When the mvp changed from being the best basketball player on the planet to making you're teamates better? Was there a chance in the voting rules? In any other year, steve nash wouldn't even be in the top 3.EDIT: Wrong forum.
Well, the initials MVP stands for Most Valuable Player. In lots of peoples eyes, your most valuable player does not always have to be the most talented player. Your most valuable player to many people is the one that is the main reason for your team being so good, the one that raises the level of play of your teamates around you. Steve Nash is one that does this, just look at how good the Suns are when he is in the game. Even when Nash is having an off night, he is still making his teamates look good, and making himself look like the Most valuable part to his team in the league. Now i personally never thought that Steve Nash was the MVP this year, but i can see why Steve Nash won the MVP. He is the best in the league at raising the level of play of his teamates around him, and was really as valuable to his team as anyone else in the league was to their team, maybe a little more valuable.
Ok, i see. Did Tim duncan raise his teamates play in his second mvp season? The answer would be yes, him being oncourt makes everyone better. But, Jason kidd won 50 games that season and was directly responsible for his teamates playing better [especially Kenyon martin] and didn't win.So if the rule that "who makes there teamates better" was enforced then, why didn't J kidd win? Why didn't Dirk win this season? Why didn't lebron win?
To be honost, i thought Kidd should have been MVP that season for the way he came into New Jersey and took a team that won very few games the year before and took them to 50 wins. As for why Nash probably won over Dirk and Lebron James(which by the way i picked Lebron James as MVP,) there could be a few reasons. First, there was the perception that Dirk and Lebron James had better teams around them than Steve Nash had around him. Especially after Amare Stoudemire was out, everone said that the Suns would not be good this year. What happened? Steve Nash ran the team, and proved that he can really take just about anyone and raise the way they play. Sure that system helped raise their stats some, but without Nash they would not be able to run that system at all. There is not another point guard in the league that could play in that system, and run it the way Steve Nash does. Also his team won more games than Lebron James team did, so the voters might have awarded that to Lebron James.The other reason why i think Nash won it, the voters were a bit biased and turned it into the Two year acheivment medal just a bit. They were impressed by the way he took one team and got 60 wins, and then took a completely different team and got 54 wins the next year proving that he really is more valuable to a team than just about anyone else in the league is.
And it's pretty screwed when a guy can average 32/7/7 win 50 games and somehow be screwed out of it by a point guard who's stats are inflated. Phoenix lives and dies by nash, i realise that. But honestly, you take lebron off that cavs team for a season and see how bad they go.
I agree Melo. But when you have a guy like Nash who has the ball in his hands 24/7 of course he's going to look like he's making his teammates better than your average PF or SG. Thats the PG's job, I agree that this 'making your teammates better' crap is just ridiculous and it's impossible to judge. Guys like Tim Duncan might not have the ball in their hands all the time like a guard but to discredit him and other bigger guys is ridiculous. You can't tell me Tim Duncan doesn't raise the level of his teammates. I use the 'making his teammates better' in my decision but only in extreme cases, like if you have a complete ballhog like Jerry Stackhouse for instance, that would be a major drawback because it's so blatently obvious. I think members here make too big of a deal out of it and I don't even bring it up because some players just don't have the oppertunity to have the ball enough to make teammates better and it's impossible to judge if Johnny X is more of a team player than Johnny Z.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Melo_061 @ Jun 7 2006, 05:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>And it's pretty screwed when a guy can average 32/7/7 win 50 games and somehow be screwed out of it by a point guard who's stats are inflated. Phoenix lives and dies by nash, i realise that. But honestly, you take lebron off that cavs team for a season and see how bad they go.</div>How are Steve Nash's stats inflated?
Because he plays in a offense where he goes in and kicks out for 'easy' assists. I'll admit that I think the Suns are so unique that players put up inflated numbers there, James Jones wouldn't have half the impact on anyother team but on the Suns he's a 14ppg guy just because of the kickouts he gets.
