Nash wins MVP, its official..

[Metal Panda]

I think some delusional people in this thread seem to forget that:

1. It's "most valuable player", not "best player"
2. Most MVPs are better, maybe even excessively so, on one side of the ball

I don't even see why Steve Nash is a questionable pick at all. Makes me laugh. It totally should have been his. F**k Kobe.

 

[Metal Panda]

I like Nash a lot but 2 straight MVPs puts him in a category with Jordan, Magic, etc and he doesnt deserve that, not by a longshot. Nash is not even close to the kind of player these two were. I like Nash, I like watching the Suns, but the MVP has always been about a player's place in NBA history, there have been LOTS of one year wonders or scoring champs that didnt win it, giving a guy 2 straight puts him in an elite category and Nash isn't good enough to deserve that. Jordan and Magic won multiple titles, they didnt just play a "fun-up-tempo-fan-favorite-high-scoring" style of play that racks up wins in the regular season but hits the wall against the halfcourt playoff style basketball.

Uh...what? The MVP award doesn't mean anything more than that--who was the "most valuable" to this team in a given year. Without Nash, the team might not even make the playoffs. The team is completely different without him. MVP doesn't mean "best player in the league" or "best offensive/defensive player in the league". Of course there have been scoring champions who weren't MVPs, just because you lead the league in scoring doesn't mean you were the most valuable to your team.

If somebody singlehandedly leads his team to 45 wins, he's a better candidate for MVP then a stud player for a 60 win team that may have a lot more weapons around him and less to do overall with the team's success. That's just a hypothetical example, but you get my drift.

 

[Amars]

Nash is a point guard he's suppose to make his teammate better.

 

[Metal Panda]

Nash is a point guard he's suppose to make his teammate better.

???? So point guards are automatically excluded from the award? What the hell is this supposed to mean?

 

[Amars]

Exactly what it says point guard are suppose to make thier teammates better. Pretty black and white. That thier role. Point guard are not excluded from the award. Hey Nash is more then deserving for the award. He's the best passer in the league.

 

[finfansince72]

Uh...what? The MVP award doesn't mean anything more than that--who was the "most valuable" to this team in a given year. Without Nash, the team might not even make the playoffs. The team is completely different without him. MVP doesn't mean "best player in the league" or "best offensive/defensive player in the league". Of course there have been scoring champions who weren't MVPs, just because you lead the league in scoring doesn't mean you were the most valuable to your team.

If somebody singlehandedly leads his team to 45 wins, he's a better candidate for MVP then a stud player for a 60 win team that may have a lot more weapons around him and less to do overall with the team's success. That's just a hypothetical example, but you get my drift.

How long have you been watching the NBA? The MVP is always about someone's place in the game, always has been. Jordan didnt win it every year because guys like Malone,Shaq, Duncan, etc deserved one, Jordan was better every year, but they won it for their place in the game. Nash winning 2 in a row puts him in the top elite category of ALL Time players and he doesn't deserve that. Nash is a good player that has a style of play that fits him, hes not an alltime great player. Hes not even close to Jordan, Magic, Shaq, etc.

 

[Metal Panda]

How long have you been watching the NBA? The MVP is always about someone's place in the game, always has been. Jordan didnt win it every year because guys like Malone,Shaq, Duncan, etc deserved one, Jordan was better every year, but they won it for their place in the game. Nash winning 2 in a row puts him in the top elite category of ALL Time players and he doesn't deserve that. Nash is a good player that has a style of play that fits him, hes not an alltime great player. Hes not even close to Jordan, Magic, Shaq, etc.

Most. Valuable. Player. I'll let those words sink in one more time, since you don't seem able to comprehend them. Not "best" or "most legendary" player.

In the past, many of the winners have been legends, but they also fit the mold for the award. The Bulls without Jordan were a completely different team as well, much like the Spurs without David Robinson. As far as the comment on their place in NBA history, then explain why Michael Jordan won his first MVP in 87-88. Prior to that, he had been a scoring machine, but his team had never finished better than 40-42. He didn't have a place in NBA history yet. Sure he scored a lot but Allen Iverson has done that his whole career yet few likely consider him "legendary" since his teams don't seem to go anywhere. The one year they did, the finals, he won the MVP.

I watched basketball as a tike in the mid to late portion of the Showtime era, so I'll ignore the jab you took at me.

In the past, perennial hall of famers may have won the award, but all this award means is Nash made the team something greater, and he did. The Suns were a joke without Nash and he took them to a much higher level. It doesn't matter that he isn't Magic Johnson. He's still a fantastic player.

