Nash does not deserve back to back MVP

[NCaliSpurs]

Am I the only one that doesn't think he belongs in the very elite group, a handful really, that have won back-to-back MVP's?

It is ridiculous. Yes, has had a great season. But he is fricking a million games behind 3 other teams in the NBA.

Is he the best man on the best team? Best man maybe (there might be two better players on his own team!!), best team no.

Does he warp the game on BOTH sides of the court? Maybe. He makes it easy to score for his opponents too.

Is he the best player in the game? Hell no. No one in their right mind would argue this. Look at Kobe. Look at Garnett. Look at Billups(!). Look at Dirk. Look at Darko (jk).

Does he make his teammates better? Yes. Absolutely. But so does their system, not to mention that he also has some darn good players there already.

Does he make his teammates better than guys like Duncan? Tim's championships on 2 vastly different squads (3 really) indicate that Tim makes his teammates pretty damned good himself. His unprecedented regular season team record in his tenure on an ever-rotating cast of players supports the claim that Tim Duncan has makes his teammates better in a way only a few other people in NBA history have been able. Has Nash earned THAT kind of respect? No.


So what other criteria is there? Well, he is fun to watch. I guess that wins MVP's nowadays. If only Rafer Alston got free reign.

[CubanMustGo]

Umm, where is Phoenix without him? Up the creek without a paddle.

[cheguevara]

Umm, where is Phoenix without him? Up the creek without a paddle.

Exactly, Nash has as much a chance to win it as anybody. This year is wide open and I hope Nash wins it again, 'cause he plays the game the right way. If not Nash, Kobe or Billups. But noone else. Don't come with that Lebron,Wade hype bullshit. fuck them.

[Sense]

Team without Nowitzki is worse..

[kskonn]

Team without Nowitzki is worse..

I don't know if i agree with this, I guess nash might be easier to replace but the suns are very mediocre team without nash.

[Sense]

I don't know if i agree with this, I guess nash might be easier to replace but the suns are very mediocre team without nash.

Not since Amare left....


The team improved as a whole and people started to step up...

Nash is not THAT big part of the picture...

Dirk deserves it alot more, the Mavs depend on his jumper EVERY game, and they know they don't do well when he's not in the lineup....


If Nash were to be hurt RIGHT NOW, with Amare, Marion, Bell, and Diaw... I think they can still win some games...

Dallas without Dirk is not good news at all..

[JMarkJohns]

If Nash were to be hurt RIGHT NOW, with Amare, Marion, Bell, and Diaw... I think they can still win some games...

Dallas without Dirk is not good news at all..

You think? How about you look it up! With a healthy Amare, Marion, Johnson, Richardson and Jackson, the Suns were 2-6 without Nash. This year, 0-1.

That's 2-for-9.

That's not very good at all.


I'm not going to argue that Dirk isn't as valuable. He probably is. But more valuable? The Suns would do fine without Nash? Come on :rolleyes

He deserved the MVP last season, just as Shaq did. It is possible to have more than one deserving player. Last season Nash got the award largely because of the turnaround Phoenix had.

This year, he's more deserving of the award individually and as a team. How can a player having better year (than that when he was MVP) on a team that has less talent (than that when he was MVP) and is still nearly as good not be deserving?

If Wade, Kobe or Dirk wins, I'm fine with it, but to say he's not deserving is insane.

[baseline bum]

Kobe's FG% has cooled off a bit, but I think the award is still his to lose. Tough call on whether Nash or Dirk should take it if the Lakers flame out though. I'm leaning a little more towards Nash on that one, but Dirk looks amazing this season.

[Sense]

You think? How about you look it up! With a healthy Amare, Marion, Johnson, Richardson and Jackson, the Suns were 2-6 without Nash. This year, 0-1.

That's 2-for-9.

That's not very good at all.


I'm not going to argue that Dirk isn't as valuable. He probably is. But more valuable? The Suns would do fine without Nash? Come on :rolleyes

He deserved the MVP last season, just as Shaq did. It is possible to have more than one deserving player. Last season Nash got the award largely because of the turnaround Phoenix had.

This year, he's not deserving of the award individually and as a team. How can a player having better year (than that when he was MVP) on a team that has less talent (than that when he was MVP) and is still nearly as good not be deserving?

If Wade, Kobe or Dirk wins, I'm fine with it, but to say he's not deserving is insane.


I'm not saying he's more deserving, but you can't picture a Dallas team winning games without Dirk...

I can see the PHX Suns winning games without Nash this season excluding the fact that they didn't win much without him last year..

They didn't have Diaw, or Bell last season, and Amare wants to play more than ever.

I just think it wouldn't be fair for the rest to continue thinking the team would be bad without him. We can't keep that thought in our head if it happened one season.


Kobe shouldn't even be in the top 5 for MVP Candidates...

I just think he should have atleast 10 games over .500 to get it.

The guy's just doing what he's always done, the only difference is Jackson this season..

[NCaliSpurs]

You think? How about you look it up! With a healthy Amare, Marion, Johnson, Richardson and Jackson, the Suns were 2-6 without Nash. This year, 0-1.

That's 2-for-9.

That's not very good at all.


Because they have absolutely no one that resembles a decent point guard after Nash, and their team is so offense-oriented, they are an absolute mess without him.

But so are almost all teams with Superstar type players. When the Star player is gone, the team sucks. When the star player is there, the team is decent.

