Nash wins MVP

after GAME 2... id say nash is getting a little air headed...
did you see when he shoved sasha for no reason tsk tsk

 

People didnt have him on their list because obviously they just dont like him. Even if they know he is the MVP they wont put them on their list. Lakers are the youngest team in the league and are 7th in the WEST that is not bad. WIthout Kobe they would be Knicks/Blazers status. He deserves more credit not just for scoring by his defense which I dont see from other MVP candidates..

 

Here's what me, and the rest of the world have to say to Steve Nash, courtesy of Kobe Bryant:

 

For those of you who said WIN. KOBE IS WINNING!!!!!!! I hope the Lakers win this series and put those damn Kobe haters to shame. Thats what it is. I honestly believe that Kobe deserves it. The Lakers are winning!!! It was a total 180 from last season. Im really disappointed that Steve took the award.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">No worries guys its a pump for the Lakers to come out explosive and beat the Suns tonight....this is the jumpstart for the Lakers to win the series...guarateed. What's also upseting is that Phil Jackson didn't win the Coach of the Year award...which also sucks or had any high considerations. </div>

Amen. Let's leave it at that. Anyone who know's anything about basketball and can judge a player on basketball and not their reputation know's that 8> 13.

I also think that whoever said this (sorry I forgot to look who wrote this) is absolutely right- Kobe Bryant and the entire Lakers organization is pissed he didn't get the award, and I think they are all going to come out swinging the rest of the playoffs in order to prove everybody wrong.

Smush Know's Kobe's making him money right now in terms of a soon to be long-term contract, Lamar know's he's on the verge of actually becoming Kobe's Pippen, and Luke's just thrilled he's actually playing. That's not to mention Kwame who is suddenly everybody's favorite surprise...

I think the announcement of "MVP" today made the Lakers feel like underdogs once again, a stigma that Kobe and his teammates have relished and thrived upon all season.

Here's to that season's continued success.

 

Sorry for taking 3 of the last 4 comment spots but I found this on SLAMonline.com and thought it brought up some very good points:

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">NASHTY
(posted Wednesday, April 26, 2006 -- posted at 6:00 p.m.)

by Khalid Salaam

Did you know that the only other point guard to win at least two MVP awards is Magic Johnson? So are we now saying that Steve Nash is on that level? Winning his second MVP award guarantees that Nash is getting in the Hall of Fame and will join the short list of great pg's of all time. Two years ago he was never considered that kind of player; he was just a good passer and scorer who was the 2nd or 3rd best player on a soft, only-thing-we-can-do-is-score team. It would be like Rashard Lewis all of a sudden going to a team that used a system that covers up his weaknesses and that team surprises everyone, wins a lot of games and he gets the MVP Award. Then because of the power of this system he is able to sustain his level for another year and then wins it again.

Are you saying that you couldn't recognize that this is the same player just playing in a different scheme? Are you saying you would reward him as being the most important and best player in the L? Because that's what is happening with Nash.

We're getting hustled here.

I'd like to give notice that Steve Nash is a great player and deserving of being a contender, but him winning back-to-back MVP Awards just seems wrong to me. Winning it again is basically saying he's the best player in the League and does anyone agree with that? Nash is a notoriously bad defender -- not just average. Has there ever been a MVP candidate who has almost no effect on the other side of the court?

Furthermore it doesn't make sense any that Suns Coach Mike D'Antoni didn't win COY again if they were going to reward Nash again. This guy is a system player and the fact that the League can't see this is a joke. Because what exactly is the reward for? Best team record? No. Highest scoring average? No. The player other teams fear the most? No. He did lead the L in assists but averaged more turnovers than Iverson and his AST/TO ratio was lower than Luke Ridnour of all people.

I'm not saying it's political, I'm just saying under what context do you give it to him over Billups and Kobe? Nash is a good player, yes, but he's not even the best player at his position (who wouldn't rather have J Kidd and Billups?). So how is he the best player in the League?!

Something weird just happened.

