I don't hate Steve Nash, regardless of what the replies to this post say.Is Steve Nash the only Most Valuable Player in NBA history where the team he left got better when he left?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fouled Out @ Jun 4 2006, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't hate Steve Nash, regardless of what the replies to this post say.Is Steve Nash the only Most Valuable Player in NBA history where the team he left got better when he left?</div>The Mavs didn't get better because he left, they got better because Avery Johnson started structuring them, making them work harder defensively and stopped them from making stupid mistakes. The year after he left, Avery Johnson's first year (for the last 18 games) they became much better. With dallas he was still putting up 14 points per game and almost 9 assists.
Yes, when Steve Nash left the Dallas Mavericks they made absolutely no additions or subtractions to their team. The Mavs are the exact same a when Steve Nash left - No difference
No... as GArenas said, Avery Johnson is responsible for molding the Mavericks into the team they are today. He began emphasizing defense, emphasizing the importance of each possession, helped Dirk transform from a soft seven-foot jump shooter into a versatile inside-outside shooter and banger, not to mention improve his defense and rebounding. Avery Johnson is responsible for this new-look Mavericks squad.Also, I read this article last night by Marc Stein concerning the Nash, Nowitzki and Cuban love-hate triangle, and it addressed whether or not Dallas would still be this good if they had kept Nash instead of letting him sign with Phoenix:<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>But what about the widespread theory that the Mavs wouldn't be as good as they are now had they kept Nash?Absolute nonsense.This is an increasingly popular theory in Dallas because Nash, over the years, became the primary scapegoat for the team's defensive woes of yore. What this theory conveniently overlooks is the list of long and rangy athletes Dallas has added since Nash's departure. He never got to play alongside Devin Harris or DeSagana Diop. He played with Nowitzki in his Irk days -- no D -- and with a center (Shawn Bradley) who was not trusted or respected by his teammates. As the Suns found out for half the regular season, until Kurt Thomas got hurt, Nash is a passable team defender if you have good defenders and athletes around him like Shawn Marion, Raja Bell, Boris Diaw and Thomas.The theory that Nash was somehow stunting his buddy's growth is hilarious when you say it out loud. Nowitzki would have expanded his game with or without Nash because (a) he's that good, and ( Johnson demanded it.Nash's departure, furthermore, didn't make this Dirk's team. That happened through Michael Finley's departure in the summer of 2005. Even though Finley willingly scaled back his game over the years as Nowitzki and Nash progressed, those two never treated the Mavs as anything other than Finley's team out of respect for the third shooter and elder statesman of a close-knit Big Three.Another myth: Harris wouldn't have the role he has now if Nash had stayed. Wrong. Harris, remember, was drafted a few weeks before Nash left. He could be understudying Nash now or playing alongside him, a la Nash and Leandro Barbosa in Phoenix.Think it might have made a difference in the last of those Sacramento series if a player like Harris had been guarding Mike Bibby instead of Nash, who also had to deal with a vintage Doug Christie at the other end? Think Nash could have drastically cut his regular-season minutes load if he had had a teammate like Harris?Don't forget, furthermore, that the guy who wound up getting the cash that didn't go to Nash -- Erick Dampier -- was giving Dallas absolutely nothing this season until Johnson benched him halfway through. It'll be handy to have Dampier in the Finals if the Mavs can get there, whether they get Miami or Detroit, but it's getting tougher to keep bulky centers with limited skills on the floor in today's up-tempo world.Johnson played with Dampier in Golden State and pushed for the sign-and-trade that brought him to Dallas, so that's his move as much as anyone's. It's thus unreasonable to expect him to question publicly the wisdom of letting Nash go, especially in the midst of a Dallas-Phoenix series.Yet you suspect that Johnson, a point guard at heart who's still searching for a coach on the floor, wouldn't protest if he could get Nash back. He was willing, at the very least, to shoot down the notion before Game 1 that Nash and Nowitzki couldn't have flourished for him as they did for Nelson."Sure they could have co-existed," Johnson said.Absolutely.Source: ESPN.com</div>Also, KMart, the Mavericks are not the same team they were when Nash was on the roster. This is their roster in Nash's final season:Steve NashDirk NowitzkiMichael FinleyAntawn JamisonAntoine WalkerJosh HowardMarquis DanielsTony DelkDanny FortsonShawn BradleyEduardo NajeraScott WilliamsTravis BestMamadou NdiayeThis is the Mavericks roster from this yearirk NowitzkiJason TerryJosh HowardJerry StackhouseMarquis DanielsDevin HarrisKeith Van HornErick DampierAdrian GriffinDoug ChristieRawle MarshallPavel PodkolzineJosh PowellDesagana DiopDarrell ArmstrongD.J. MbengaSo, as you can see, there are only three players from Nash's final season in Dallas still remaining on the team today.
yeah, i think it was just a coincidence. They won what, like 17 in a row when AJ starting coaching them last year? They had a tougher mentality that really paid off. But you also look at the team he went to, they improved by like 40 games.
You guys he wasn't asking was he the difference. He asked if it happened to anyone else. And, I am not really sure FO.
