If voting was to be looked at into the playoffs, Dirk would have easily lost this to Nash.
If voting was to be looked at into the playoffs, Dirk would have easily lost this to Nash.
Dirk should have lost to Nash anyway. Id hate to immortalize Nash as the only (if im correct) 3-time-consecutive MVP winner, but he deserved it again. I doubt the Suns make the playoffs without him, at best they look like the Lakers minus a superstar.
The Suns are a playoff team without Nash, as long as they have something resembling an actual PG playing for them. The Lakers are lucky to break 20 wins without Kobe.
What gets me is the "best player on the best team in the regular season" crap that's being spewed, which would explain why Nash got it last year when the best player on the best regular season team was Chauncey.
Oh well...
It's always nice when the league is embarrassed of their MVP choice.
Find a new slant.
I totally disagree with ya for once Mxy. Barbosa has his moments in spurts, but when they dont have nash, their overall record hasn't resembled "playoff team" level in any way. But the last time I brought this up, i got attacked and adamantly told how Marion(who is on a serious hot seat) was a bigger piece than him. So I'll just leave it at "I disagree". I think people just hate Nash. Well I do too. But I think he is an MVP caliber player for Phoenix and their style of basketball.Originally Posted by Uncle Mxy
^
Stalked by a Mod who gives 1 percent credence.
Barbosa is lousy at PG. That's why their backup PG when Nash is off the court is Diaw. When Nash was out sick this year, Diaw was out too, and that's when their motor stopped working. Give the Suns a Brevin Knight and they still make it in the playoffs with 40-odd wins. I don't hate Nash, but I don't think he's the only reason for the Suns success by any stretch. The Suns without Nash made it to the playoffs with a half-court offense under Me-bury coached by Frank Johnson.
But as for Dirk as MVP, there were lots of older MVPs defeated in the first round of the playoffs they played in -- Moses Malone twice, Bob McAdoo, Bill Walton, Wes Unseld, Wilt in '66, Bob Pettit in '59. It happens.
I dont think Dirk didn't deserve it because they were bounced in the first round, I understand it is a regular season award. But over the last two seasons, arent the Suns something like 2-5 when Nash is out? 60 wins a season when he is in. It shouldn't be about best player on the team with the most wins, it should be about 'if we take this one player out how much does this team suffer?'
Mxy I get your point about Chauncey, sad that he wasn't even talked about this year. Wasn't he in the top 5 last year though?
They were 2-4 with Nash out this year, but Diaw was also out for 3 of those games, all losses. When Barbosa is starting at PG, they shit on themselves with great regularity. That's why they signed Marcus Banks to that silly contract. We suck without Chauncey, but that's because most of our backup PG options are even iffier than Barbosa or Banks.
2-5, 2-4, splitting hairs lol. Thanks for the research though Mxy. Point being, like I said it should be 'which team suffers most without x player?' It should never be given to a player on a losing team except maybe an extreme exception, but the whole 'best player on best team' is bullshit. Im not going to rack my brain too hard, had too long of a day, but Nash and Billups are definitely among the tops as far as good teams who suffer without them. Among that list you could easily (hate to say it) include Kobe and Lebron. Their teams are battling Memphis for those bingo balls without them, so would Minny without Garnett although they are almost on that list anyway. On another note, to address a very good player... even with Duncan out, the Spurs arent title contenders but are still decent.
I could go on with the list but you get my point.
i agree with that assesment uxka BUT dirk did improve his game. i think the nba should make some criteria for this, one being the 'which team suffers most without x player?'
Bookmarks