So the whole they suck without Nash argument is a bit overplayed.



He deserved the MVP last season, just as Shaq did. It is possible to have more than one deserving player. Last season Nash got the award largely because of the turnaround Phoenix had.

This year, he's more deserving of the award individually and as a team. How can a player having better year (than that when he was MVP) on a team that has less talent (than that when he was MVP) and is still nearly as good not be deserving?


Firstly, the team isn't having a better year. Their record will be worse by year's end.

As far as talent is concerned, some would argue that they have MORE talent this year - with the addition of a break-out Diaw, Raja Bell, and Kurt Thomas.

I would disagree that Nash was deserving of the MVP last year. So I don't buy your argument that he automatically deserves it this year as a result of having an on-par season as last year.

Last year, he was a popular pick for a lot of different reasons that don't apply this year.

1) He was the leader (and probably not the best player!) on the team with the best record in the NBA. Not the cast this year.

2) The team got off to a great start. They were on pace for 70 wins, and he basically won the award in the first 35 games. It was his to lose after that. Not the case this year.

3) He has an irrepressible offensive repertoire that was a lot of fun to watch. Still the case, but the playoffs showed that you need to make stops too. Nash doesn't do this.

4) Everyone thought that he was the reason why Amare broke out. And they were wrong. Amare is a beast without Nash. He is a beast period. It was just one more year in his progression, and he became a lot scarier looking because the team was actually winning.


That's it. That's all. It was cute, but it should be over, as he is not in any in the same league as
a) any previous MVP within the last 25 years - MJ, Bird, Magic, Shaq, Duncan, Robinson, Malone.
b) any back-to-back MVP ever - Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem, Moses Malone, Bird, Magic, Jordan, and Duncan.

All of these guys won multiple titles. They all dominated the league. What about Nash? Isn't this heresy?!?!?

[TOP_MODEL_M]

Nash is a great player and he deserved his MVP award last season but this year Kobe's been unbelievable and I'm pretty sure he'll get it unless the Lakers fail to make the playoffs.He's not one of my favourite players by any means but I agree that he deserves it.Suns are 2-9 without Nash. What's the lakers recent record without Kobe? Or what would it be like?
Dirk has done big things this year so obviously he'll be seriously considered as well especially if Dallas get the #1 spot, which I doubt.
As for Billups I think he doesn't stand a chance because Detroit have so many great players that Billups is only arguably the best of them.I think Rip deserves more recognition than he gets.

[LilMissSPURfect]

best player on best team has always gotten the NOD ........but becoz spurs or detroit end up with best records "THEY" have to deviate from the "NORM"

[NCaliSpurs]

Damn "THEM"

[JamStone]

1. Kobe
2. Nash
3. LeBron
4. Dirk
5. D-Wade

Kobe is the MVP this year. He just is. And, I hate the Lakers.

[mookie2001]

nash couldnt play d if it was an elimation game in the WCF and steve kerr was reigning from upon
he would probably run away from kerr as if he were the boogedy man

[DarkReign]

nash couldnt play d if it was an elimation game in the WCF and steve kerr was reigning from upon
he would probably run away from kerr as if he were the boogedy man

Although I did rate Nash as #1 candidate on ESPN, I have to agree. Nash is extremely gifted offensively. Unfortunately, there are 2 sides of the ball.

Nash CANT play defense.

Kobe can.

[NCaliSpurs]

Kobe has earned some recognition in the league. He has consistently been one of the most complete players, and he has won 3 rings. Kobe > Nash. And I hate the Lakers too.

[mavsfan1000]

1. Kobe
2. Nash
3. LeBron
4. Dirk
5. D-Wade

Kobe is the MVP this year. He just is. And, I hate the Lakers.
Do you even watch mavs games? Dirk definitely is a MVP with Nash as the second choice. It would be a crime if Nash gets it again. He is getting tons of help this year. Also Barbosa could win a lot of games for the suns without Nash. Eddie House as a backup is enough to do that.

[Vashner]

I would rather see long dong. .I mean Kobe win it.

[1Parker1]

I actually don't think Kobe is going to win it. His rep is still has a ball hog and his team is too low in the rankings for him to get it. If he wins it, then what about guys like AI, Paul Pierce, etc?

Nash is unbelievable. Last year, people were saying Amare makes Nash appear better then he is. This year, without Amare, now people are saying guys like Marion and Diaw, make it easier for Nash. But, it's the other way around. Just look at the Spurs win against the Suns without Nash playing...how easily the Spurs beat them. Then watch the game with Nash...Spurs struggled a lot more.

Yes, Nash doesn't play defense, but you know what? He plays in a system/team where he doesn't really need to. His passing skills and ability to make guys liek Raja Bell and Boris Diaw look like MVP candidates offsets his poor defense, IMO. No way would the Suns win that second seed if they didn't have Nash.

My choice:

1) Nash

2) Dirk--He's just as importatant to the Mavs success this season as Nash. Although, I don't think he makes his team-mates better like Nash or Duncan.

3) Kobe--Without him, Lakers would be competeing with the Bobcats for the worst record in the league.

4) Brand--People still aren't taking the Clippers seriously...how about the fact that they are now in the playoffs???!

5) Billups/Wade/Lebron--great players, but I don't think any of them will really win it.

[JMarkJohns]

- - - NOTE: This is a LONG reply...


