I'm sick of people disrespecting Steve Nash's MVPs.

[QUOTE=Young X][B]Why would you use Nash beating Dirk against Dirk when Nash and the Amare-less Suns beat the Lakers in that same season? Besides, what does that have to do with the regular season?[/B]
[/QUOTE]

what are you talking about, i haven't mentioned a single thing about post season play in this thread. I never mentioned Nash beating Dirk

Dirk got beat by Kobe on his home court in the regular season, and by that I don't mean the Lakers beat the Mavs, I mean Kobe beat the Mavs by outscoring them through 3 quarters by himself making the game a blowout

i'm not going to take the time to read the rest of your post if your reading comprehension isn't good enough to even respond properly to mine.

Yeah because this topic comes up so much in ANY BASKETBALL DISCUSSION EVERYWHERE...right? Except it doesn't. Nobody frankly ****ing cares who won MVP in 2005 or 2006. Nobody was so overwhelmingly great and leading their team to a high win percentage for anyone to really garner any butthurt feelings.

[QUOTE=TheMarkMadsen]who in todays league could take 27 shots per game while not being a detriment to their team?

[B]does Lebron taking 27 shots every night on the Cavs while freezing out Love and Kyrie make them better? no

does Curry taking 27 shots on the Warriors every night while freezing out Klay make them better? no[/B]

[B]Did Kobe taking 27 shots per game in 06 max out his teams potential?[/B]

yes, it clearly did as the stats show, they were barely a .500 team when he DIDN"T SCORE 40, and were 18-9 when he did..

so clearly Kobe was doing what was best for the team.[/QUOTE]
Them taking 27 shots would still win at least 45 games and a 7th seed.

As far as potential, Odom (underrated on that team) was the only other player who was in double digit FGA so we really don't know what other potential was there with such a low amount of FGA from the rest of the team.

[QUOTE=TheMarkMadsen]what are you talking about, i haven't mentioned a single thing about post season play in this thread. I never mentioned Nash beating Dirk

Dirk got beat by Kobe on his home court in the regular season, and by that I don't mean the Lakers beat the Mavs, I mean Kobe beat the Mavs by outscoring them through 3 quarters by himself making the game a blowout

i'm not going to take the time to read the rest of your post if your reading comprehension isn't good enough to even respond properly to mine.[/QUOTE]My bad, I was thinking about a different year. :facepalm

Why should one game determine who the MVP is anyway?

You're confusing the best player with the MVP. No player on a 7th seeded team will be the MVP. Dirk led a 61 win team and also had a phenomenal regular season. If there was anyone who was robbed it was Dirk.

[QUOTE=AirBourne92]kobe shouldve won both of those[/QUOTE]


And you should have been aborted by your parents. Lebron averaged 31/7/7 on 49 FG% while playing on a 50 winning team.

I've said it before and I'll say it again-the only reason people disparage his MVP is because of the colour of his skin.

Nobody hates on Iverson's MVP even though he wasn't a top 10 player when he won MVP.

[QUOTE=AirBourne92]kobe shouldve won both of those[/QUOTE]

Kobe was obviously the best player but you can't give a guy on a sub-500 or barely above 500 team the MVP.

Stockton had better stats than Nash, led a worse supporting cast to far better success. Stockton never even sniffed top 5 MVP consideration.

2005 and 2006 was weak in terms of MVP candidates.

[QUOTE=masonanddixon]
Nobody hates on Iverson's MVP even though he wasn't a top 10 player when he won MVP.[/QUOTE]
LOL plenty of ISHers have been saying that Iverson didn't deserve MVP.

Also, you're wrong. Iverson was a top 5 player that year but he wasn't the clear cut best.

[QUOTE=masonanddixon]I've said it before and I'll say it again-the only reason people disparage his MVP is because of the colour of his skin.

Nobody hates on Iverson's MVP even though he wasn't a top 10 player when he won MVP.[/QUOTE]

You don't have to be a top 10 player to win MVP, you just have to shit on the opposition multiple times throughout the season as a lil 165 lb 6'1 guy on a shitty team.

[QUOTE=deja vu]LOL plenty of ISHers have been saying that Iverson didn't deserve MVP.

Also, you're wrong. Iverson was a top 5 player that year but he wasn't the clear cut best.[/QUOTE]

Not even close

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
Dirk
KG
Webber

were at least all better

[QUOTE=masonanddixon]Not even close

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
[B]Dirk[/B]
KG
[B]Webber[/B]

were at least all better[/QUOTE]

:roll: :roll:

[QUOTE=TheMarkMadsen]:roll: :roll:[/QUOTE]

Good point, son.

[QUOTE=masonanddixon]Not even close

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
Dirk
KG
Webber

were at least all better[/QUOTE]

Says Iverson wasn't a top 10 player...then lists only 6 players. :roll:

that suns team was very entertaining to watch.:rockon:

2006 = inflated stats years. heck a 21 year old LeBron had better stats and more wins with an even worse supporting cast that year.

[QUOTE=deja vu]Stockton had better stats than Nash, led a worse supporting cast to far better success. Stockton never even sniffed top 5 MVP consideration.

2005 and 2006 was weak in terms of MVP candidates.[/QUOTE]
Karl Malone was on his team and won mvps...

He's arguably the worst player in the history of the sport to win the award... and he won it TWICE. That doesn't mean he didn't deserve it, but that's why people complain.

[QUOTE=bdreason]He's arguably the worst player in the history of the sport to win the award... and he won it TWICE. That doesn't mean he didn't deserve it, but that's why people complain.[/QUOTE]
No he isn't not even close. He was a better player than both Derrick Rose and Allen Iverson were...rather easily.

