2009-10 NBA Basketball

[Commander Vaughn]

^That's more my point. Nash's numbers have been relatively constant over the years, regardless of the talent level surrounding him. His numbers didn't dramatically change when he joined the Suns. His assists increased by 3 per game, and turned it over one more time per game, but the other stats didn't really fluctuate.

Thats exactly what you would expect when you take a great player and put him on a team with better talent.

 

[Galactus]

How exactly did the Suns have better talent than the Mavs. The Mavs not only went to the Finals, but they beat Nash to do it. There is nothing great about Nash. In order to be great you have to be the best at your position. Are you telling me that you think Nash is one of the best point guards ever?

 

[Commander Vaughn]

The MVP isn't a "best ever" type of award. Was Nash the best point guard the years he won? I would argue yes. Kidd is up there too, but he was starting his decline the years Nash won. Nash's stats really are second to none in the two years he won the award. Plus, he took a team of essentially the same players that went 29-53 before his arrival to 62-20 after his arrival.

And what other players would you give the MVP to in '05 and '06? Kobe? Duncan? Wade? All great players, and in the case of Duncan and Wade great players on great teams.

Kobe played well, but didn't improve his team. In 2003-2004, the Lakers went to the Finals, lost, and Shaq and Phil Jackson left. And the Lakers struggled for few years. If Kobe was MVP-type material, his team wouldn't have struggled as badly as it did after their departure.

 

[Galactus]

Did I miss something or did Kobe win the MVP award and the Finals?

You could have given the award to anyone of the top players in those years and they would have deserved it. The MVP was never, and since has never been about making your team better. It is about being the best player in the league. Period. Nash has never and will never be the best player in the NBA. All this making your team better stuff is just fluff.

If you can honestly tell me that if you were building a team, with your money to spend, that you would pick Nash those MVP years over any number of other players in their prime in those years, I will hope that you get a chance to do it. The Suns under Nash accomplished just as much as they did under Kidd, nothing.

 

[Commander Vaughn]

The MVP award is about the player who is most valuable to their team. Without Nash, the Suns were terrible. The next year, with Nash, they won more than twice as many games.

It's less about winning titles, and more about the success thats attributable solely to a particular player. For example, I'd have given the MVP to Dwayne Wade last year, not Lebron. Wade was largely absent during Miami's 15 win season. Then he comes back and the Heat win almost four times as many games. That's an MVP performance.

Nash had the same affect on Phoenix when he first won, and no other player had a similar affect on a team the following year, and the Suns were still successful, so he got the award again.

I don't see the MVP as being the best player in the league. A lot of the time the MVP and best player are the same person, but they don't have to be. The MVP is the player who makes the biggest difference for his team.

 

[Galactus]

Until recent years as I cited a page back, the MVP was always about the best player. When they pick a finals MVP it is the best player of the series. They pulled this thing out for Nash and I remember the sports writers playing with the whole, what is value really mean thing. Like I said in baseball, they tired that stuff so they wouldn't have to give the award to A-Rod when he was on the losing Rangers, but Baseball runs a tighter ship than Basketball and they would never go for that.

Like I said those MVP's were bogus and everyone says it now

 

[Commander Vaughn]

There is no written rule saying the MVP goes to the best player in the league. And it isn't isn't called the "Best Player Award". It goes to the most valuable player. Best does not always equal most valuable.

You can say you disagree with the selection of Nash. I disagreed with Lebron last year. But it doesn't make the award any less legitimate.

 

[Galactus]

Well that is true. The award is valid because that is how the award is done. But the point I am trying to get across to you is that Most Valuable Player always equaled Best Player. Most Valuable Player sounded better than Best Player I guess. Now in Baseball, which votes on the award after the season is over the award is suppose to go to the most valuable player on a top team.

But the MVP always goes to the best player of a game, series, finals, and season in Basketball. Since it is sportswriters making the decision it is always flakey anyway because they vote for people they like and not for people they dislike which is the major flaw of the award in my opinion. I would prefer if the GM's picked the best player because they are the most honest in the bunch.

 

[Commander Vaughn]

I do understand that traditionally, the MVP goes to the best player. But things change and evolve over time, and we've got a different definition of league MVP today then we did a decade ago. Change isn't necessarily bad though.

 

[Galactus]

I don't the definition changed except for those two years that Nash won. The other years it was the player having the best year on one of the best teams. When someone else wins like Nash did I will change my mind, until then it was a aberration.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Until recent years as I cited a page back, the MVP was always about the best player. When they pick a finals MVP it is the best player of the series. They pulled this thing out for Nash and I remember the sports writers playing with the whole, what is value really mean thing. Like I said in baseball, they tired that stuff so they wouldn't have to give the award to A-Rod when he was on the losing Rangers, but Baseball runs a tighter ship than Basketball and they would never go for that.

Like I said those MVP's were bogus and everyone says it now

You need to read a book by Wilt Chamberlain if you think they always gave the award to the best player. The amount of times he got passed over by Bill Russell genuinely pissed him off (for the vast majority of his career, he should have gotten it every season. Jordan is the same way). They certainly don't give it to the best player always - never have.