</div>

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting ilive4ball:</div><div class="quote_post">Sorry for taking 3 of the last 4 comment spots but I found this on SLAMonline.com and thought it brought up some very good points:</div>

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting spawn:</div><div class="quote_post">Please note that I'm not biased but I can easily counter your points.

First, Cleveland is in the Eastern conference which barely held 5 teams over
.500 in the playoffs (correct me if I'm wrong, it was either 4 or 5 but yeah, point is, it's WEAK).
Even though the East is so weak, Lebron's team, clearly with a much more talented supporting cast (Larry Hughes, Marshall, Jones, Snow, Brazilian) still mangaed only 5 more wins...in the EASTERN CONFERENCE. You do realize that, given the current record in the WESTERN CONFERENCE, facing superior opponents more frequently, the Lakers would have been fifth in the East? (Just with thier current record)
Now, imagine if the Lakers got to face teams like the Raptors, Hawks, Knicks, and others two more times a year? How much more victories would that equal to? Sure, it's a hypothetical situation but it's definetly not far fetched. If the Lakers were in the East, given thier current record, they could have definetly finished 3rd or 4th.
</div>

Los Angeles is on the West coast, so they are in the Western Conference, there's nothing you can do about that. I sure hope MVP voting isn't supposed to be done on hypotheticals. Who cares what conference they are in. If it was done on hypotheticals, just imagine how many pts Dirk would have had if they played in the Eastern Conference. Just imagine how much better Steve Nash would have done in the Eastern Conference. It's irrevelant because we will never know.

About the Cavaliers supporting cast, are you seriously saying Larry Hughes? He didn't even play in half of the games. Donyell Marshall came off of the bench for 9 ppg, Damon Jones's 6 ppg off of the bench with 38.7% FG, Snow's 4.8 ppg and 4.2 apg, and Vareajeo, who only played in 48 games all year????(and in the games he did play he avg 15 mpg) What a great supporting cast that you mentioned. Big Z is a good supporter, but wouldn't you rather have 15 9 and 6 assists over 16 and 8 and 2 blocks? Flip Murray was good after they traded for him, but he only played in 28 games, but he had only avg 10 ppg in 1 season previously so he isn't really that good. Drew Gooden is good role player for his 11 and 8. Basically the only ones you can mention is Z, Gooden, and Marshall.

I mean if you mention those guys what about Brian Cook's 8 pts, Luke Walton's 5 pts and 4 boards, Devean George's 6 pts and 4 boards, Kwame Brown's 7 pts and 7 rebounds, Smush Parker's 12 pts 4 assists and 2 steals, and Chris Mihm(played in more games then Hughes and Vareajeo)'s 10 pts and 6 boards. I honestly don't buy how "bad" Kobe's supporting cast is. They are bad at times, but they are young, they are bound to be inconsistent.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting LO7:</div><div class="quote_post">Magic and Jordan are the only guards who have won back 2 back MVP's! I dont even feel right mentioning nash in that group. When was the last time a player won the MVP award while scoring under 20 ppg? Thats easy... Nash did! for tehsecond straight year.</div>

Oh, I guess Duncan's back-to-back MVP's don't count then?

 

duncan is a forward

 

back in 2003/2002 or something when tracy mcgrady averaged 32 points per game, he had the same season as kobe is having right now minus the 81 points, he didn't win MVP so kobe doesn't deserve it if he didn't, and t-mac took way less shots too remember that

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting whomikejones:</div><div class="quote_post">back in 2003/2002 or something when tracy mcgrady averaged 32 points per game, he had the same season as kobe is having right now minus the 81 points, he didn't win MVP so kobe doesn't deserve it if he didn't, and t-mac took way less shots too remember that</div>

Kobe shot the same FG% as T-Mac, so thats irrelevant. Even though he took more shots he still shot as well has McGrady. He also managed to get his teammates involved as much and he finished with 3 extra wins and an extra place ahead in the standings in a harder conference.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">
Los Angeles is on the West coast, so they are in the Western Conference, there's nothing you can do about that. I sure hope MVP voting isn't supposed to be done on hypotheticals. Who cares what conference they are in. If it was done on hypotheticals, just imagine how many pts Dirk would have had if they played in the Eastern Conference. Just imagine how much better Steve Nash would have done in the Eastern Conference. It's irrevelant because we will never know.

