04-05. how can anyone say he didn't earn it that year?
i honestly think people on here just hate white basketball players. before i get flamed hear me out. steve has always fascinated me as one of those guards who KNOWS that he isn't the most athletic/fastest/best or whatever on the court. he goes into every game knowing that most likely the PG he'll be guarding will burn the sh!t outa him. but what has always impressed me about steve is his ability to overlook that and simply play his own game. so he's not as fast as you...well he'll draw you in real quick then make a beautiful dish to the paint and embarrass you. IMO steve is one of the best passers this league has seen since pistol pete, whom a lot on this website seem to think is also vastly overrated. no one is EVER gonna say steve is the best PG of all time...and possibly not even top 5. but what you can say is that in what he lacks in raw talent he makes up in his ability to be a step ahead of his defender and a ridiculous work ethic that took him from being a basic no body from canada that could barely find a schollie in the US, to being one of the greatest PG's of the 90's/00's. but to answer the question....i think the 04-05 MVP was greatly deserved by steve. i couldn't think of a better guy to give it to after a season of hard work turning around a terrible team into a contender.
Kobe may have been the best player in 2006, but his team won what? 45 games? That won't get it done in MVP voting. I'd pick Shaq in '05 for MVP followed by Dirk and either Dirk or Lebron in '06.
Nash just never seemed on their levels as an overall player to me. He was great in the clutch, an amazing shooter and a great passer, but he was usually torched defensively whether it be Tony Parker, Mike Bibby or any other Western Conference point guard.
It's obvious that most of us feel that Steve Nash probably didn't deserve 2 MVPs, maybe not even 1 MVP,
I don't agree with the premise of choosing which MVP Nash deserved less. He didn't "deserve" either, as several people have already posted.
The '05 MVP fraud goes back to Ron Artest, the Palace Brawl and Dictator Stern's mandate to designate a more "friendly" face for the league. After all, who could hate Steve Nash... a nice inoffensive guy who plays an exciting game and gets his teammates involved. All well and good, except for the glaring fact that Nash is not an MVP-level talent. Never was, never will be. That he "won" the award with a 15.5ppg average over a legend like Shaq is one of the enduring travesties in league history.
In 2006, when he had a better statistical year, the writers couldn't bring themselves to admit their mistake, so they compounded it by "awarding" him another one.
Just a ridiculous situation that has forever tarnished the meaning of the MVP award. Who can really take it seriously now?
2005 if I had to pick one. He jump started that team and he was the engine that ran it. Without him all those guys were lost deers staring at headlights. Combine that with the fact that he lead his team to 60 or so wins in a very tough Western Conference it's hard to say he didn't deserve it.
He definitely deserved one of the two for what he did, just not two.
I don't agree with the premise of choosing which MVP Nash deserved less. He didn't "deserve" either, as several people have already posted.
The '05 MVP fraud goes back to Ron Artest, the Palace Brawl and Dictator Stern's mandate to designate a more "friendly" face for the league. After all, who could hate Steve Nash... a nice inoffensive guy who plays an exciting game and gets his teammates involved. All well and good, except for the glaring fact that Nash is not an MVP-level talent. Never was, never will be. That he "won" the award with a 15.5ppg average over a legend like Shaq is one of the enduring travesties in league history.
In 2006, when he had a better statistical year, the writers couldn't bring themselves to admit their mistake, so they compounded it by "awarding" him another one.
Just a ridiculous situation that has forever tarnished the meaning of the MVP award. Who can really take it seriously now?
Do you have any real proof or did you just ass_ume that?
Here's a better question, why do so many people hate Nash?
Agree. I was on the Nash MVP bandwagon early in 2005, there's no doubt in my mind that he was the man.
In 2006 Kobe was so spectacular, so amazing, so unstoppable, so history making that you HAD to give it to him, there only 2 reasons he didn't win it;
1. Colorado case really hurt his image
2. Steve Nash is White.....I hate to go "THERE" but let's be real....the writers are the ones who vote for MVP.......probably 90+ % white and never played serious ball.
Agree. I was on the Nash MVP bandwagon early in 2005, there's no doubt in my mind that he was the man.
In 2006 Kobe was so spectacular, so amazing, so unstoppable, so history making that you HAD to give it to him, there only 2 reasons he didn't win it;
1. Colorado case really hurt his image
2. Steve Nash is White.....I hate to go "THERE" but let's be real....the writers are the ones who vote for MVP.......probably 90+ % white and never played serious ball.
How do you make that kind of a statement without laughing?
Re: Which MVP did Steve Nash deserve more?