I long for the day people on this board aren't merely wowed by stats.

 

[GreenMonster]

Uh...what? The MVP award doesn't mean anything more than that--who was the "most valuable" to this team in a given year. Without Nash, the team might not even make the playoffs. The team is completely different without him. MVP doesn't mean "best player in the league" or "best offensive/defensive player in the league". Of course there have been scoring champions who weren't MVPs, just because you lead the league in scoring doesn't mean you were the most valuable to your team.

Without Kobe you think the Lakers even sniff 25 wins in the West or take a Suns team with the MVP of the league to 7 games..

 

[finfansince72]

Most. Valuable. Player. I'll let those words sink in one more time, since you don't seem able to comprehend them. Not "best" or "most legendary" player.

In the past, many of the winners have been legends, but they also fit the mold for the award. The Bulls without Jordan were a completely different team as well, much like the Spurs without David Robinson. As far as the comment on their place in NBA history, then explain why Michael Jordan won his first MVP in 87-88. Prior to that, he had been a scoring machine, but his team had never finished better than 40-42. He didn't have a place in NBA history yet. Sure he scored a lot but Allen Iverson has done that his whole career yet few likely consider him "legendary" since his teams don't seem to go anywhere. The one year they did, the finals, he won the MVP.

I watched basketball as a tike in the mid to late portion of the Showtime era, so I'll ignore the jab you took at me.

In the past, perennial hall of famers may have won the award, but all this award means is Nash made the team something greater, and he did. The Suns were a joke without Nash and he took them to a much higher level. It doesn't matter that he isn't Magic Johnson. He's still a fantastic player.

I long for the day people on this board aren't merely wowed by stats.

Well even using youre reasoning, Nash doesnt cut it. Kobe and LeBron are just as valuable if not more so than Nash is. Im just going to have to assume you don't understand the history of the award or why Shaq didnt win it 5 or 6 years in a row or why Jordan didn't win it 9 years in a row. The award is about your place in the game, it always has been Nash is totally undeserving of 2 straight, the Suns are a nice team but they arent going to win a thing with the 'MVP' playing matedor defense and the team having nothing in the middle with Amare out. Nash made the Suns better, but are the Mavericks worse without him? Seems strange that the MVP of the league 2 years running would actually improve a team by leaving it like Dallas.

 

[King Felix]

:boohoo: the ppl who voted know more than any of us

 

[dominizzo]

Steve NAsh is a super natural

 

[Metal Panda]

The award is about your place in the game, it always has been

Keep repeating it if that is what it takes for you to believe it. Not my fault you don't understand the simple concept. The reason Shaq didn't win it ever year is because in other seasons, other superstars stepped up more than they usually did and led their team farther than they had in the past.

If it was merely about someone's place in history, I wonder why we don't see players from 38-44 teams winning the award. Iverson only won it when his team went to the Finals, and he's one of the "studs" from this generation.

 

[Amars]

Look at this list of players that won. I can clearly say they were one of the top 3 player in the league that year. I wouldnt even consider Nash a top 5 player in the league. Just look at that list. Nothing but dominating players.

2003-04 - Kevin Garnett, Minnesota
2002-03 - Tim Duncan, San Antonio
2001-02 - Tim Duncan, San Antonio
2000-01 - Allen Iverson, Philadelphia
1999-00 - Shaquille O'Neal, Los Angeles Lakers
1998-99 - Karl Malone, Utah
1997-98 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1996-97 - Karl Malone, Utah
1995-96 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1994-95 - David Robinson, San Antonio
1993-94 - Hakeem Olajuwon, Houston
1992-93 - Charles Barkley, Phoenix
1991-92 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1990-91 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1989-90 - Magic Johnson, Los Angeles Lakers
1988-89 - Magic Johnson, Los Angeles Lakers
1987-88 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1986-87 - Magic Johnson, Los Angeles Lakers
1985-86 - Larry Bird, Boston
1984-85 - Larry Bird, Boston
1983-84 - Larry Bird, Boston
1982-83 - Moses Malone, Philadelphia
1981-82 - Moses Malone, Houston
1980-81 - Julius Erving, Philadelphia
1979-80 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Los Angeles
1978-79 - Moses Malone, Houston
1977-78 - Bill Walton, Portland
1976-77 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Los Angeles
1975-76 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Los Angeles
1974-75 - Bob McAdoo, Buffalo
1973-74 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Milwaukee
1972-73 - Dave Cowens, Boston
1971-72 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Milwaukee
1970-71 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Milwaukee
1969-70 - Willis Reed, New York
1968-69 - Wes Unseld, Baltimore
1967-68 - Wilt Chamberlain, Philadelphia
1966-67 - Wilt Chamberlain, Philadelphia
1965-66 - Wilt Chamberlain, Philadelphia
1964-65 - Bill Russell, Boston
1963-64 - Oscar Robertson, Cincinnati
1962-63 - Bill Russell, Boston
1961-62 - Bill Russell, Boston
1960-61 - Bill Russell, Boston
1959-60 - Wilt Chamberlain, Philadelphia
1958-59 - Bob Pettit, St. Louis
1957-58 - Bill Russell, Boston
1956-57 - Bob Cousy, Boston
1955-56 - Bob Pettit, St. Louis