About the Cavaliers supporting cast, are you seriously saying Larry Hughes? He didn't even play in half of the games. Donyell Marshall came off of the bench for 9 ppg, Damon Jones's 6 ppg off of the bench with 38.7% FG, Snow's 4.8 ppg and 4.2 apg, and Vareajeo, who only played in 48 games all year????(and in the games he did play he avg 15 mpg) What a great supporting cast that you mentioned. Big Z is a good supporter, but wouldn't you rather have 15 9 and 6 assists over 16 and 8 and 2 blocks? Flip Murray was good after they traded for him, but he only played in 28 games, but he had only avg 10 ppg in 1 season previously so he isn't really that good. Drew Gooden is good role player for his 11 and 8. Basically the only ones you can mention is Z, Gooden, and Marshall.

I mean if you mention those guys what about Brian Cook's 8 pts, Luke Walton's 5 pts and 4 boards, Devean George's 6 pts and 4 boards, Kwame Brown's 7 pts and 7 rebounds, Smush Parker's 12 pts 4 assists and 2 steals, and Chris Mihm(played in more games then Hughes and Vareajeo)'s 10 pts and 6 boards. I honestly don't buy how "bad" Kobe's supporting cast is. They are bad at times, but they are young, they are bound to be inconsistent.
</div>

If you look at the Lakers players in comparison with the Cavaliers players, you can easily see that the Cavs have a much more talented supporting cast based off the player's past reputations. Take that as you will, but that's how supporting casts are often judged, based off the players potentials and past exposures. Donyell Marshall, regardless of what his numbers in Cleveland became, is a much better option then say...Luke Walton (although Luke is getting better). Big Z is a much more reliable option then Chris Mihm. Damon Jones is a much better spot up shooter (which is why he was signed) then Smush Parker and it can be assumed that more teams would sign Damon rather then Smush, right?

Now, regardless of all that let me ask you something.

You say the numbers of the Lakers cast isnt that bad and you paste a bunch of low numbers from the Cavs players. Well, since Lebron is just that damn good of a player, the one who makes "players around him better" (wheras Kobe supposedly doesn't), why all the low numbers from his surrounding players, who in retrospect, are supposedly supposed to be more talented?
I'm not hating on Lebron, but rather playing devil's advocate.

Just think, if Kobe can muster this much out of the Laker's current lineups (and I give credit to LO for this, as well as Kobe's ability to set up teammates), then what could he do with an actually "talented" supporting cast?

I won't base everything off hypotheticals, but you say you'd rather have 31 7 7 and over 35, 5 and 5 right? So Kobe over Lebron? (in the MVP race atleast).

Kobe led a bunch of "nobodies" or rather "less talented" individuals to a 7th seeded playoff birth IN THE WEST with 45 wins (and yes, the Conferences do matter when you're talking about wins, because the West is easily more difficult so that arguement goes in Kobe's favor) while only having 5 less wins then Lebrons. So doesn't that make him a more likely canditate for MVP then Lebron?

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">
Oh, I guess Duncan's back-to-back MVP's don't count then?
</div>

Duncan's not a guard

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">
- It's odd how Steve Nash has two MVPs and Shaq (the best player this decade) only has one?? i guess this goes to show how people take Shaq for granted..
</div>

Well there are reasons for that.

There is no way Shaq would have gotten the MVP at any point from his Orlando Magic days till 1998, the last year of the Bulls Dynasty, simply because Karl and MJ were much better choices back then and were superior players and had superior teams then any of Shaq's.

In 1999, Karl Malone posted up excellent numbers while leading the Jazz to the best record in the league (tied with the Spurs), thus justifying why he won it and Shaq didn't.