 

[Galactus]

Let me clarify. When I say the best player, I mean arguably the best player. As I have already stated, the award is given by sports writers, who generally want to give it to the best player, in other years it is different. I know Wilt should have gotten it a lot, same thing with Jordan, but writers get on these movements and politics get into it, which is why I said you should just let GM pick by secret ballet. I really am amazed that the leagues actually let sports writers pick at all instead of them doing it themselves.

 

[gblews]

^That's more my point. Nash's numbers have been relatively constant over the years, regardless of the talent level surrounding him. His numbers didn't dramatically change when he joined the Suns. His assists increased by 3 per game, and turned it over one more time per game, but the other stats didn't really fluctuate.

You've created a straw man argument and are going to town with it. I never said Nash wasn't a good point guard. My point was that he is WAY overrated because he won two league MVP awards without ever having raised the level of any of his teams (into?) past the conference finals.

Further, Nash's "numbers" are as empty as Charles Barkley's were. Just about any "good" (true) point guard could put up Nash-like numbers given the array of offensive talent Nash has always had to work with and a system which kept the ball in his hands. An assist is simply a pass that leads to a basket. After all of his great "numbers", and his 2 MVP awards, Steve still has not gotten a team into the Finals.

Thats exactly what you would expect when you take a great player and put him on a team with better talent.

Bro, can we put this to rest and get back to the real argument; that Steve is one of the most overrated players in NBA history. Hell, everyone knows he can get assists every night. When Mr. Multiple MVP gets to the Finals a couple of times, I'll take notice.

 

[gblews]

There is no written rule saying the MVP goes to the best player in the league. And it isn't isn't called the "Best Player Award". It goes to the most valuable player. Best does not always equal most valuable.

Here's my idea of what "league" MVP means to me (and it IS league MVP), It means a player who would be the most valuable player on the most teams in the league. Now I know the MVP voters don't see it this way, but they should.

This criteria would have eliminated Nash from winning the award because he was merely the Suns MVP. If you'd put him on the Lakers the years he won, he'd have been a solid #2, same with the Cavs, same with the Heat.

You can say you disagree with the selection of Nash. I disagreed with Lebron last year. But it doesn't make the award any less legitimate.

What has tainted the award forever for me has been manipulating the meaning of the MVP to justify voting for a lesser player (Steve Nash).

Imagine, a truly great player like Kobe Bryant has only won one MVP and Steve Nash has two. It's positively laughable. Dwayne Wade, another truly great player has no MVP's and STEVE NASH HAS TWO!!!!

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Anyone have any thoughts on the Sixers' signing of Iverson?

 

[Galactus]

It is a shame that he had to sign for a non guaranteed contract. But an out of shape AI but up 11 points and 6 assists in 37 minutes. That alone says a lot about the man. I hope he comes back to form and gets them in the playoffs.

 

[nealish116]

The Pacers are on their way to their worst season in decades. There's talent on the roster, but they cannot put anything together consistently. Coach O'Brien appears to have no clue how to manage the young guys minutes versus the veterans. Is the team building toward the future or trying to win now? Either way this team isn't going to the playoffs with poor coaching, terrible defense, and haphazard substitution patterns.

Now Danny Granger is out indefinitely after re-aggravating a deep heel bruise. What a year thus far. It's really quite disappointing for a team I thought could make the 8th seed in the East this year.

 

[Neroon]

Imagine, a truly great player like Kobe Bryant has only won one MVP and Steve Nash has two. It's positively laughable. Dwayne Wade, another truly great player has no MVP's and STEVE NASH HAS TWO!!!!

Kobe has played with markedly better talent. Ergo, as valuable as he is there are other players to pick up the slack when he has an off night. Dallas and Phoenix OTOH never had that luxury, so more responsibility fell on the few stars - like Nash - that they did have.

Would you be arguing this much if Kobe had three MVP awards?

Anyone have any thoughts on the Sixers' signing of Iverson?

I think it's more desperation than anything else. Bringing "THe Answer" back to Philly may sell tickets though, and that's always a good thing. It will be interesting what role he plays on this team. I suspect if he could accept being a bench player, a part-timer, or someone like Vinnie "The Microwave" Johnson was for the Pistons then AI could look forward to a few more years in the league. As it is.... I just don't know how much it's going to help Philly.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Honestly, it'll help keep them in Basketball purgatory if that's what they wanted (it could push them to a 7th or 8th seed and a first round loss). I'd rather them lose big than win small right now and hopefully get a worthwhile draft pick. Iverson will sell tickets, though (probably the primary reason), and, if he does retire, it will be nice for him to do so as a Sixer.

I honestly expected him to go to a team that has a chance to win, I think he's one of those players that deserves a championship, but will never get one.

 

[Anthony Sabre]

I've watched Iverson since he was at Georgetown but never have been a fan of his. Can't agree with you on him deserving a championship but I can understand you wanting him to get one. I felt the same way about Barkley and Wilkins.

How about the Blazers nearly beating the Cavs with only a nine man roster? (Can't believe Oden is out again.) Cavs off to a bit of a rocky start, losing to teams they shouldn't.