 

[finfansince72]

Keep repeating it if that is what it takes for you to believe it. Not my fault you don't understand the simple concept. The reason Shaq didn't win it ever year is because in other seasons, other superstars stepped up more than they usually did and led their team farther than they had in the past.

If it was merely about someone's place in history, I wonder why we don't see players from 38-44 teams winning the award. Iverson only won it when his team went to the Finals, and he's one of the "studs" from this generation.

Iverson proves my point. He is a Hall of Famer and has been one of the toughest players to ever play, and has carried terrible teams pretty damn far, farther than Nash. Iverson deserved one to secure his place in the game. Frankly, you simply don't know what youre talking about. Look at the list in a previous post, notice all of those players are great? Not just good players that play in a system catered to easy assist numbers and high scoring games. Nash has no business winning the award twice in a row, its absurd.

 

[Boik14]

Look at this list of players that won. I can clearly say they were one of the top 3 player in the league that year. I wouldnt even consider Nash a top 5 player in the league. Just look at that list. Nothing but dominating players.

2003-04 - Kevin Garnett, Minnesota
2002-03 - Tim Duncan, San Antonio
2001-02 - Tim Duncan, San Antonio
2000-01 - Allen Iverson, Philadelphia
1999-00 - Shaquille O'Neal, Los Angeles Lakers
1998-99 - Karl Malone, Utah
1997-98 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1996-97 - Karl Malone, Utah
1995-96 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1994-95 - David Robinson, San Antonio
1993-94 - Hakeem Olajuwon, Houston
1992-93 - Charles Barkley, Phoenix
1991-92 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1990-91 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1989-90 - Magic Johnson, Los Angeles Lakers
1988-89 - Magic Johnson, Los Angeles Lakers
1987-88 - Michael Jordan, Chicago
1986-87 - Magic Johnson, Los Angeles Lakers
1985-86 - Larry Bird, Boston
1984-85 - Larry Bird, Boston
1983-84 - Larry Bird, Boston
1982-83 - Moses Malone, Philadelphia
1981-82 - Moses Malone, Houston
1980-81 - Julius Erving, Philadelphia
1979-80 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Los Angeles
1978-79 - Moses Malone, Houston
1977-78 - Bill Walton, Portland
1976-77 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Los Angeles
1975-76 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Los Angeles
1974-75 - Bob McAdoo, Buffalo
1973-74 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Milwaukee
1972-73 - Dave Cowens, Boston
1971-72 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Milwaukee
1970-71 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Milwaukee
1969-70 - Willis Reed, New York
1968-69 - Wes Unseld, Baltimore
1967-68 - Wilt Chamberlain, Philadelphia
1966-67 - Wilt Chamberlain, Philadelphia
1965-66 - Wilt Chamberlain, Philadelphia
1964-65 - Bill Russell, Boston
1963-64 - Oscar Robertson, Cincinnati
1962-63 - Bill Russell, Boston
1961-62 - Bill Russell, Boston
1960-61 - Bill Russell, Boston
1959-60 - Wilt Chamberlain, Philadelphia
1958-59 - Bob Pettit, St. Louis
1957-58 - Bill Russell, Boston
1956-57 - Bob Cousy, Boston
1955-56 - Bob Pettit, St. Louis

I can easily build a case that Nash is the Magic Johnson of this era except with a higher FG %, better ast/TO ratio, but with less rebs. Magic is a slightly better scorer but Nash wrecks him in outside shooting/3's. The only thing Magic really has on Nash is about 5 inches and the advantage of playing in an era known for up tempo play while Nash plays in one of the best and most complex era's for defense ever, the mid 90's being the possible lone exception. Let me know how you feel about that.