Reply With Quote
No. And it's not even that close, tbh.
Nash's 1st MVP should have gone to Shaq.
No. And it's not even that close, tbh.
Not surprised the terrorist is supporting an English Speaking White
Dirk was a jump shooter on a stacked team. LBJ was in a much weaker conference. 50 wins BFD, tbh. Nash was the biggest impact player in the league in 06. Like Curry, following his first MVP, he actually went up another level. And Nash was probably more deserving than Dirk of the MVP in 07 when he peaked, but they weren't going to award a third straight MVP in the margins.refresh my memory bro, but how in the world did Dirk not win MVP in 06? What was the narrative?
61 wins, 26.6 PPG, 9RPG, 40-49-90 split and played 81 total games...
54 wins, 18.8, 10.5 Assist, 43-50-90 split and 79 total games
and that 50 win Lebron James team...
Dirk had a virutal 40-50-90 season at 26.6 with a 61 win team...
Not to mention by most standards, Nash had a of a team but only 64.
2004-05
Shaq BPM: 5.7 PER: 27.0 VORP: 4.7 WS/48: .211
Nash BPM: 1.7 PER: 22.0 VOPP: 2.4 WS/48: .212
New Age Bull , tbh.
The reasoning was, Suns remained elite sans Stoudemire and Nash was having at least as good a season as pervious, so if he was the MVP then, why not now (as if that logic couldn't be applied to most MVP's in history)?refresh my memory bro, but how in the world did Dirk not win MVP in 06? What was the narrative?
61 wins, 26.6 PPG, 9RPG, 40-49-90 split and played 81 total games...
54 wins, 18.8, 10.5 Assist, 43-50-90 split and 79 total games
and that 50 win Lebron James team...
Dirk had a virutal 40-50-90 season at 26.6 with a 61 win team...
Not to mention by most standards, Nash had a of a team but only 64.
Why James didn't win: Wasn't "his turn yet" and 50 wins, no matter the roster, was considered a minimum requirement from '83-'16.
Why Nowitzki didn't win: Was/is 9-10 inches taller and came from overseas. He won in '07 because even the media knew they couldn't justify Nash joining Russell, Chamberlain and Bird as the only players to win it 3 consecutive years. Also, Mavericks finished 6 games clear of next closest team and posted what was then t-4th all-time with 67 wins.
If the amount of coverage and information that's available now, was available throughout history, the history of this and other awards would look a lot different than they do.
Kobe
Russ
Kobe
It wasn't the year he won the MVP.
Nobody brought up Iverson over Shaq?
You have a Shaq fetish, don't you?
I was going to, but the East wasn't the absolute blizzard it is now and that team was ALL AI. I think the media was giving too much credit to Phil coming back, albeit to a ready-made contender, due to the Lakers flaming out in 99, and also having a much more complete roster.
Wilt said it best; Shaq was allowed to foul fifty times a game and just run people over. He wasn't robbed of .
You forgot the pivotal metric that made the voters choose Nash over Shaq, tbh.
Shaq: black
Nash: white
And Green does not fit.
Nash deserved it the year Stoudemire went down tbh
Well he didn't deserve it one of the years, depending on the logic people used.
If Stoudemire was such a big piece then no way should Nash be credited for 'making everyone better' which was the logic they used to give him the MVP over Shaq in 2005 (disregarding the fact Amare was hurt in 2004 and the Suns completely overhauled their team mid-season).
2005: They won 62 games! Complete turnaround, it's because of Nash! (Amare averages 26/10)
2006: They lost 8 more games but still did okay without Amare! It's because of Nash!
BS.
Nash, Westbrook and Rose probably.
Still won 54 with scrubs while boosting his numbers. Media learned from the Stockton/Malone days when Stockton wasn't getting the MVP credit he deserved.
You guys are forgetting a couple of key details
1) MVP is always "player of the year". You can use any stat metric bull you want but it always goes to "player of the year". I tried explaining that to Asian kid I work with. Russ Westbrook was guaranteed to win despite the low seed because he was, far and away, the player of the year.
2) In 2006, the Suns didnt just lose Amare. The Suns lost Amare Stoudemire, Joe Johnson and Quentin Richardson (3/5 of the previous years starting five) and still won 54 games with almost a brand new team.
And Joe Johnson. And Quentin Richardson.
And did it with some guys named "Boris Diaw", "Raja Bell" and "James Jones" in the starting lineup.
Well then your argument works against his 2005 MVP (which I remember in the past you agreed he didn't deserve).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
