They said Tony Parker was in the MVP discussion. How freaking biased can you be? He also said Billups is better than Nash in the MVP race bc he outplayed him a few weeks ago. This is so ridiculous..
I think he should be mentioned as someone who has had a tremendous season and helped his team greatly to have the season they had. Keep in mind that Duncan has been troubled by injuries during the year, and the team has still managed to play at a very high level. I dont think he should win the award, obviously, but similar to Kidd, I think he should be brought up in the conversation. Now Im not saying either one of those guys should win it, because there are clearly more deserving guys, but both have had great seasons and their teams have been very succesful in part due to their performance.
How is Parker not in the MVP discussion? What is the best team in the West? The Spurs. Who has been their best player this year? Tony Parker. That should count for something.The Billups thing is a joke though, because although he is the guy that runs it for them, Ben Wallace is more important on the other end, Rip Hamilton is equally importnat as a scorer, and Rasheed Wallace is surprisingly a comparable lockerroom leader. That team is just so good, any PG could have some success there
I think Billups is the leader of that team, but I do agree that he shouldnt win the award because of the help he has around him..He has had a great year, but I dont consider him an MVP because of it..If Detroit wound up winning 70, however, I think he would have gotten alot more consideration. I think he has had a great year,but there are players that are more desrvant in my opinion..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KMart @ Apr 9 2006, 04:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How is Parker not in the MVP discussion? What is the best team in the West? The Spurs. Who has been their best player this year? Tony Parker. That should count for something.The Billups thing is a joke though, because although he is the guy that runs it for them, Ben Wallace is more important on the other end, Rip Hamilton is equally importnat as a scorer, and Rasheed Wallace is surprisingly a comparable lockerroom leader. That team is just so good, any PG could have some success there</div> He isn't putting up the numbers...he's not the NBA's 'most valuable player'...come on.
Why do you guys think Valuable implies you have to be the best player? It doesn't. Steve Nash wasn't the best player last year, not even top 5, but he won it. When Tim Duncan won the MVP in 02-03, KG had a better individual seasonWhen Charles Barkley won the MVP in 92-93, was he the best player in the league?You don't have to be the best to win MVP
I personally think that Mr. Nbadogmatist is Biased against the spurs because he hates them but thats just me.......and u have to be more specific about the article......they know that he wont win it but alot of guys are in the discussion......hes like Chauncey to where his stats arent AMAZING but look what is team is doing even if he does have a good supporting cast.....
haha, adam.. i'm not biased with something like this. I may not like them, but i'm not stupid. He's not in the discussion at all IMO, they just wanted to throw him in there. I honestly don't think Chauncey should be considered either. It's between Nash, Dirk, Kobe, maybe Elton Brand and LeBron.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KMart @ Apr 9 2006, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Why do you guys think Valuable implies you have to be the best player? It doesn't. Steve Nash wasn't the best player last year, not even top 5, but he won it. When Tim Duncan won the MVP in 02-03, KG had a better individual seasonWhen Charles Barkley won the MVP in 92-93, was he the best player in the league?You don't have to be the best to win MVP</div>And Kidd should have won it over both of them that year..
Dude, some people are freaking obsessed with the Spurs. In fact, last year, some parents named their child Tonyduncanginobli, or something similar to that, but remember...There are ALWAYS candidates included in the race who are just mentioned, but aren't expected to win.Parker isn't even the best player on his team, lol...
I dont even think of Tony Parker being MVP. I dont even think of Tony Parker being the leader on his team. Maybe the best, but I think the Spurs would be pretty good without him. That's not the case with Kobe/LeBron/Nash etc.
Living in SA for college, I can tell you that this city is in love with the Spurs, so it doesn't surprise me the newspaper would do something like that. I knew SA was basketball crazy, but I didn't know they were this obsessed with their Spurs until I moved here for college.Hell, earlier this season I wore my Amare Stoudemire jersey to go out one night, and a lot of places wouldn't even let me in because I was wearing that. Anyway, back to topic. Parker should be mentioned, but he isn't one of the top 5 or 6 candidates for the MVP trophy. Billups would be higher if the Pistons hadn't slipped off a little bit before the All-Star Break, and if they still had a chance to break 70 or 72 wins.
He can be considered in mayeb to the ten or so for mvp. But he wasnt better than Nash, Dirk, and most of the last couple of guys.
Tony Parker will be mentioned. Remember last year, how PJ Brown got a third place vote? I'm sure Tony will get at least 1 person to vote for him. There is no chance that he can get the trophy though.
Tony Parker probably will be mentioned and get a view votes but its hard to say that parker, chauncey and wade should be MVP, you could probably make a case for nash on this one too. Parker has Duncan, Wade has Shaq, and Chauncey has the rest of the Piston starters, even though Duncan and Shaq haven't been playing like they normally do they both not so long ago were the being considered for MVP of the very same team they are with now. Nash has Marion also who leads the Suns in a majority of their categories but Nash also has a bunch of players that are doing great along side of him that were never were really good players.
that's ridiculous. Nash makes those players better. Did you notice how little those players did without nash? Diaw? House? Jones? if you replace that team with even a good pg, they don't even make .500
