidates going around shooting their mouths off that they derserve it.

Dirkadirkastan · 04-05-2007, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

Don't want to start MVP thread #89 so do you guys think Dirk's lack of desire (at least in interviews and in the paper) to win the MVP hurts his cause?

Do you hire the most deserving candidate if every time they were asked if they want the job or the project, "Oh, it'd be nice but it's not really my thing."?

I think Dirk will still win it but part of the reason why it's as interesting/closer then it should be is because Dirk views it as such a trivial matter.

All the candidates say the same thing.