Because they have absolutely no one that resembles a decent point guard after Nash, and their team is so offense-oriented, they are an absolute mess without him.

You're making my argument for me. It's because he's a superstar with no near-equal that makes him so valuable. To try and use this as an argument against Nash is very odd.



But so are almost all teams with Superstar type players. When the Star player is gone, the team sucks. When the star player is there, the team is decent.

So the whole they suck without Nash argument is a bit overplayed.

What? You mean like when a team loses their 6-10, 250, top-10 overall post player? He's gone and Nash has kept the team as competative as a short, wing-oriented team possibly can be.

You can't possibly justify your final statement. They are 2-7 the past two season without Nash. Nash can't be punished because he didn't miss longer to really pound home his value, but his absense can be blamed for many problems the Suns have. When he's out of the game, the Suns offense isn't nearly as effective. When he's not playing in a game, the Suns generally lose.



Firstly, the team isn't having a better year. Their record will be worse by year's end.

Yes, yes, but if you recall, the Suns were a mere .500 team against division leaders last season. This year? A mere .500. That's what I'm basing this on. This team has had so many injuries other than Amare that at times, they didn't have a bench or frontcourt. Those are bound to add up to a loss here and there. Last season, the Suns had near-perfect health throughout until JJ's injury in the second round.



As far as talent is concerned, some would argue that they have MORE talent this year - with the addition of a break-out Diaw, Raja Bell, and Kurt Thomas.

Let's just say that last year's team had three All-Stars (Nash, Amare, Marion), a wing capable of 20 points, 6 rebounds and 6 assists any given game (JJ), a 3-point champion (Richardson), a great veteran off the bench (Jackson) and a quality big for defense and rebounding (Hunter).

This year's team has but two All-Stars (one fewer), a wing capable of 20-6-6 any given game, but because of injuries, has missed Barbosa for half the season, Jones, for roughly a third, Thomas for a third, Grant for two-thirds and while Bell has been a great addition, he doesn't equal Richardson and Jackson.

With everybody healthy, then yes, this team has more talent, but you can't just look at the names and say they are more talented when this year's team is missing a top-10 player and four or five quality role players for 20+ games throughout the year.



I would disagree that Nash was deserving of the MVP last year. So I don't buy your argument that he automatically deserves it this year as a result of having an on-par season as last year.

Last year, he was a popular pick for a lot of different reasons that don't apply this year.

1) He was the leader (and probably not the best player!) on the team with the best record in the NBA. Not the cast this year.

2) The team got off to a great start. They were on pace for 70 wins, and he basically won the award in the first 35 games. It was his to lose after that. Not the case this year.

3) He has an irrepressible offensive repertoire that was a lot of fun to watch. Still the case, but the playoffs showed that you need to make stops too. Nash doesn't do this.

4) Everyone thought that he was the reason why Amare broke out. And they were wrong. Amare is a beast without Nash. He is a beast period. It was just one more year in his progression, and he became a lot scarier looking because the team was actually winning.

That's it. That's all.

He won for all that and for the fact that his addition certainly helped the Suns get off to the great start. Maybe he wasn't the only reason, but who is? Shaq had Wade. Duncan had Ginobili and Parker. After Duncan and Shaq, the MVP race wasn't very close. Maybe James, but his team missed the playoffs. Iverson, close to the same as James.

While several reason contributed to the 2003-04 season's record, that team still had Johnson, Marion and Amare for 50 games. In them they were well below .500. With Nash, they exploded. You can't just write that off as coincidense. You can't. His style of play perfectly complimented them and maximized those skills to the extent that they weren't just talents any longer, but great players. Take him off and that same core was 2-6.

Nash was largely responsible for the Suns style of play, which aided certain Suns to career years, which directly led to the Suns fast start. Take Nash out of that equation and it doesn't matter the names. Not only did they go 2-6 last season, but the PPG dropped from 110 with Nash, to 85 without.

Are you still arguing that Nash wasn't largely responsible? Please.... if you do, it's just plain bone-headed ignorance or bias. Without Nash, that team was mediocre in every facet of the game. With him, they advanced to the Western Conference Finals.



It was cute, but it should be over, as he is not in any in the same league as
a) any previous MVP within the last 25 years - MJ, Bird, Magic, Shaq, Duncan, Robinson, Malone.[quote]

So now to be an MVP you must pass some "All-time great" type of litmus test? That's so freakin' rediculous you should be laughed out of this thread.

Maybe Nash's career wasn't in their league, but the award isn't for career. It's for that one season. If having the best year of your career while being the guiding force on a Western Conference Championship team isn't good enough to qualify, then Robinson sure as hell better hand his over. Same with Garnett. And you could even argue that if the litmus test is All-Time greats who've led their teams to Titles, then goodbye Barkley, goodbye Malone, good bye Iverson.

[quote]b) any back-to-back MVP ever - Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem, Moses Malone, Bird, Magic, Jordan, and Duncan.

All of these guys won multiple titles. They all dominated the league. What about Nash? Isn't this heresy?!?!?

The bolded line belongs nowhere near an MVP debate as the award is a regular season acknowledgement. They have a Finals MVP to recognize the most valuable champion. So shut the eff up already.

Nash is averaging 20 points, 11 assists on great shooting while guiding an undersized team to a top-4 record in the League. No one can stop him from doing so. You make him a scorer, he beats you (see Mavs series). You make him pass, he beats you (see everything else). If that's not domination, then you have a warped sense of the word.

