Reply With Quote
By awarding Steve Nash back to back MVP's, isn't that indirectly saying that he is better than John Stockton (who never got an MVP award) and in the same echelon as guys like Magic Johnson, Tim Duncan, and MJ?
I am just trying to say, Nash is a very valuable player. But is he the MOST valuable among Dirk, Kobe, LBJ, Chauncey? I would say no.
By awarding Steve Nash back to back MVP's, isn't that indirectly saying that he is better than John Stockton (who never got an MVP award) and in the same echelon as guys like Magic Johnson, Tim Duncan, and MJ?
No, just as naming Nash MVP over Kobe, Dirk, LeBron doesn't mean he's the better player.By awarding Steve Nash back to back MVP's, isn't that indirectly saying that he is better than John Stockton (who never got an MVP award) and in the same echelon as guys like Magic Johnson, Tim Duncan, and MJ?
So if we all agree that Kobe and Lebron are better players, with worse supporting casts, I'm not sure how Nash keeps winning it. History is going to point back to this time and say "what the were they doing?"
Damn, I leave for the evening, and this thread got really good ... still haven't read it all, but some really good discussion in this thread.
Kobe and Lebron, didn't deserve it, why wasn't Lebron in the playoffs his last two years, because he's the one that choked away the second half of the season. Kobe was 2 games out of the POs, so you're basically giving him the MVP for two frickin games, it should have gone to Dirk
One question I have is what role should team success play in the determination of the MVP.
Plenty of people argue that a team should at least be a playoff team. But, then you get into the gray area of how many wins is sufficient to make an argument for a player to deserve the award. 50 wins? A top 2 team in the conference, record wise? As in Kobe Bryant's case, is there ever a situation where the player is so valuable and so great that he transends the notion of team success?
I think it's that gray area along with the lack of a true definition of "valuable" that makes it so tough of a debate. People have different criteria. People weigh certain things more heavily than others. While most would agree that it has to be some combination of individual accomplishment along with team success, most voters weigh the two differently.
And, what about defense? I know there is already a DPOY award and an all-NBA Defensive team. But, should an MVP player at least be adequate to solid at the defensive end? That is now in question when discussing the MVP.
Personally, if you really dissect the word "valuable" and try to argue something along the lines of what SirChaz wrote about a player being the "most instrumental to their team's success" ....
HECK, I think CHRIS PAUL would be a leading candidate for the MVP. Forget that his team didn't make the playoffs. Look at the fact that they traded away their starting center, their back-up center got banned from the league, the fact that they had to move their franchise to Oklahoma City and they had to deal with all the devestation of Katrina, and that they were a horrible tam the previous season. The Hornets almost made it into the playoffs.
Last year's record: 18-64
This year's record: 38-44
A 20 game improvement on the shoulders of a rookie point guard after all that franchise and team had gone through.
Anyway ... I know that's a bit tangental. But, my point is that with all the differing criteria voters use for the MVP award, I think there should be a more concise criteria or formula to determine the winner. But, I guess whoever would have one, there would be people upset about the decision.
All-Time Scoring Seasons:
1. Wilt Chamberlain - 4,029 points (1961-62)
2. Wilt Chamberlain - 3,586 points (1962-63)
3. Michael Jordan - 3,041 points (1986-87)
4. Wilt Chamberlain - 3,033 points (1960-61)
5. Wilt Chamberlain - 2,948 points (1963-64)
6. Michael Jordan - 2,868 points (1987-88)
7. Kobe Bryant - 2,832 (2005-06)
8. Bob McAdoo - 2,831 (1974-75)
9. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 2,822 (1971-72)
10. Rick Barry - 2,775 (1966-67)
One game, my ass.
^Plus...isn't this award supposed to be about the individual player?! To me, MVP=BEST PLAYER IN THE NBA for a given season. People get caught up in the whole, who makes his team-mates better thing. That's only part of it, but with Nash....he's winning it soley based on this factor.
So we are using previous playoff success to determine MVP now? Okay, Tony Parker for MVP it is. He will be stopping by Nash's house to pick up last year's MVP trophy, too, since he and Billups will be sharing it.
Last I checked you have to get to the Playoffs to even be considered, I don't get why people want to reward a player whose fault it was that he didn't get to the POs to begin with.
Where did I bring up previous playoff success?
Last edited by Trainwreck2100; 04-26-2006 at 11:50 PM.
What player are u talking about? Kobe, Lebron, and Dirk took their teams to the playoffs.
It was a response to his response to me.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Team is team and MVP is MVP. They cannot be completely seperated because this isn't an individual sport, but Steve Nash is getting all the credit for Boris Diaw's shot selection, comprehension of the team's system, and time in the gym. How fair is that to Diaw, Bell - I owe my career to this one guy? It wasn't fair when they did that with Michael Jordan, and it's not fair now.
I have been irritated over awards before - Ron Artest getting the Defensive Player of the Year Award in 2004 - but not like this. I think this is, perhaps, the worst selection for a postseason award in my lifetime. I don't think that's overstating this.
It's not a postseason award, thus the pre-playoff deadline for the voting.
It's supposed to be based solely upon that year's regular season.
Get over it. It's hardly that big a deal. I thought D'Antoni was very deserving this year for COY. Don't see me ing that he didn't get it. Mainly because I didn't think he deserved it last year, but I digress... point is, the world will continue to rotate upon its axis, even after the travashamockery of nash winning another MVP award comes to pass...
They are handed out after the season is over, or how could they judge by the whole season? They are commonly referred to as postseason awards. By your definition, "postseason" awards would be limited to the Larry O'Brien trophy for the best team, and the Finals MVP for the best player of that series.
Marion, Diaw, Nash
On that list, Nash would be my THIRD pick to join the Spurs - and that's just from his own team.
Back when MJ, Bird, Magic, Malone, Shaq, Hakeem even AI & Kidd were winning; w/o a doubt they would have been the 1st pick from there respective teams, and way up on the list from ANY team in the league if I could choose a single player.
I'd take Amare w/his knees right now over Nash, as well.
I think most people would agree with me; what kind of value is that?
one writer said he would not vote for kobe because of the lakers record
but only thought lebron james could be better then kobe this year
but he voted for nash
I am pretty sure you are making this up, because if you are not, then you can settle this whole thing right now.
Please post the "guidelines" with a link.
When you said this to support your case the Lebron doesn't deserve MVP:
The award is given at the end of the regular season. The prefix "post" is Latin for "after", therefore the word "postseason" means "after the season". Its used to describe the playoffs doesn't mean that it's the only meaning of the word.
And don't try to change the subject. Nash doesn't deserve the freaking award.
You're right, there are none... I am caught.
no guidelines to speak of, other than the voters definition of "valuable"...
Still, I'm confident in my definition as it fits to far more cases than does yours.
You simply cannot base a regular season award on anything other than that season and those players being considered. Right now, I'm not sure if any of the candidates really could stand under the weight of your criteria.
What was it again, I believe it was...
To win MVP...
Player must be a HOF calibur player on the verge of a le, if not already with one in hand.
To win multiple MVPs...
Player must be a All-NBA legand with at least one le in hand, if not multiple ones.
To win back-to-back MVPs...
Player must be arguably the best ever at his position, with a minimum of two les in hand and the possibility of more on the way.
Forgive me, but isn't such recognition what the Hall of Fame is for?
How can you so willingly base a regular season award upon a players resume and All-NBA potential.
It's entirely short-sighted of you. It basically limits the call of greatness to a handful of players redetermined year after year after year after year.
That's not what the award is for.
I do apologize for my ignorance which you posted above. Should have known better.
Best Player On The Best Team!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions