Source: Nash to be MVP

Kobe bryant is not the league mvp.

The only thing there is no doubt about is that he is the mvp of his own team... for only the second time in his career.

You use a double standard to defend that he is the mvp. First you say look at his teammates, no one has done more with less. Then you say look at his stats, they're incredible. Have you ever stopped to think that maybe he has incredible stats because of his poor teammates? Jordan put up those numbers despite sharing the ball with pip, grant, kukoc among others. Now thats impressive.

Then you downplay nash - he's playing the perfect system under the perfect coach. Have you forgotten exactly who is coaching the lakers? arguably the greatest, or top 3, greatest coaches in nba history. See the difference between this year and last year? that wasn't kwame. this isn't a larry brown situation, pj has made a career coaching the greatest guard there ever was. It's only inevitable he be able to get the most out of the second or third greatest.

Then you people say its unfair to look at kobe's record. But when someone brings up tracy mcgrady's 32 ppg 6.5 rpg, 5.5 apg, .457 fg% season (opposed to bryants 35 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, .45fg% season) you say look at mcgrady's record!

Then you downplay nash's mvp year last season saying maybe he only got it because his team exceeded expactations. but - suprise, surprise - then you say kobe's the shit, no one thought he'd make the playoffs, look, he made them. MVP! MVP! MVP!

seems to me the people who would vote kobe for mvp have incredibly bias criteria and reasoning that constantly changes.

kobe maybe the best player in the league, but not most valuable. how many lakers have career highs for a season in as many categories as the Suns do. James Jones, Eddie House, Diawesome, Tim Thomas is rejuvenated, Barbosa's more known, etc.

You use a double standard to defend that he is the mvp. First you say look at his teammates, no one has done more with less. Then you say look at his stats, they're incredible. Have you ever stopped to think that maybe he has incredible stats because of his poor teammates? Jordan put up those numbers despite sharing the ball with pip, grant, kukoc among others. Now thats impressive.

You don't understand. Incredible stats are incredible stats. Regardless of who you're teammates are, if you can put up 35 points per game in the NBA, while the opposing defense is focusing solely upon you, that's unbelievable. Show me the double standard. The facts are that no one has done more with less, and that no one has done so while being so un-reliant on his teammates.

Then you downplay nash - he's playing the perfect system under the perfect coach. Have you forgotten exactly who is coaching the lakers? arguably the greatest, or top 3, greatest coaches in nba history. See the difference between this year and last year? that wasn't kwame. this isn't a larry brown situation, pj has made a career coaching the greatest guard there ever was. It's only inevitable he be able to get the most out of the second or third greatest.

So was it Phil Jackson who got Kobe to increase his PPG, FG%, 3PT%, MPG, while averaging less turnovers? I'm not going to downplay what Phil has done to this Laker team, but if you actually watched basketball, you'd see that the situations are entirely different. The four players Nash has around him fit the Suns' system perfectly: athletic big men and great three-point shooters. Now while Nash is a contingent piece to that system, the individual production he's had to make to get his team to their highest capacity doesn't even compare to Bryant's.

Then you people say its unfair to look at kobe's record. But when someone brings up tracy mcgrady's 32 ppg 6.5 rpg, 5.5 apg, .457 fg% season (opposed to bryants 35 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, .45fg% season) you say look at mcgrady's record!

Different year. Tell me why Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, and John Stockton -- the greatest point guards of the last ten years -- don't have any MVPs. Pass-first point guards like Kidd and Stockton did the exact same thing that Nash has been doing for the last two years -- 'make their teammates better.' They did (or have been doing) this their entire careers.

The point is, every year is different. There's no precedent set with the MVP award.

Then you downplay nash's mvp year last season saying maybe he only got it because his team exceeded expactations. but - suprise, surprise - then you say kobe's the shit, no one thought he'd make the playoffs, look, he made them. MVP! MVP! MVP!

The point of the argument was to dismiss the expectations and look at what actually happened, especially since both sides had certain expectations and both overcame them.

seems to me the people who would vote kobe for mvp have incredibly bias criteria and reasoning that constantly changes.

It seems to be that you're a moron.

jason kidd got robbed by tim duncan

i'll agree with that.

We're still on that stupidity? Giving Kidd the MVP in 2002 is as bad as giving Nash the MVP in any year...

Ya, and giving kobe is as bad as giving iverson in 00-01.

Who cares? He's going to win it and that's all that matters!

While I don't think Nash should've won it, Lebron or Dirk should've, I won't say he wasn't deserving. He was definately more deserving than last year when it was all about hype and being an underdog. What I hate that keeps popping up is arguments for him like

I won't take up space quoting the rest of your post simply to say I agree with it, but I will add that Nash is a very convenient choice for the media members who vote on the award based on some very simple numbers and facts.

He's raised his scoring average by 3.3 ppg while his assists have only dropped from 11.5 to 10.5 per game. He's shooting better across the board turning in a 50-40-90 year and he's even averaging a career high in rebounds with 4.2 per game. On top of that, his team's roster is noticeably different to last year's squad and were missing a key player (and 2005 All-Star) in Amare, yet they won over 50 games.

Now, that alone doesn't lock up the MVP because you can make a similar case for Kobe (the scoring average, the 81 point game, the string of 40+ games, leading the Lakers to the 7th seed and so on) and LeBron (30+ ppg, the impressive numbers elsewhere, the Cavs winning 50 games) and they're just as impressive in a bid for MVP.

I'm not saying that the above synopsis of Nash's 2005/2006 season is necessarily MVP clinching but they are simple, positive facts that voters can point to when justifying their ballots since I don't think many of them analyse the in-depth stats. On top of that, he was named MVP last year when his team had a more favourable chance and he had less impressive stats which brings in the "well if he was MVP worthy last year, he's definitely MVP worthy this year" argument.

And that's not to say that the case for Kobe or LeBron is actually weaker, simply that (right or wrong) the voters decided Nash's case was more convincing. Again, he's a very convenient choice based on a couple of notable observations about his stats (especially in comparison to last year) and the conclusions that can be made about his 2006 season.

I'm not saying that the above synopsis of Nash's 2005/2006 season is necessarily MVP clinching but they are simple, positive facts that voters can point to when justifying their ballots since I don't think many of them analyse the in-depth stats.

How about voicing to the NBA and get you involve in the voting next year?

I mean they are the professional, not us. And you are saying they dont analyse the in-depths? That's a joke.

I strongly suggest you cut out the attitude if you want to keep posting here, I'm not very impressed at all with the lack of respect you show your fellow posters. Shape up.

And you are saying they dont analyse the in-depths? That's a joke.

No, that's not what I said at all. You would have known that if you had read my post carefully instead of skimming it and attempting to insult me in the lame way that you did; that's the only joke. I said I don't think many analyse the in-depth stats, taking per 48 minute averages into account when making their choices or considering some of the numbers sites like 82games.com monitor and discuss.

In the future, I suggest you read posts more carefully and respond to them without childish insults and the intent to mock the poster. And again, I strongly suggest you don't mock moderators and admins, or your stay here will be a very brief one.

EDIT: Nevermind, I know who you are now.

I thought there was something fishy with him.

Who is it? Dweaver?

You know somethings fishy when they post at NBA + General talk straight away.

You don't understand. Incredible stats are incredible stats. Regardless of who you're teammates are, if you can put up 35 points per game in the NBA, while the opposing defense is focusing solely upon you, that's unbelievable. Show me the double standard. The facts are that no one has done more with less, and that no one has done so while being so un-reliant on his teammates.

Incredible stats are incredible stats I don't disagree with that. And yes I agree that putting up 35 per is impressive. But the situation in which the incredible stats are garnered does make a difference. There are plenty of college players that have incredible stats and they don't win player of the year. Wilt averaged 50 ppg and 20 rpg and he didnt win mvp. To say kobe has incredible stats without taking into consideration the situation in which he got those stats is turning a blind eye to the truth. That is any good player will put up better numbers on a sucky team. Kobe is not a good player, kobe is a great player. But his team still sucks, even you would agree. The mark of a mvp is that he puts his teammates in a better light. He doesn't make his teammates better persay, he makes them seem better (which kobe has never done). In order to make ones teammates seem better the team has to win. While of course kobe cannot win a game alone, he is the most responisble. Does he need more talented teammates? yes. but if he had them, he wouldn't be averaging 35....and he still wouldn't be mvp.