In 2000, Shaq won it for being the best player of the best team in the regular season, simple as that.

In 2001, Allen Iveron's Sixers took the league by storm and had the 2nd best record IN THE LEAGUE, behind only the Spurs. The little guy, A.I was leading the way and he simply won over the fans and the media voters with his phenonemonal season and I don't think nobody could have said that he deserved it any less then Shaq.

In 2002, Tim Duncan clearly should have been the MVP as the Lakers posted a better record then the year before but were rampant with injuries (particularly to O'Neal), thus pretty much securing it for Tim Duncan who had a phenomnal season. Actually, Jason Kidd should have won this MVP award for he took a down and out Nets team from the brink of existence to the NBA Finals.

In 2003, Shaq was obviously slowly on the decline, ballooning up in weight and personal complaints about EVERYTHING. Tim Duncan had yet another phenomenal season while leading the Spurs to the top yet again, so therefore it can be justified as to why he won it.

In 2004, KG led the way to an excellent Wolves record while still maintaining amazing numbers, and therefore won the MVP. Shaq on the other hand, was slowed down by injuries once again and definetly did not post up MVP worthy numbers, as he posted career lows in points and rebounds (mostly because this was the "4 Hall Of Famers" L.A team).

In 2005, perhaps Shaq's last chance to win the MVP award, he lost out to Steve Nash, who can be argued as deserving of the award and I am not one to disagree, because I really believed he dserved it.

By 2006, Shaq was obviously in the decline (atleast in the regular season) and there was no way he'd win the award with his incosistency.

Basically, I think it boils down to the fact that, after the year 2000, Shaq would not try as hard during the regular seaso nand turn it on during the playoffs, which isn't excatyl the best mothod to get the MVP of the regular season award.

I don't think the one MVP is a insult to Shaq at all because for each year he didn't receive it, arguements can easily be made for the players who won it over him, because they did give much more effort and importance to thier team IN THE REGULAR SEASON.

 

All I am saying is if your gonna screw kobe like that, atleast let him be the runner up. I mean 4th on the list over James and Nowitzki?

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">He deserves to be there, he has the stats and wins to back it up.</div>

True but so does Kobe with the stats and wins. LeBron is great don't get me wrong but for Kobe to not even be in the top 3 is insulting....

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Don't even sit their and tell me Laker fans arn't biased. If you don't think so, I'm not going to waste my time debating this with you. </div>
I cannot believe what you just said. WHAT FAN ISN'T BIASED!!!!!????? Thats why they are a fan.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I expect posters to be neutral and be knowledable and don't assume everyone are Kobe haters like spawn and shape do.</div>
While I never said Kobe should win it, I said I hope he wins it, I still think he should atleast get better recognition than that. For you to say otherwise truly does make you a kobe hater.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> I honestly don't buy how "bad" Kobe's supporting cast is.</div>
Just because they have decent stats doesn't mean they are good supporting players. Look at the Knicks stats per game. Do they have a good team? Pfff. At this point this thread has become an official Kobe hater fest. I don't see why either, we people in the laker forum don't go to the Suns forum and diss Nash, or the Cavs forum and call him garbage compared to Kobe and he didn't get enough wins to be an MVP. Do you people even know what MVP means? If you know what it means then you know Kobe should be the runner up at the very least. Hell even third I would be comfortable.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting spawn:</div><div class="quote_post">If you look at the Lakers players in comparison with the Cavaliers players, you can easily see that the Cavs have a much more talented supporting cast based off the player's past reputations. Take that as you will, but that's how supporting casts are often judged, based off the players potentials and past exposures. Donyell Marshall, regardless of what his numbers in Cleveland became, is a much better option then say...Luke Walton (although Luke is getting better). Big Z is a much more reliable option then Chris Mihm. Damon Jones is a much better spot up shooter (which is why he was signed) then Smush Parker and it can be assumed that more teams would sign Damon rather then Smush, right? </div>