As for comparing Nash to those names above, no one is. None but you, anyways. Are you going to say that San Antonio maybe doesn't deserve their three Titles because they weren't won as dominantly as the Lakers three? Hell, the Lakers swept the Nets, the Spurs merely beat them in six. That since the Spurs didn't dominate, they aren't worthy to be called Champions because they don't measure up to what's been done int he past?

Seriously. Are you so blinded by your bias that you can't see how absurd that is?

That was an example... the following is literally what you are arguing, only the names have been changed.

That Duncan isn't as dominant as Shaq, but Shaq only has one MVP award while Duncan has two?

Really... is this what you are trying to use to devalue Nash's seasons?

Enough already.

[slayermin]

Nash is the MVP.

[mavsfan1000]

A lot of Dirk haters on here. Dirk's team is doing better than Nash's team so Dirk is the MVP. Nash has Marion.

[JMarkJohns]

A lot of Dirk haters on here. Dirk's team is doing better than Nash's team so Dirk is the MVP. Nash has Marion.

Dirk is certainly worthy. No doubt. If he wins, he wins. Just hope that the MVP police don't call taint since Dirk isn't Larry Bird.

[jochhejaam]

Dirk edged his way into the top spot with me after his 51 points against GS.

2.Kobe
3.Nash

The rest of the best; Wade, Brand, Billups, Lebron

Any of the top 3 works for me.

[slayermin]

Dirk edged his way into the top spot with me after his 51 points against GS.

2.Kobe
3.Nash

The rest of the best; Wade, Brand, Billups, Lebron

Any of the top 3 works for me.

If you are going to give it to a scorer, might as well give it to showboat since he does play defense. But of course, I would never vote for him if I had a vote.

I like Nash because he picked up his scoring in the absence of Amare and his playmaking ability maximizes the abilities of the other four players on the court with him.

[Sec24Row7]

Depends on what you mean by "Valuable".

If by valuable you mean that the loss of said player would create that team's largest win % decrease then Nash clearly wins.

If you mean valuable as far as monetarily, then Lebron would win every year.

If you mean valuable as far as best player on best team, then it's someone besides nash.

[mavsfan1000]

Dirk is a team player while Kobe is a ball hog. Dirk takes what the defense gives him while Kobe takes the shot no matter what.

[slayermin]

Dirk is a team player while Kobe is a ball hog. Dirk takes what the defense gives him while Kobe takes the shot no matter what.

I don't think Dirk deserves it because he can't post up smaller players like Bowen or Marion. And his defense is less than stellar.

[MrChug]

#1. Nash-This fucker's doing with or without Amare. I have to admit, I argued last seasons coronation, but this season----there's NO doubt. This is the MOST valuable player...one who makes scrubs look like SUPERSTARZ. Period. They go to another team, they lose....see Q-Rich. :wink
#2. Billups-the biggest clutch artist and leader on the league's best REGULAR SEASON team? That's EXACTLY who the regular season MVP Award is designated for.
#3. Wade-this fucker's doing it with or without Shaq...does this sound familiar!??!??
#4. LeBron James-numbers aside...this rediculous dude is his taking team MINUS its 2nd best player to the playoffs handily. FUCK the rediculous "clutch" claims. They're unfounded. Lebron James is the real deal, and he continuously pi$$es in other team's faces.
#5. Kobe Bryant-Okay, okay...I'm a Kobe hater extraordinaire, but I'll be damned if anyone can say that he's not the most DOMINANT player in the league...a title I'm QUITE sure he's happy to take from his bestest buddy Shaq. Who else can take over a game whenever they want to? ...that's what I thought. :smokin

[Pandaemonaeon]

I don't know why the 'adversities' issue gets thrown around by the press a lot to lobby for Nash. The loss of Q? He did well for them but he's verrry expendable, and they did get a great pivotman that was an upgrade in more ways than one, so that's hardly an adversity. What, JJ? Diaw is making the JJ trade look like highway robbery. Yes he was an unproven commodity coming in, but in the end he worked out well (earlier than expected I might add) which barely hurt them at all - again, hardly an adversity.

Now Amare, they may have a point but not as big as made up to be as Bell, along with Nash and Marion, stepped up their games (stepped up is an understatement for what Marion has done this year - many has him pegged as an MVP candidate actually) to cover up for his 26-point output.

Besides, losing your star player before training camp is easier to deal with than in the middle of the season which is why I find the Mav's injury woes much worse. Amare goes down and they plug in Diaw in his place; Howard goes down and they have an NBDL guy as a replacement.

But I think it's close between Dirk and Nash and I'm fine with either one.

[jochhejaam]

If you are going to give it to a scorer, might as well give it to showboat since he does play defense. But of course, I would never vote for him if I had a vote.

I like Nash because he picked up his scoring in the absence of Amare and his playmaking ability maximizes the abilities of the other four players on the court with him.
That's not a bad case for Kobe but I wouldn't give it tio him because in my mind an MVP needs to think "team" first, granted he basically is the team this year but he didn't have the team mentality even when he had Shaq as a teammate.

[NCaliSpurs]

- - - NOTE: This is a LONG reply...
You're making my argument for me. It's because he's a superstar with no near-equal that makes him so valuable. To try and use this as an argument against Nash is very odd.


