Reply With Quote
Another thread to dogpile on the Mavs.
Joy.
Nash
Dirk
Nash or Dirk?
Both play/played on the Mavs
Both are chokers
Which one's the more undeserving MVP?
It's a tough choice for me but I'd have to go with the overrated Nash. His team's loaded with talent: He's got 2 other all-stars on his team, a defensive first team player, sixth man of the year and the Suns still can't dominate any team in the playoffs aside from the Lakers.
Another thread to dogpile on the Mavs.
Joy.
Perhaps they shouldnt have lost to an 8th seed after winning 67 games.
Oh hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaah ahahaPerhaps they shouldnt have lost to an 8th seed after winning 67 games.
That was an original thought.
woooooooooooooooohhhhhhh
man that was great.
Nash is pretty clutch. It's his team that's not. However, he only deserved one of his trophies, but he wasn't a terrible choice for MVP. I think Dirk's is tainted due to his massive meltdown in the first round.
Pretty true, though.
It was pretty true...
Uh, Dirk's PER against Golden State was over 20. His regular season PER was 27. Over 20 is all-star caliber, 27 is MVP. Dirk wasn't even the main culprit for his team's demise. He deserves legitimate criticism for not measuring up to his regular season peformance, but he's not the main reason his team lost, especially considering Avery sat Damp and moved Dirk over to the C. Imagine a goalie being moved to center-forward and it's easy to understand the slight drop-off in his performance.
Did you even watch those games? If you had, perhaps you might've noticed Avery getting worked like a punching bag at the hands of Nellie...or JET unable to hit water from a boat. Or Buckner and George having PER's under 5.
I would think Spurs fans of all people would know by now not to underestimate the guy.
Nash because the back-2-back MVPs compounds the misery of that decision.
Nash... MVP is a season award. Nash's mvps make me feel bad for Kidd's lack of MVPs lol.
Allen Iverson.
EDIT: Wait, decades? Then the worst is Magic Johnson over Michael Jordan in 1989. A.I. over Shaq is number 2.
Last edited by EJFischer; 06-13-2007 at 09:17 PM.
By the way, does anyone remember who won Defensive Player of the Year?
Was it Camby or Marion? I honestly don't remember and don't feel like taking the 2 seconds to google it.
Camby
Dirk absolutely was the main culprit for his team's loss, but he was also the main reason for their great season. Dude ran out of gas placing too much importance on the regular season after a devastating Finals loss, exactly like the Pistons did the year before.
I'll say Nash, only because Kobe was my first choice for '06 MVP (Nash earned it in 05 though, and was a distant second in my book in 06).
I've been meaning to mention, I frequently enjoy your posts.
who the is Camby again?
I will just simply disagree. The entire Mavs team underachieved in that series, from the coaching staff to the players, with the exception of maybe Diop. And when your sixth-best player is the only guy to show up, you're not going to win.
Do you think that the GS-Dal series is that big of an upset? Dallas's team efficiency ratings projected them at 60 wins, about what they did the last two years but they got 67, mainly going fifth gear against a bunch of teams packing it in for a chance at Oden. And the Warriors were a much better team after that trade. I think they would've won 50-55 if they had been healthy and together all year. A 55-win team beating a 60-win team doesn't seem like anything more than a mild upset, does it?
No, it was really that bad. I'm sorry but it's pathetic that you guys try to rationalize your team's choke job with "Oh, the Warriors really weren't an 8-seed". They were an 8-seed, the Mavs lost to them. Simple as that. The Jazz beat them in 5 games, and the Spurs beat the Jazz in 5 games. Any team in the playoffs besides Dallas and L.A. could have beaten the Warriors in a 7-game series.
that guy from 2002 and 2003 was ing garbage
I don't give a what PER anybody had out there on the court, I don't give a how many rebounds he pulled down...the bottom line is that DIRK was the one that needed to lead this team by getting the ing ball in the bucket and he failed miserably. Whether it was by beating a guy smaller than him or passing out of a double team to the right guy, DIRK FAILED MISERABLY.