I'd rather have Smush, since he is a better defender and not so one dimensional. Wouldn't you say that Lamar Odom is more talented then Big Z?(best bigs for both teams) Wouldn't you say that Smush is having a better season then Eric Snow? Donyell Marshall and Drew Gooden are more talented than Kwame Brown and Brian Cook. Like I said in my previous post the only guys worthy of mentioning as good supporting cast are Z, Gooden, Marshall, Flip. I would say LA has Lamar Odom, Smush Parker, Kwame Brown, and Brian Cook. If you are talking about past reputations, wasn't Lamar Odom the #1 option in Wade's rookie season and Odom's only season in Miami? Kwame Brown was the #1 pick. Smush and Brian Cook haven't had a past reputation though.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting spawn:</div><div class="quote_post">Now, regardless of all that let me ask you something.

You say the numbers of the Lakers cast isnt that bad and you paste a bunch of low numbers from the Cavs players. Well, since Lebron is just that damn good of a player, the one who makes "players around him better" (wheras Kobe supposedly doesn't), why all the low numbers from his surrounding players, who in retrospect, are supposedly supposed to be more talented?
I'm not hating on Lebron, but rather playing devil's advocate.</div>

I never said that, so I don't know why you are directing it at me. Lebron does make people around him better, which is why you have heard of some of these guys, same with Kobe. Most of these players weren't well known before they came in with Kobe or Lebron. They both make players better, but judging by Lebron's assist total over Kobe's, I would say that Lebron passes the ball around more and gets his players involved more. If Kobe plays like he did last night, then they are going to be a tough team to beat. He stayed within the offense and trusted that his teammates will make the shots. Sometimes Kobe doesn't get his teammates involved, whereas Lebron normally always gets them involved(hence why his assists are higher). I still think the Lakers supporting cast is at least close to the Cavs. I don't think it's really that much of a difference like everyone is making it out to be.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting spawn:</div><div class="quote_post">Just think, if Kobe can muster this much out of the Laker's current lineups (and I give credit to LO for this, as well as Kobe's ability to set up teammates), then what could he do with an actually "talented" supporting cast?</div>

I would say his lineup is talented. Did you even read my post? You are acting like I was dissing his supporting cast and saying that Kobe can't make others better, I wasn't I think it's good.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting spawn:</div><div class="quote_post">I won't base everything off hypotheticals, but you say you'd rather have 31 7 7 and over 35, 5 and 5 right? So Kobe over Lebron? (in the MVP race atleast).</div>

Actually Lebron had 31 7 and 7 and Kobe had 35 5 and 5, so I am in fact hinting at picking Lebron over Kobe in the MVP race.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Kobe led a bunch of "nobodies" or rather "less talented" individuals to a 7th seeded playoff birth IN THE WEST with 45 wins (and yes, the Conferences do matter when you're talking about wins, because the West is easily more difficult so that arguement goes in Kobe's favor) while only having 5 less wins then Lebrons. So doesn't that make him a more likely canditate for MVP then Lebron?</div>

Conferences matter yes, if they were tied a Western Conference player would have the advantage or even 1 or 2 wins behind, I agree, but you can't hypothetically give the Lakers 6 more wins(to go ahead of Lebron) if they were in the Eastern Conference when you are making your MVP vote. That is just too many to even think of that point. I would still give Lebron the edge in wins. If that was the case, I would give the MVP to Steve Nash or Dirk Nowitzki even more, because they both would have 60+ wins if hypothetically they were in the Eastern Conference.

WHY ARE YOU SAYING THAT THEY AREN'T TALENTED. STOP LISTENING TO ESPN AND ALL THE ANALYSTS SAYING THAT IT'S JUST KOBE. His supporting cast isn't that damn bad.