He is certainly valuable when he is playing. But inferring his value (when he is playing!) by looking at how bad they suck when he is not playing is ludicrous, especially when he has only missed ONE GAME this year.

Nash is great player, judge based on the games he plays, not on the ones he doesn't.



What? You mean like when a team loses their 6-10, 250, top-10 overall post player? He's gone and Nash has kept the team as competative as a short, wing-oriented team possibly can be.



But I thought Nash was the MVP of the team last year? If he is clearly the most valuable player in the entire NBA then losing 1 player and gaining several other talented players shouldn't be that big a deal.




Yes, yes, but if you recall


Blah blah. I am right. You are wrong. The Suns are not the best team in the nba, and they are behind 3 other teams by a long stretch of games.





Are you still arguing that Nash wasn't largely responsible? Please.... if you


No I am arguing that he shouldn't be back to back MVP. Two different things.




So now to be an MVP you must pass some "All-time great" type of litmus test? That's so freakin' rediculous you should be laughed out of this thread.


To be back-to-back MVP, you must pass some kind of All-Time Great litmus test. The logic is simple. If only All-Time great players become back-to-back MVP, then as a sanity check, surely the guy you are voting for must be examined in this light.




Maybe Nash's career wasn't in their league, but the award isn't for career.


Tell that to Karl Malone. His MVP awards were mainly the result of him having an outstanding career, and not necessarily being the MVP of that year.



The bolded line belongs nowhere near an MVP debate as the award is a regular season acknowledgement. They have a Finals MVP to recognize the most valuable champion. So shut the eff up already.


I was talking about respect, and that is something that certainly does go into voting for MVP. So please feel free to wet yourself.



Nash is averaging 20 points, 11 assists on great shooting while guiding an undersized team to a top-4 record in the League. No one can stop him from doing so. You make him a scorer, he beats you (see Mavs series). You make him pass, he beats you (see everything else). If that's not domination, then you have a warped sense of the word.


You have convinced me. I guess that is why he has won so many championships, because he is so unbeatable.



As for comparing Nash to those names above, no one is. None but you, anyways.


By saying he is the MVP again, you automatically lump him with that group. No one is comparing him to those players because he doesn't even approach it in terms of talent, or value.




Are you going to say that San Antonio maybe doesn't deserve their three Titles because they weren't won as dominantly as the Lakers three? Hell, the Lakers swept the Nets, the Spurs merely beat them in six. That since the Spurs didn't dominate, they aren't worthy to be called Champions because they don't measure up to what's been done int he past?


You have lost your mind. No one votes for Titles. Teams play. The winners take all, and the fact that they won cannot be disputed. People VOTE for the MVP, so it is reasonable to argue one way or the other that they deserve it or don't.




Seriously. Are you so blinded by your bias that you can't see how absurd that is?


Bias towards what? I don't understand. I have an OPINION. But please, show me my bias.




That Duncan isn't as dominant as Shaq, but Shaq only has one MVP award while Duncan has two?


A reasonable person can say argue Tim Duncan has been as dominant as Shaq. A reasonable person cannot say that Steve Nash has been as dominant as either.




Really... is this what you are trying to use to devalue Nash's seasons?

Enough already.

Read again. There are three strong cases that apply in conjunction. The reasons he won MVP last year aren't valid this year, he clearly doesn't belong in the list of players that have won back-to-back MVP awards, and there are more deserving candidates.

You disagree with both my reasons. I expect you to. You are the one who is biased.

[JMarkJohns]

You need to get past this lame swipe at Nash by bringing up Championships. They don't factor in. Period. You can't bring that up for a regular season award. Otherwise, Robsinon, who failed to even advance to the Finals the year he was the MVP and certainly wasn't a Champion at the time, needs to fork his over.

Your arguments are convoluted.

You argue Nash's value during games, but we can't use the 2-7 record the past two seasons without Nash to pound home the point that he's clearly as valuable to his team as any player in the League? Why? Because you say so? There's no reason not to. You say he doesn't deserve it either years. To prove Nash's value, it seems only logical to bring up the disparity in record and play when he's out for both years.

You really seem to have something against him.

You make outlandish claims, then fail to acknowledge factual or at the very least, quality responses to them. You basically claim that an MVP must be a potential All-Time great with at least one Championship and that to be a back-to-back MVP, you must be an All-Time great with multiple Championships.

I've already proved you don't and that you shouldn't.

Therefore I'm right, you're wrong. Not the other way around, my friend.


As for my bias. Please. In the season's first months, I was extremely critical of Nash's play. I went as far as to say that Nash shouldn't make the All-Star team because while his stats were very good, the Suns weren't winning and he'd directly cost the Suns at least two or three wins at the time. As he's improved his game, then the games of others and thus the Suns season, my opinion has changed.

You can ask just about anyone. I'm one of the least biased fans around. Here, there or anywhere. But when an argument against a Sun doesn't make sense, I'm going to defend the Suns. When the arguments do make sense, I'll admit such and take up the side of those arguing it.

Just scroll through my posts here. I've bashed Sarvar, Nash, D'Antoni, aspects of the Suns offense and defense... Probably as often as I've defended them.

In this case, you have no real case. You not only claim that Nash doesn't deserve it this year, but that he didn't deserve it last year. That's just ignorance, or maybe, as I've said, both ignorance and bias, since you now know the holes in your arguement yet ignore them.