[QUOTE=masonanddixon]

Nobody hates on Iverson's MVP even though he wasn't a top 10 player when he won MVP.[/QUOTE]


People hate on AI's MVP all the time. And the only reason he really won it, was because the 76ers won the Eastern Conference that year by like 6-8 games.

I don't remember if Nash had the #1 seed for either of his MVP's, but I don't think so.

[QUOTE=RoundMoundOfReb]No he isn't not even close. He was a better player than both Derrick Rose and Allen Iverson were...rather easily.[/QUOTE]


I'll give you D. Rose, and AI is arguable... that still means he's top 3 worst MVP's of all time... and he won TWICE.

[QUOTE=bdreason]I'll give you D. Rose, and AI is arguable... that still means he's top 3 worst MVP's of all time... and he won TWICE.[/QUOTE]
He's better than Bob Cousy too. :lol

[QUOTE=RoundMoundOfReb]He's better than Bob Cousy too. :lol[/QUOTE]


Cousy was a 13x All-Star, 12x All-NBA, 8x League assist leader, and won 6 NBA championships.


I didn't watch him play, but it's pretty obvious he was a more dominant player than Nash in his time.

[QUOTE=bdreason]Cousy was a 13x All-Star, 12x All-NBA, 8x League assist leader, and won 6 NBA championships.


I didn't watch him play, but it's pretty obvious he was a more dominant player than Nash in his time.[/QUOTE]
weak era. Trust me Nash is way better.

its funny how everywhere marbury went the team sucked balls.. and then when kidd and nash replaced him the teams just took off.

[QUOTE=Hey Yo]Because there's players in the league who could avg. 35ppg if they took 27 FGA per game.[/QUOTE]

People who say this just show they have no concept about how basketball works. Do you know how hard it is to get up 27 shots against NBA defenses?

Shot-creating has become so underrated as a skill.

Shaq > Nash in 05. Shaq's impact is unparalleled.

[QUOTE=bdreason]He's arguably the worst player in the history of the sport to win the award... and he won it TWICE. That doesn't mean he didn't deserve it, but that's why people complain.[/QUOTE]

Rose and Iverson in recent memory, plus Harden/Curry if one of them wins this year. Add Unseld and Cowens to the list if we go back a bit.

Makes him top 5 worst, which is fine with me. What irritates me is when people saying Kobe of all people should've won, or when people act like it was because of race (or some other dumb reason). I've heard it all.

Agree completely. Nash is easily a top 10 offensive player of all time, and he played a position for which defense matters very little.

[QUOTE=Fire Colangelo]Rose and Iverson in recent memory, plus Harden/Curry if one of them wins this year. Add Unseld and Cowens to the list if we go back a bit.

Makes him top 5 worst, which is fine with me. What irritates me is when people saying Kobe of all people should've won, or when people act like it was because of race (or some other dumb reason). I've heard it all.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.. he had great teams.. but can you imagine amare and joe johnson doing anything together besides rotating isos? Nash was the motor who facilitated the machine.. even kobe or Lebron or wade couldn't glue that team together like nash did. They could probably carry shit teams farther than nash could but in those years he was just the perfect fit in the perfect situation

[QUOTE=Fire Colangelo]Rose and Iverson in recent memory, plus Harden/Curry if one of them wins this year. Add Unseld and Cowens to the list if we go back a bit.

Makes him top 5 worst, which is fine with me. What irritates me is when people saying Kobe of all people should've won, or when people act like it was because of race (or some other dumb reason). I've heard it all.[/QUOTE]

You're an idiot. Weakness in MVP is related to the players in the NBA and League. When Harden or Curry wins they will have deserved it IN THIS LEAGUE THIS SEASON. How that pertains to other players of other seasons isn't all that important. It's not like either will have won it over more deserving players like Rose and Iverson did.

[QUOTE=Smoke117]You're an idiot. Weakness in MVP is related to the players in the NBA and League. When Harden or Curry wins they will have deserved it IN THIS LEAGUE THIS SEASON. How that pertains to other players of other seasons isn't all that important. It's not like either will have won it over more deserving players like Rose and Iverson did.[/QUOTE]

Idk why you're so angry all the time.

I was simply responding to a post that said "Nash is the worst player in NBA history to win MVP". Worst player in history... that means compared to the rest of the MVP winners, Nash is ranked last. Nothing was said about the strength of his MVPs.... nothing.

To respond to your post, I'd agree with you. If Curry wins MVP this year, he'd deserve it, just like Nash did in 05, and to some extent 06. But Nash would be the better player than Curry.

You can argue for more than one person each year, obviously, but at the end of the day Nash was definitely one of the worthy candidates both times.

[QUOTE=bdreason]People hate on AI's MVP all the time. And the only reason he really won it, was because the 76ers won the Eastern Conference that year by like 6-8 games.

I don't remember if Nash had the #1 seed for either of his MVP's, but I don't think so.[/QUOTE]

I believe they were the #1 seed in 04-5 (won like 63 games).

[QUOTE=Ca$H]2006 Kobe was the closet thing you will ever see to prime MJ.[/QUOTE]

true dat.

[QUOTE=RoundMoundOfReb]2006 = inflated stats years. heck a 21 year old LeBron had better stats and more wins with an even worse supporting cast that year.[/QUOTE]

You're a ****ing douchebag...but good point. Nearly everyone AT EVERY POSITION saw a rise in efficiency in 06 when the rules changed. Nobody's legacy benefited from it more than Kobrick.