At ude reflects leadership. Effort reflects leadership. Clutch play reflects leadership. I can go on and on. When Dirk came to play, the rest of the team came to play. When Dirk decided it was nap time, so did the rest of the team. Don't put this ing abortion of a series at Jason Terry's feet, or Devean George's, or Josh Howard's or even Avery's. The bottom line (and this is not something any geek Hollinger stat can give you) is that this team NEEDED their leader to step up and make shots, they NEEDED their leader to play aggressively for 4 quarters, and they got NONE OF THAT. well except half a good game and then a miracle bailout at the end of the other one.
You can say the blame can be shared, fine whatever....but the VAST MAJORITY of the blame MUST FALL AT THE FEET OF DIRK.
How is it a "choke job"? A choke is when you have a lead and cough it up. Dallas never controlled that series. They lost to a pretty good team. Dallas is vulnerable to small ball, while small ball teams like the Warriors are vulnerable to great post players (Boozer), and Deron Williams cancelled out Baron Davis. Simple as that. The Warriors were an 8 seed that went 16-3 down the stretch with everybody healthy -- they beat Phoenix, Dallas twice, Pistons in Detroit, Utah twice. They were NOT some .500 team backing into the playoffs. Give them some respect.
I'm not claiming it's not an upset, it was. And I'm not claiming Dallas played their best, they clearly didn't. But this was a whack season in a lot of ways. The records and seedings didn't matter as much this year. "Findog" on "Spurstalk.com" isn't going to change the perception of it being a historic implosion, but I would like to see Golden State keep that team intact and win 55 games next year. It won't look nearly as bad as it does now.
I understand what you're saying about intangibles and poise, things that can't be measured by stats, and Dirk failed there. A lot of stat geeks try to claim that Garnett is equal or better than Duncan based on the fact they both put up 22 and 11. But Dirk gave this team more in that series than people remember. He had one truly horrible game. I don't mind criticizing him and saying he failed to measure up to his standards, but I'm tired of people laying the blame for that series solely at his feet. He had plenty of "help."I don't give a what PER anybody had out there on the court, I don't give a how many rebounds he pulled down...the bottom line is that DIRK was the one that needed to lead this team by getting the ing ball in the bucket and he failed miserably. Whether it was by beating a guy smaller than him or passing out of a double team to the right guy, DIRK FAILED MISERABLY.
PER has its limitations but it's a pretty good way of measuring a player's impact on the game. Hollinger is the same guy who swore up and down since February that San Antonio was the best team in the League based on point differential. That made no sense at the time but it's clear in retrospect he and his stats were right. So what if they lost a game here or there at home to Charlotte or Boston? They were kicking teams in the teeth and occasionally taking a night off, whereas Dallas won EVERY SINGLE GAME by a grand total of 5 points. The bottom line is that if Dirk graded out over 20 on PER, he was performing at an All-Star caliber level, with the miserable exception of Game Six. And he was doing it at the Center position. Let's see Pop switch Duncan out to Shooting Guard and see how effective he still is.
Last edited by Findog; 06-13-2007 at 10:52 PM.
The Mavs won 67 games, had homecourt throughout the playoffs, and was favored to win the Championship. You lose to a ing 8 seed in the first round. It doesn't matter if you were up or not, your team LOST IN THE FIRST ROUND. That's choking.
Including a bushel of wins over teams tanking for Oden. It's one of the least impressive 67 win seasons ever. Based on their efficiency stats, they were a 60 win team, not a 67 win team. If the regular season doesn't matter, why do Spurs fans keep pointing to that gaudy record as proof of anything that matters instead of the fool's gold that it really is?The Mavs won 67 games
Homecourt is overrated. It's nice to have, but you don't need it to win a series.had homecourt throughout the playoffs,
Wouldn't have beaten the Spurs.and was favored to win the Championship.
Lost to a very good team that was one of the best teams in basketball from February on. Is November-February all that relevant? Because if it was, then Dallas > San Antonio. Losing to Miami was a choke job. Losing to Golden State was a case of X's and O's, bad coaching and tired legs from going fifth gear for 82 games. The quality of the two teams made this more akin to a second-round matchup. An upset for sure, but a minor upset, not a historic one. 67-15 and 42-40 isn't nearly as relevant as what these teams did after the All-Star break.You lose to a ing 8 seed in the first round. It doesn't matter if you were up or not, your team LOST IN THE FIRST ROUND.
Karl Malone.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