[NCaliSpurs]

You need to get past this lame swipe at Nash by bringing up Championships. They don't factor in. Period. You can't bring that up for a regular season award. Otherwise, Robsinon, who failed to even advance to the Finals the year he was the MVP and certainly wasn't a Champion at the time, needs to fork his over.


Robinson was better than Nash. Robinson has a title.

Championships only factor in when you are talking about respect. Respect is a key component to giving someone BACK-TO-BACK MVP's.



You argue Nash's value during games, but we can't use the 2-7 record the past two seasons without Nash to pound home the point that he's clearly as valuable to his team as any player in the League? Why? Because you say so? There's no reason not to. You say he doesn't deserve it either years. To prove Nash's value, it seems only logical to bring up the disparity in record and play when he's out for both years.


Nash missed one game this season. If you want to bring in last season, then I would bring in the season before that, with the Mavs. Why have they done BETTER without him. What does that say about his value? See how badly this is going for you?



You really seem to have something against him.


I don't think he deserves to be mvp again. Other than that, I actually like watching him play.



You make outlandish claims, then fail to acknowledge factual or at the very least, quality responses to them. You basically claim that an MVP must be a potential All-Time great with at least one Championship and that to be a back-to-back MVP, you must be an All-Time great with multiple Championships.


Your comprehension skills are lacking. I said that to win back-to-back MVP's your two seasons better have been out of this world. Out of this world in a way that compares to guys that are so valuable that their teams have been successful enough to win at least a championship. Again, this is one part of the argument. You can disagree. I don't care. The world goes round.



I've already proved you don't and that you shouldn't.

Therefore I'm right, you're wrong. Not the other way around, my friend.


You proved yourself to be quite easily upset.




As for my bias. Please. In the season's first months, I was extremely critical of Nash's play. I went as far as to say that Nash shouldn't make the All-Star team because while his stats were very good, the Suns weren't winning and he'd directly cost the Suns at least two or three wins at the time. As he's improved his game, then the games of others and thus the Suns season, my opinion has changed.

You can ask just about anyone. I'm one of the least biased fans around. Here, there or anywhere. But when an argument against a Sun doesn't make sense, I'm going to defend the Suns. When the arguments do make sense, I'll admit such and take up the side of those arguing it.

Just scroll through my posts here. I've bashed Sarvar, Nash, D'Antoni, aspects of the Suns offense and defense... Probably as often as I've defended them.

In this case, you have no real case. You not only claim that Nash doesn't deserve it this year, but that he didn't deserve it last year. That's just ignorance, or maybe, as I've said, both ignorance and bias, since you now know the holes in your arguement yet ignore them.

You accuse others of bias, but you are the Suns fan. I don't even have a dog in the race.

Nash is a very very good player. He is great on offense, but sucks on defense. I didn't think he deserved it last year, but I wasn't the only one. He didn't win it unanimously, so please don't call it ignorance, just because my opinion differs from yours.

Anyway, I am done here.

[JMarkJohns]

Robinson was better than Nash. Robinson has a title.

He didn't at the time.


Championships only factor in when you are talking about respect. Respect is a key component to giving someone BACK-TO-BACK MVP's.

They shouldn't be. It's a regular season award, based on a season, by season performance. Maybe it's been used a few times as a career recognition award, but largely, it's given to a top-10 player who's season is propelling his team to 1. either great overall success or 2. to overcome serious injuries or 3. a combination of both.

This year, Nash is doing both. Maybe not the greatest success, but they are a top-4 team despite missing their most talented and only low-post presense all season.



Nash missed one game this season. If you want to bring in last season, then I would bring in the season before that, with the Mavs. Why have they done BETTER without him. What does that say about his value? See how badly this is going for you?

Simple. He wasn't the MVP on that team. He is on this team. That's all there is to it. This team, the only team that matters, is largely based on his offensive skills. When without him, either this season or last, they are 2-7 and average under 90 points a game.




I don't think he deserves to be mvp again. Other than that, I actually like watching him play.

You said you didn't think he deserved it in the first place. Not this year. Not last year. Again, you really have no reason for this except that his name isn't as big as past winners and that he hasn't won any Titles. You, again, are the only one trying to compare him to the previous greats. You are the only one who keeps using the flawed argument of Championships needing to be factored in to a regular season award. They simply don't belong.



Your comprehension skills are lacking. I said that to win back-to-back MVP's your two seasons better have been out of this world. Out of this world in a way that compares to guys that are so valuable that their teams have been successful enough to win at least a championship.

No. It simply does not. No matter how much you wish it did or wish it would, it simply is not the case. I really can't say it more clearly. The MVP award is for the regular season and the regular season only. Postseason doesn't factor in, otherwise the voting would take place after the entire year. By using this, you are basically eliminating everyone but Duncan, Billups, Shaq or Kobe. That's just insane. No Wade, no James, no Nash, no Dirk, no Brand...



Again, this is one part of the argument. You can disagree. I don't care. The world goes round.

No. It's not. It's part of your argument, but fails to factor in to the real equaltion as much as you claim it does, if it factors in at all. If it did, then Jordan would have won the award every year from 1990 until he retired - he didn't - and Duncan and Shaq would be splitting them ever since - they haven't.