If you want bad, check out the Magic's supporting cast for Tmac in the Pistons series 3 years ago. Rookie Drew Gooden was our 2nd best player. We had Andrew Declerq and Jacque Vaughn(might be mistaken, it might have been Tyronn Lue, got those years mixed up) starting. Pat Garrity was coming off of the bench. Rookie Gordan Giricek was our starting SG. So basically we had Tmac, 2 rookies, 2 scrubs starting. We did have Darrel Armstrong coming off the bench though.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">There is no way Shaq would have gotten the MVP at any point from his Orlando Magic days till 1998, the last year of the Bulls Dynasty, simply because Karl and MJ were much better choices back then and were superior players and had superior teams then any of Shaq's.</div>

Did you forget that Shaq led the Magic to the Finals? He coulda won an MVP then. And what about MJ's 2 year hiatus, he coulda easily won an MVP in there. With Hakeem the Dream there though he didn't win it, but it wasn't MJ's dynasty. They honestly never really crossed paths, because when MJ got back to his 3 peat level, Shaq had already moved to the Lakers.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting spawn:</div><div class="quote_post">Basically, I think it boils down to the fact that, after the year 2000, Shaq would not try as hard during the regular seaso nand turn it on during the playoffs, which isn't excatyl the best mothod to get the MVP of the regular season award.

I don't think the one MVP is a insult to Shaq at all because for each year he didn't receive it, arguements can easily be made for the players who won it over him, because they did give much more effort and importance to thier team IN THE REGULAR SEASON.</div>

I agree with you there. Shaq saved himself for the postseason.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I cannot believe what you just said. WHAT FAN ISN'T BIASED!!!!!????? Thats why they are a fan.</div>

Because some other Laker fan was spazzing out and it sounded like he was trying to tell me he wasn't biased.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">While I never said Kobe should win it, I said I hope he wins it, I still think he should atleast get better recognition than that. For you to say otherwise truly does make you a kobe hater.</div>

Just in case you were wondering, I had Nash first, Kobe second, Dirk third, and LeBron fourth. But you know, I'm a Kobe hater, so it doesn't matter what I think of Kobe.


<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">At this point this thread has become an official Kobe hater fest.</div>

Get out of here with that garbage. Who is 'hating'?

 

I don't know about most of the people, here but if Kobe doesn't finish 1st in the MVP voting why does it even matter?

Also, the reason why Kobe didn't win MVP is SIMPLY because his team was only a 7th seed. Getting that team a 7th seed is an accomplisment itself, I understand that because just look at the team, Parker, Cook, Walton etc. But that's just the way it is, if you're not a elite team you shouldn't get MVP. You have no idea how much I think AI deserved MVP's when he was really alone in Philly, but as long as his team wasn't on top I've come to understand he didn't deserve it after all. The same applies to Kobe, he and the fans just need to suck it up and realize that it just didn't cut it. 35 PPG, leading this "horrible" team to a very, very, very respectable record is all nice and all, but as long as you're not a elite team OR have at LEAST 50 wins you just doesn't the MVP. Simple as that. It's been like this for ages, so it wouldn't be fair for all that to change just because a player scored 81 Points and lead a poor supporting cast to the Playoffs. Like I mentioned guys like AI, Barkley others has had MAJOR individual seasons and lead their team to the Playoffs(low seed) and while they were in a way deserving for the MVP, they didn't get it just because of their seeding. So why should Kobe be any special?

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Kobe led a bunch of "nobodies" or rather "less talented" individuals to a 7th seeded playoff birth IN THE WEST with 45 wins (and yes, the Conferences do matter when you're talking about wins, because the West is easily more difficult so that arguement goes in Kobe's favor) while only having 5 less wins then Lebrons. So doesn't that make him a more likely canditate for MVP then Lebron?</div>

That's BS. Conference doesn't mean a thing. All that matters is the WINS. When you look at the record it doesn't say how many wins you got in the East or West, it's OVERALL. Just how the MVP should be decided, OVERALL. Not by 81 point games or highlights, it should be looked at from a OVERALL standard. If your in the West, tough look for you, if your in the East hey, you get a better shot. At the end of the day it doesn't matter. You just have to live with it and play.