Well, it almost happened in the 1968-69 season. In the 1967-68 season, Wilt Chamberlain won the MVP award as a member of the Philadelphia 76ers, and led them to a record of 60-22. He played the next season ('68-'69) with the Lakers, yet the Sixers finished with a 55-27 record... only a 5 game dropoff from the previous year.In Kareem Abdul Jabbar's final season with the Milwaukee Bucks (1974-75), the Bucks finished 38-44. Although Kareem did not win the MVP award that season, he won it 3 of the previous 5 seasons. He was with the Lakers the next season ('75-76) and won an MVP award with them in his first two seasons. The Bucks finished the first season without Kareem with an identical record (38-44) and still managed to win their division.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Jun 4 2006, 04:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Only Fouled Out could be short-sighted enough to make this topic.</div>Holy... stop with the hating.It's hard to say who got the better deal, because both teams improved quite a bit after that trade. If Nash wouldve stayed and actually played like he does in Phoenix... wow.But then again the Mavs are the ones in the finals. But it wouldve probably be better IMO if they kept Nash and he would keep playing like he did.It's hard for me to put my finger on.
They have alot more depth and they have started to play defense. Avery has done a great job coaching them. They are doing great with individual iso's. Steve Nash leaving has nothing to do with their sudden success.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CB4AllStar @ Jun 5 2006, 09:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>They have alot more depth and they have started to play defense. Avery has done a great job coaching them. They are doing great with individual iso's. Steve Nash leaving has nothing to do with their sudden success.</div>But steve nash's sudden transformation is all due to him even though they added Q rich and Amare was healthy finally Stein is a fanboy, i don't even bother reading what he has to say.
Jesus, I wasn't really trying to hate on anybody. I was asking a question. I emboldened the "Valuable" part because common sense would tend to believe a team that lost the Most Valuable Player would not improve record-wise. And just for the record, the Mavs were on track to improve in wins even before Avery coached the 18 games.Thanks, BigMo.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ELiiiTE @ Jun 4 2006, 06:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Holy... stop with the hating.It's hard to say who got the better deal, because both teams improved quite a bit after that trade. If Nash wouldve stayed and actually played like he does in Phoenix... wow.But then again the Mavs are the ones in the finals. But it wouldve probably be better IMO if they kept Nash and he would keep playing like he did.It's hard for me to put my finger on.</div>It's not hating; it's simple truth. If you even vaguely remember all of the Mavericks playoffs runs, you could remember things like Dirk (and others) being inconsistent, no defense, no worthwhile big men, etc. All those things are different now. I don't think Avery's work improved the team's regular season performance at all, but it has in this postseason, clearly. There's no question in my mind why the team improved when Nash left... it was a lot of coincidence.As for Nash leaving, I wish he could be with the Mavs, but it was his decision whether or not to take less money or not. He chose not to. I can't say that I blame him, but with the tax the NBA would have put on it... it just wasn't possible.
I've seen you twice deliberately call FouledOut on something insignificant. That is simple truth.And I dont think the Mavs improved by mere coincidence. Avery Johnson came into the picture and started to get things running. They probably wouldve been the best team in the league had Nash stayed and played the way he is now. But those are all what if's. Right now the truth is that the Dallas Mavericks are in the NBA playoff finals with many changes, a great coach, and no Nash. They've proven they dont need him, but the Suns did... so it worked out for both.
Haha, no, that's called opinion. He has done the same when I clearly meant something else. If he wants to act childish, I will treat him as such.Yeah, I don't mean that the Mavs "accidentally" got better. I'm just saying that there is absolutely no causation between the Mavs making the finals and Nash leaving the team. If Nash replaced Terry, I don't think we'd be in any different position.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ELiiiTE @ Jun 4 2006, 09:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I've seen you twice deliberately call FouledOut on something insignificant. That is simple truth.</div>Don't worry about it, this is all I see:<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>You have chosen to ignore all posts from: Justice.</div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Jun 4 2006, 02:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Also, KMart, the Mavericks are not the same team they were when Nash was on the roster. This is their roster in Nash's final season:Steve NashDirk NowitzkiMichael FinleyAntawn JamisonAntoine WalkerJosh HowardMarquis DanielsTony DelkDanny FortsonShawn BradleyEduardo NajeraScott WilliamsTravis BestMamadou NdiayeThis is the Mavericks roster from this yearirk NowitzkiJason TerryJosh HowardJerry StackhouseMarquis DanielsDevin HarrisKeith Van HornErick DampierAdrian GriffinDoug ChristieRawle MarshallPavel PodkolzineJosh PowellDesagana DiopDarrell ArmstrongD.J. MbengaSo, as you can see, there are only three players from Nash's final season in Dallas still remaining on the team today.</div>Wow... Absolutely wow. The fact you took my post seriously speaks volumesAnd to Justice, don't call out Fouled_Out like that, he's already one of our best posters, and does nothing offensive at all.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KMart @ Jun 5 2006, 11:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow... Absolutely wow. The fact you took my post seriously speaks volumes</div>I'm not surprised.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fouled Out @ Jun 5 2006, 06:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Don't worry about it, this is all I see:</div>I'm not trying to defend you, I just hate when people do that.And good on you.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GArenas @ Jun 4 2006, 08:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The Mavs didn't get better because he left, they got better because Avery Johnson started structuring them, making them work harder defensively and stopped them from making stupid mistakes. The year after he left, Avery Johnson's first year (for the last 18 games) they became much better. With dallas he was still putting up 14 points per game and almost 9 assists.</div>co-sign 100%also dont forget the got Jason Terryan improved Jason Terry at that