Instead, non-champions like Barkley, Malone, Iverson, Garnett and Nash have been named as many times as the All-Time great Champions like Jordan, Shaq and Duncan since the Bulls first Title.



You proved yourself to be quite easily upset.

And you've proven yourself to be quite ignorant.



You accuse others of bias, but you are the Suns fan. I don't even have a dog in the race.

Nash is a very very good player. He is great on offense, but sucks on defense. I didn't think he deserved it last year, but I wasn't the only one. He didn't win it unanimously, so please don't call it ignorance, just because my opinion differs from yours.

Anyway, I am done here.

Your not ignorant because you disagree. Your ignorant because you hold on to your flawed notions of what an MVP should be, rather than looking at the facts and seeing what it really is.

You don't have to be an All-Time great with a Champioship to win one and while the back-to-backs have been All-time greats with multiple Championships in hindsight, a two-time winner doesn't have to meet such... see Malone. If Nash wins the award, he wins. If not, he doesn't. I think Wade, Dirk or Kobe are all deserving. However, if he does, he'll deserve it. He's the one player that is largely responsible for the Suns success. You can claim at times other players factor in, but Nash makes everyone better and does so that even bench-players come to Phoenix and explode. It's not just the system, it's the man that makes the system work and that man is Nash.



Anyway, I am done here.

Fine by me. I'll quit just as soon as I'm allowed the last word :)

I've seen the Suns core of Marion and Amare with and without Nash. They are infinately better with him. I've seen Nash with and without Amare and the Suns aren't that far off without him.

There's a reason for both.

To those who care to see basketball for what it is, Nash has more than proven his value. Say what you will about his postseason failings, but it really belongs nowhere near this debate.

[reader]

Going with Nash.

He was asked to integrate all but 2 new players into his team, with only 2 starters from last year, himself and Marion.

He was asked to improve his scoring, he has done that, while improving his shooting. Currently shooting + 50%, + 40% and +90%. Only 3 players have ever shot that well.

He was asked to keep his team in playoff contention, he has done that, number 2 seed, far exceeding expectations.

Only player in the league averaging a double-double, points and assists.
Leads the league in assists.

Yes, he deserves it.

[rm13]

I don't know why the 'adversities' issue gets thrown around by the press a lot to lobby for Nash. The loss of Q? He did well for them but he's verrry expendable, and they did get a great pivotman that was an upgrade in more ways than one, so that's hardly an adversity. What, JJ? Diaw is making the JJ trade look like highway robbery. Yes he was an unproven commodity coming in, but in the end he worked out well (earlier than expected I might add) which barely hurt them at all - again, hardly an adversity.

Now Amare, they may have a point but not as big as made up to be as Bell, along with Nash and Marion, stepped up their games (stepped up is an understatement for what Marion has done this year - many has him pegged as an MVP candidate actually) to cover up for his 26-point output.

Besides, losing your star player before training camp is easier to deal with than in the middle of the season which is why I find the Mav's injury woes much worse. Amare goes down and they plug in Diaw in his place; Howard goes down and they have an NBDL guy as a replacement.

But I think it's close between Dirk and Nash and I'm fine with either one.


How many of you people that are saying what a great supporting cast Nash has now said after they lost JJ and Amare that they had no chance of making the playoffs?

Also you do know that that gret pivot man you spoke of is out for till the playoffs and they kept on winning. That was a large part of the adversity-they lost Amare-then Brian Grant-then Kurt Thomas-all 3 centers they had were out. And they kept on winning-they didnt use it as an excuse like the Mavs fans like to do.

The fact that Diaw is all of a sudden an all-star has to be somewhat attributed to Nash. Yes he is having a carreer high in mins-but there were mins for him in Atlanta-he just didnt produce so they didnt play him. Diaw is a great player but it took a player like Nash to give him the confidence to show what he has really got. You do understand they don't seem like adversities because of Nash's leadership and skill.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

How many of you people that are saying what a great supporting cast Nash has now said after they lost JJ and Amare that they had no chance of making the playoffs?

Also you do know that that gret pivot man you spoke of is out for till the playoffs and they kept on winning. That was a large part of the adversity-they lost Amare-then Brian Grant-then Kurt Thomas-all 3 centers they had were out. And they kept on winning-they didnt use it as an excuse like the Mavs fans like to do.

The fact that Diaw is all of a sudden an all-star has to be somewhat attributed to Nash. Yes he is having a carreer high in mins-but there were mins for him in Atlanta-he just didnt produce so they didnt play him. Diaw is a great player but it took a player like Nash to give him the confidence to show what he has really got. You do understand they don't seem like adversities because of Nash's leadership and skill.


Diaw was playing out of position in Atlanta.

Nash isn't even the best all around player on his own team...

[mookie2001]

nash couldnt play d if it was an elimination game in the WCF and steve kerr was reigning from upon
he would probably run away from kerr as if he were the boogedy man

[NCaliSpurs]

Sound like exactly what I was saying?


The Sports Guy:

Put it this way: Nash was a cute choice last season, mainly because none of the other candidates stood out, and I could see why someone would have been swayed. (It was like ordering one of those fancy foreign beers at a bar, the ones in the heavy green bottles with the 13-letter name that you can't pronounce, only someone else is drinking it, so you say to yourself, "Ah, screw it, I'm tired of the beer I always drink, lemme try one of those.") But this year? I'm not saying he should be ignored, but if you actually end up picking him, either you're not watching enough basketball or you just want to see a white guy win back-to-back MVP's.