More possesions equals more opportunities to score, rebound and pass. That is why i don't take their stats seriously, because there all inflated.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BCB @ Jun 7 2006, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I agree Melo. But when you have a guy like Nash who has the ball in his hands 24/7 of course he's going to look like he's making his teammates better than your average PF or SG. Thats the PG's job, I agree that this 'making your teammates better' crap is just ridiculous and it's impossible to judge[.</div>I'm sorry, but only someone that doesn't know what they are watching for says that it is impossible to judge for who makes their teamates better. There are certain players you can watch and say "do you see how that team around them plays when he is on the court." Tim Duncan, Steve Nash, Shaq are just a few in the league that have this ability. Other players you can watch and say "that guy gets stats, but the team really doesn't play well with him out there on the court, compared to when he is on the bench" like Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, Zach Randolph to name just a couple. People can say that the system Nash is in inflates his and other players numbers all you want. The fact is no other point guard in the league could run this system even close to as well as Steve Nash runs the system. A question for though, could it be Nash that makes this system great, instead of the system that makes Nash great?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Melo_061 @ Jun 7 2006, 03:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Ok, i see. Did Tim duncan raise his teamates play in his second mvp season? The answer would be yes, him being oncourt makes everyone better. But, Jason kidd won 50 games that season and was directly responsible for his teamates playing better [especially Kenyon martin] and didn't win.So if the rule that "who makes there teamates better" was enforced then, why didn't J kidd win? Why didn't Dirk win this season? Why didn't lebron win?</div>i co-sign on everything u have saidi remember that season i think it was 02-03 yea jason kidd deserved it not tim duncan that year
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (valo35 @ Jun 8 2006, 04:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm sorry, but only someone that doesn't know what they are watching for says that it is impossible to judge for who makes their teamates better. There are certain players you can watch and say "do you see how that team around them plays when he is on the court." Tim Duncan, Steve Nash, Shaq are just a few in the league that have this ability. Other players you can watch and say "that guy gets stats, but the team really doesn't play well with him out there on the court, compared to when he is on the bench" like Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, Zach Randolph to name just a couple. People can say that the system Nash is in inflates his and other players numbers all you want. The fact is no other point guard in the league could run this system even close to as well as Steve Nash runs the system. A question for though, could it be Nash that makes this system great, instead of the system that makes Nash great?</div> :HAHAHA: If steve nash makes the system great then explain to me why he didn't blow up untill he met d'antoni?And to you're bolded comment, i challenge you to come out with a decent argument onto why another pg like Andre miller could not run the system on par with nash? or even close to it?
There are a couple of reasons why i don't think that Miller could do what Steve Nash is doing in Phoenix. For starters he isn't even half of the three point shooting threat that Steve Nash is. Knowing this, Millers player would be able to play off on him a bit, allowing him to slide in front of Miller on his drive to the basket and making it harder for Miller to get into the lane for the easy kick out buckets to the three point shooters on Phoenix. With Nash, the players have to play up on him to guard against his three point shot, this would allow for Nash to take his man off of the dribble a bit better because the player is closer and can't slide in front of Nash as easily. So Nash would be able to get into the lane, and kick out to his three point shooters better than Steve Nash could do. Secondly, a major component of that offense is the pick and roll which Nash runs to perfection. I haven't seen Denver run this pick and roll much, and i don't believe it is something that Miller can run overly well. They have a perfect player to run it with him in Carmelo Anthony, but for some reason they didn't do it much. Another reason, Denver runs an up tempo, take shots quick in the shot clock, run and gun style like the Suns play and Miller doesn't do it as well there as Nash does in Phoenix. Now you could make a point that Denver doesn't have the three point shooters that Phoenix has, but you can make the same point that the players around Miller are a little better overall than the players that was around Nash this season. From what you are saying, it's the system that makes players good, the players are not good on their own. So if the system was so great and its not Steve Nash making it great, when D'Antoni took over in 2003 for the Suns why didn't the team blow up then? Why did it take until 2004 for the team to blow up, when Nash got there? Why wasn't the system great in Denver in 1998? Further more his scoring was pretty much the same in Dallas as it has been in Phoenix. His went from 17.7 and 14.5 in Dallas his final seasons to 15.5 and 18.8 in his first two season with Phoenix. One point isn't much of a change from 14.5 to 15.5, and up to 18.8 this season, could be attributed to him shooting more because the team around him went down and he had to take on more of a scoring roll this season than in previous seasons. His assists did go up a little, from 8.8 his final season in Dallas to 11.5 in his first season and 10.5 this season, which means the system only added on about 2 assists total, which to me isn't a "huge blow-up" from what he was doing in Dallas.
Yeah, and Dallas scored basically the same number of points when Nash was there as Phoenix does now. I'm sorry to say it, but I think Nash is the reason, not D'Antoni.He also led Santa Clara over Arizona in 1993. Hint: only four times in NCAA tournament history has a 15 seed beaten a 2 seed.I don't know though. Look at this list.Multiple Winners6 - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar5 - Michael Jordan5 - Bill Russell4 - Wilt Chamberlain3 - Larry Bird3 - Magic Johnson3 - Moses Malone2 - Tim Duncan2 - Karl Malone2 - Steve Nash2 - Bob PettitOne of these things is not like the others, one of these things just doesn't belong! Can you tell which one is not like the others? Lol.Yeah, so basically he doesn't deserve to be on that list. But at the same time, I'm not sure who I would pick instead of Nash. Lebron would probably be my pick, I guess.