To say that it is impressive that kobe put up those numbers despite double/triple teams implies that other stars of his caliber don't or haven't been given the same attention at one point in their career. Every player of his calibre is double and triple teamed. No superstar can be shut down on a consistent basis without consequence. none. you can argue that kobe has more defensive focus placed on him then most, but again we go back to the fact that if he had help to draw attention away his stats would also concurrently go down - his efficiency and winning percentage up.

So was it Phil Jackson who got Kobe to increase his PPG, FG%, 3PT%, MPG, while averaging less turnovers? I'm not going to downplay what Phil has done to this Laker team, but if you actually watched basketball, you'd see that the situations are entirely different. The four players Nash has around him fit the Suns' system perfectly: athletic big men and great three-point shooters. Now while Nash is a contingent piece to that system, the individual production he's had to make to get his team to their highest capacity doesn't even compare to Bryant's.

To answer that question I give you this: so was it mike d'antoni who got nash to increase his ppg, apg, fg%, 3pt%? If you actually watched basketball you'd see that the lakers this year play with more intenstiy and more efficiently. Sorry, but that's not all kobe. See last year. If people are going to say that nash's stat jumps from dallas to phoenix is due to a system that benefits him and d'antoni, then I'm going to say that kobe's stat jump from last year to this is due to the triangle and phil's implementation of it.

Different year. Tell me why Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, and John Stockton -- the greatest point guards of the last ten years -- don't have any MVPs. Pass-first point guards like Kidd and Stockton did the exact same thing that Nash has been doing for the last two years -- 'make their teammates better.' They did (or have been doing) this their entire careers.

The point is, every year is different. There's no precedent set with the MVP award.

duncan, jordan, magic. You're right, every year IS different, and this year there is no duncan, jordan, or magic. there's kobe putting up numbers on a bad team.

It seems to be that you're a moron.

yeah, well you're a bad person! christ. what is this? pre-school? keep on track.

Situation: 10 seconds left on the clock, down by one.

Phoenix: Give the ball to Nash? Yes, he passes to someone and the someone maybe makes it.

Lakers: Give the ball to Kobe? YES? Who else? If you cheer for the defensive team you're heart stops as Kobe takes the jumper.

This is a difficult case. I'd give it to Kobe. You can bring all the make teammates better, shoot too much, on a good team - good system stuff you want, I won't change my mind.
With a team that was doomed from the start, at least what everyone thought, Kobe singlehandedly raised his team to the playoffs. I hope the Lakers beat the Suns or at least stretch to 7 games just to put Nash's second MVP into a more controversy.
I mean Kobe had a historical season. I've read the whole thread and know what most of you think about it. What more has the guy to do to? Average 81 ppg? The MVP award has become so personal that Kobe will never win it. It is very sad to see this.
Nash makes his teammates better but that is nothing new. He has a better team while Kobe IS the team. The Laker's success depends solely on him this season and he has carried his team through the whole season and into the playoffs. And if they manage to win the Suns, there's no way Nash should be the MVP.
My MVP for 06 is Kobe Bryant. And get of Nash jock for christsakes... the NBA is getting more sucky everyday.

yeah, but there's about 20 guys you could pass the ball to at the last shot who are just as capable as kobe to make it, that's just being clutch. Yes he had a historical game, though not the MOST historical. It's kinda like if Barry Bonds passes Babe Ruth. Yeah, it's amazing, but not the MOST amazing. All Kobe did was score, basically. And that just so happens to have helped his team. His teammates were a part of it though. They grew better. Suns lost JJ, Q, Amare, and KT. That's 4 guys who they've used as starters, and they still finished just 8 games under last year. Lakers got 11 more wins, but with a somewhat strengthened roster, and of course Kobe 'IS' the team, but if you stuck Nash in the Lakers system, there's a good chance they get a couple more wins. Put Kobe in the Suns system, he absorbs it and warps it so that he IS the system. Kobe just makes teams rely on him for everything.