[ShoogarBear]

If Steve Nash is so valuable, how come the Mavs are better without him? Has there ever been an "MVP" who made BOTH teams better when he went from one to the next?

[Darrin]

Consecutive MVP Winners:
Tim Duncan (2002, 2003)
Michael Jordan (1991, 1992)
Magic Johnson (1989, 1990)
Larry Bird (1984, 1985, 1986)
Moses Malone (1982, 1983)
Kareem Abdul- Jabbar (1976, 1977 and 1971, 1972)
Wilt Chamberlain (1966, 1967, 1968)
Bill Russell (1961, 1962, 1963)

Multiple winners list:
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (6)
Michael Jordan (5)
Bill Russell (5)
Wilt Chamberlain (4)
Larry Bird (3)
Magic Johnson (3)
Moses Malone (3)
Tim Duncan (2)
Karl Malone (2)
Bob Pettit (2)

Single MVP winners:
Steve Nash (2004-05)
Kevin Garnett (2003-04)
Allen Iverson (2000-01)
Shaquille O'Neal (1999-00)
David Robinson (1994-95)
Hakeem Olajuwon (1993-94)
Charles Barkley (1992-93)
Julius Erving (1980-81)
Bill Walton (1977-78)
Bob McAdoo (1974-75)
Dave Cowens (1972-73)
Willis Reed (1969-70)
Oscar Robertson (1963-64)
Bob Cousy (1956-57)

I just wanted everyone to know what company we're talking about putting Steve Nash in, especially since Jason Kidd, John Stockton, and Isiah Thomas never won this award.

[ShoogarBear]

^ Even better than that. EVERY ONE of the consecutive MVP winners won the championship in at least one of those years.

And the only multi-MVP not to win a championship was Karl Malone.

Nice list, Darrin.

[Fabbs]

The criteria of "what would Phx be without him" is simply not enough.

How is Dallas doing without him? Case closed.

How is
Cleveland without Lebron, etc

[Darrin]

If Kobe is not going to win it this year, I don't knwo if he'll ever win the damn thing. He's been the league's runner-up in the scoring title on a 50-win team and didn't win it. He's has 29, 6, 5, and 2 on a Championship team and didn't win it.

Check out these stats:

Most Points in a single season:
1. Wilt Chamberlain - 4,029 (1960-61)
2. Wilt Chamberlain - 3,586 (1961-62)
3. Michael Jordan - 3,041 (1985-86)
4. Wilt Chamberlain - 3,033 (1959-60)
5. Wilt Chamberlain - 2,948 (1962-63)
6. Michael Jordan - 2,868 (1986-87)
7. Bob McAdoo - 2,831 (1973-74)
8. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 2,822 (1970-71)
9. Kobe Bryant - 2,797 (2005-06) with 2 games left to play (roughly more 70 points at his average, and a top-seven scoring season). His scoring average is top-9 as well.
10. Rick Barry - 2,775 (1965-66)

Every player on that list, except Rick Barry, won a Most Valuable Player Award. Three of those 5 players have multiple MVPs.


Most points in a single game:
1. Wilt Chamberlain - 100 (1962)
2. Kobe Bryant - 81 (2006)

As for the argument that Kobe isn't doing more than getting the Lakers a playoff berth, consider this:
1955-56: Bob Pettit: 25.7 ppg, 16.2 rpg for the 33-39 St. Louis Hawks.
1975-76: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 27.7 ppg, 16.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, and 4.12 bpg for the 40-42 Los Angeles Lakers.
1981-82: Moses Malone: 31.1 ppg, 14.7 rpg, 1.8 apg, 1.54 bpg for the 46-36 Houston Rockets.
1987-88: Michael Jordan: 35.0 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.9 apg, and 3.2 spg for the 50-32 Chicago Bulls.

Those aren't the only examples, just the best.

2005-06: Kobe Bryant: 35.4 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, and 1.81 spg for the 44-37 Los Angeles Lakers.

[Darrin]

^ Even better than that. EVERY ONE of the consecutive MVP winners won the championship in at least one of those years.

And the only multi-MVP not to win a championship was Karl Malone.

Nice list, Darrin.

Thanks.

That's a good point, but Magic Johnson didn't win an NBA Championship in 1989 or 1990. Every single player on that list at least played in the NBA Finals once in their multiple wins.

I forgot to mention the Jerry West, Rick Barry, Pete Maravich, Gary Payton, Dave Bing, Clyde Drexler, Earl Monroe, Mitch Richmond, Lenny Wilkens, Gus Williams, Tiny Archibald, Walt Frazier, and George Gervin never even had one MVP award.

If we're going to give it to a winner, I'd rather give it to the guy who averaged 19 points and 9 assists on the best team in the league. He had a career season and the Pistons improved by 9 games over last season (most wins by any team since the 1999-00 Los Angeles Lakers).

[ShoogarBear]

Ah, messed up on Magic. Which undeserving chump squad beat out the Lakers in those years?

[Darrin]

Ah, messed up on Magic. Which undeserving chump squad beat out the Lakers in those years?

http://www.nba.com/media/pistons/history_19891990champs.jpg



I don't know. I'll have to look that up.

[NCaliSpurs]

You guys are bringing the same takes I was espousing. JMarkjohns is going to bite your head off.