Great post, i gotta give it to you. Everything you said was correct but you said no-one in the nba could even touch the job nash is doing. That's wrong :happy0144: i'll post more later Honestly, i think steve nash is majorly overrated. Steve nash is the Used whilst d'antoni's is the user, he found a pg who could run his system. But steve nash is not the reason why the system is great, he's just a proxy. What i objected at was you saying no other pg could do the job he did, and that is a lie. Another pg wouldn't be able to hit 3's or shoot as good as steve nash is, but i'm 100% positive Andre miller could do a good job. Andre miller on a fast break is money, he's visions is great also. He just lacks the shooting part but if he was in phoenix and his defender went under the screen, i think he could hit it. The suns rotations give alot of good looks and with the help of the pick and roll Miller's fg% would rise. Basically, it isn't only Steve that can run that system to excellence. I have no idea why the sytem didn't blow up in denver. As for his first season with phoenix, look at the personella he had to work with, Amare was injured for like 30 games, the pg of the team was traded and they were left with Leandro barbosa at pg [not sure if joe johnson ran the 1]. For a system to work, players are needed. That team lacked role players who could make shots like the suns of 2006edit: So i checked up the denver nuggets of 1998 and check out the team http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DEN/1998.htmlAre you freaking joking me?Now this doesn'e mean Steve nash is horrible, he probably has the best vision in the league and is a marvel with the ball. But to say no other pg could do a job as good or even close is making steve nash sound overrated. Actually he is overrated but that's besides the point.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Melo_061 @ Jun 8 2006, 03:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Honestly, i think steve nash is majorly overrated. Steve nash is the Used whilst d'antoni's is the user, he found a pg who could run his system. But steve nash is not the reason why the system is great, he's just a proxy. What i objected at was you saying no other pg could do the job he did, and that is a lie. Another pg wouldn't be able to hit 3's or shoot as good as steve nash is, but i'm 100% positive Andre miller could do a good job. Andre miller on a fast break is money, he's visions is great also. He just lacks the shooting part but if he was in phoenix and his defender went under the screen, i think he could hit it. The suns rotations give alot of good looks and with the help of the pick and roll Miller's fg% would rise. Basically, it isn't only Steve that can run that system to excellence.</div>There is no way that Miller could run that system in Phoenix and make it even half as dangerous as it is with Steve Nash running that system. You say that his shooting percentage would go up, thats fine it probably would, but he is still not a three point shooter. He only took 27 three point shots all of last year, which says he has no confidence in his three point shot, and he only made 5. His three point shot will never raise enough to be dangerous or worth worrying about. That limits a few things on him, and those same things do not limit Nash. Like i said, the opposing teams guards and players will know by Miller getting into the lane he will be able to kick out to his three point shooters. So since he can't shoot, they will just cut off his driving ability hanging back and being able to slide into position much easier. On Nash they have to play right up near him, because if they don't he will just come down the court and knock down an open three point shot. By playing up on him, it's easier to drive by the guy. I was a point guard in high school, i had the same problems Miller had because i can't shoot.Also, when a player is not playing up on you because they don't respect your three point shot, it's much harder to run them into a screen for the pick and roll. This is why it will be hard for him to run that pick and roll in Phoenix. With the player playing off of you, if you try to run him into a pick all he will do is step up in front of the pick to where you are.That's two things right there he will not be able to do that Nash does perfectly in this offense, and is a huge part of this offense.
Everything you said was perfectly true. Andre miller would be limited and would not be able to produce like nash. But, on the fast breaks he's damage and considering the suns go on a lot of fastbreaks, he'd be able to pick up assists. So are you willing to say that if another point guard who can shoot and is a good passer, he would able to run the system as good as nash? or even close? Because if that is what you are saying, then that proves my whole point. Without the system and dantoi, nash wouldn't be able to play similar basketball and wouldn't have the freedom he has now. And that is what i'm trying to get at, nash and d'antoni are a pefect match but the system is the husband and is more important than the wife, Nash.Honestly, i was under the impression that it was Coleango* who put the system into place in phoenix but apparently that was wrong.And btw, great post :happy0144:
I would say that if another point guard could shoot like Nash, run like Nash and find the open player like Nash does then yes he would be able to run that system just as well. The problem is that there is not another player in the league that can do that, Kidd doesn't have the shooting, Miller doesn't have the shooting, i don't think Mike Bibby has the court vision and i really don't see anyone else being able to do it. That just really makes me think that Nash helps make the system as much as the system helps make Nash. I would agree with you though that D'Antoni and Nash are perfect for each other as player and coach. Nash likes to play that run and gun, drive and shoot style of play, and D'Antoni likes to coach that style of play.
Well you said that no-one in the league could come close to what Nash is doing in the system. Mike bibby's vision isn't as good as nash's but he's shot is automatic [or it used to be] and he could do a similar job.I'm just wondering if it wasn't the system why nash suddenly blew up then why didn't he do anything in dallas? I know i've said that a million times but that's the major point. Nash found a system which used his main talents to perfection, his shooting and vision. But if Mike bibby was thrown onto the suns, the same things would be said about him [he'd obviously not be doing excatly as good as nash].And this thread has officially has gone off topic
Well it has gone off of topic, but i think it's been good debate the entire time.I think part of Nash that blew up the most was media hype, and the fact that he was the leading contributor to a team that won 60 after only winning 29 the year before. If you look at his stats, his scoring average was around the same in Dallas as it is now in Phoenix maybe a fraction to a point higher. The only thing that really shot up was his assists, and that was only by 2 and a fraction over. So he really didnt blow up in stats as much as he did in exposure and winning with what was perceived to be a worse team in Phoenix. He was really a good player in Dallas, just Dirk Nowitzki over shadowed him i believe.