And btw what does

And get of Nash jock for christsakes

mean? Is that english?

What I dont understand is the Lakers got worse on paper with the Caron/Kwame deal, and the Lakers Improved 9 games, and have the upper hand right now against the Nash led suns, and they say that Kobe doesnt improve his teamates? What does he do then? lol.. and they say theres a double standard.

Suns got worse on paper with the JJ for diaw too. What Kobe does... is score. To improve teammates, that means help them, and basically get them points. Because basically the only way a scorer can help is getting teammates assists. Kobe had a healthy full roster, Nash was missing the Suns main scorer and arguably who was a top young big man. The point is that Nash dragged this team about as much as Kobe, and he had more new faces to work with. Of players on the Suns roster last year, only Nash, Marion, Barbs and Amare(though not really). Yet the suns still won the division. I think that was a main factor. Lakers finished 3rd in the division, Suns first. Though I would agree if you were to say they should wait until the end of the playoffs to decide mvp. Kobe would definitely have a strong argument, probably be the favorite. I'd argue more, but i'm in America and it's midnight. uck. i'm tired

why is it that people mention whom the Suns lost but not who they gained?

Kobe had a healthy full roster

Even with amare out and Joe Johnson in atlanta, the Sunsa had a better supporting cast for nash than the lakers for kobe. Shawn Marion could easily be a top 10 player on anyones list and basketball purists wouldnt argue.

But tell me, if the suns lost such important players, does that mean Nash wasnt as important last year? That it was all Amare and Joe Johnson? Hmm..

There's one aspect that Kobe help his teammates better than Nash does, and that's at the defensive end.
Kobe plays less 1on1 but much more help defence this year, while Nash is always a burden in that field.

why is it that people mention whom the Suns lost but not who they gained?

Exactly

And Kobe does a lot on the defensive end too, making him a threat on both ends of the floor.
By the way when Suns miss Stoudemire "ass their main scorer", it sounds like Nash is just a role player in their system, not the centerpiece.

yeah, but there's about 20 guys you could pass the ball to at the last shot who are just as capable as kobe to make it, that's just being clutch.

Well there are clutch players other than Kobe of course, but he does have many other assets than that.
Would you want for Nash to take the last shot if down by one or two?

why is it that people mention whom the Suns lost but not who they gained?

Because they gained people that nobody else wanted. Before this season, Boris Diaw, Eddie House, Raja Bell, James Jones, etc. weren't exactly coveted.

That could be said only for Eddie House. Having seen Diaw play long before the Hawks traded him (and immediately after, in the EC), he was already a versatile and superb player well before he got to play with Nash and Suns' system. It's just that he has been missused by the Hawks as a tall PG because of his ballhandling and passing ability, while that's not really what Diaw is all about. He's more of a do-it-all-but-nothing-superb guy, a glue guy type of player in the Josh Howard and Nocioni mold (for some of the retards out there - I'm not saying that their games are similar). James Jones showed last year that he has the talent to succeed in this league when the injuries and suspensions strucked Pacers' roster and Raja Bell is one of the most underrated players in the league. It's only that the problem with today's NBA is that everybody want potential - and Bell isn't tall or athletic enough to become a superstar, so people are forgeting how good of a player he already is, his shot, defense and little things he does for his team to succeed.

By the way when Suns miss Stoudemire "ass their main scorer", it sounds like Nash is just a role player in their system, not the centerpiece.

I'm not saying I don't agree with your point of view, but this doesn't make sense.
It kinda represents what is wrong with how a lot of (young) people see basketball these days. It's not about scoring. What if Nash isn't the leading scorer? Does that automatically mean he can't be the centerpiece?
OK, so he can't play defense what so ever, but he makes this team. He makes the high-scoring, fast paced Suns who win games by simply outscoring their opponents.
Apart from Nash, Kidd's probably the only PG in the league that could make Amare play like last year, so it's not like you could put any PG in Nash' spot and say the Suns would do the same.

ps. it's not "ASS their main scorer"