<div class="quote_poster">huevonkiller Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">He really doesn't sound like an MVP they way you worded this paragraph.</div> Depends on how you define MVP, personally I think taking a 29 win team and winning an average of 59 games a year is MVPish. You can score 50 PPG on a 12-70 team... so stats to me aren't all they're cracked up to be without the wins. The term "valuable" is too subjective to say what you did, cause to most people the fact Nash gets everybody involved, makes them better, and gives his team open shots is why he's an MVP candidate.
<div class="quote_poster">scorbutic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Depends on how you define MVP, personally I think taking a 29 win team and winning an average of 59 games a year is MVPish. You can score 50 PPG on a 12-70 team... so stats to me aren't all they're cracked up to be without the wins. The term "valuable" is too subjective to say what you did, cause to most people the fact Nash gets everybody involved, makes them better, and gives his team open shots is why he's an MVP candidate.</div> Well the key phrase there is that I mentioned he didn't sound like an MVP the way in which Chutney phrased that paragraph.
<div class="quote_poster">huevonkiller Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Well the key phrase there is that I mentioned he didn't sound like an MVP the way in which Chutney phrased that paragraph.</div> I know, that's why I said it's hard to say that if nobody even agrees what kind of player should win the MVP. He was saying how Nash gets everybody involved, makes his team better, and gives his team open shots -- primary distributor vs primary scorer. Because Nash does that is why a lot of people voted him MVP, it's not because of his 18 PPG average. Maybe you're focusing in on the part where he said Nash doesn't have to shoulder the blame because it really will have to land on the players who couldn't hit the open shots Nash created for them. Well that's just true, Nash can only get the player the ball with the best possible scoring opprotunity (which is what he does best), after that it's up to Amare, Marion, Diaw, Barbosa, Bell, and JJ to make the shot, Nash can't make it for them.
<div class="quote_poster">scorbutic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I know, that's why I said it's hard to say that if nobody even agrees what kind of player should win the MVP. He was saying how Nash gets everybody involved, makes his team better, and gives his team open shots -- primary distributor vs primary scorer. Because Nash does that is why a lot of people voted him MVP, it's not because of his 18 PPG average. Maybe you're focusing in on the part where he said Nash doesn't have to shoulder the blame because it really will have to land on the players who couldn't hit the open shots Nash created for them. Well that's just true, Nash can only get the player the ball with the best possible scoring opprotunity (which is what he does best), after that it's up to Amare, Marion, Diaw, Barbosa, Bell, and JJ to make the shot, Nash can't make it for them.</div> Nash has been known as more of a scorer in the Playoffs. I disagree that he wouldn't be at fault at the end of games, he can shoulder some of the scoring load too.
a MVP that can't score? Doesn't sound right to me.....if other players in your team can't hit the open shots, it is time for the "Ace" (MVP) to start scoring and take over the game. If not, he can only be the best PG but not the MVP. You should pass when your teammates are shooting well. Nash is doing well on that(really well i should say). But when your teammates are not playing well, you should be the man. All your teammates are looking at you and having faith in you. However, most of the time Nash's teammates are playing well because they are allstars with great talents.
<div class="quote_poster">huevonkiller Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Chutney, I have some serious issues with some of your points. What do you mean the Suns made noise in the playoffs in Nash's first year there? They were the number one seed and were totally owned by the Spurs in five games. The Suns were terrible in that series in spite of their elite talent.</div> They made it to the Conference Finals, so I do think that they made noise in the playoffs. But, they were still a bit of an unknown heading into the playoffs, because IMO people were still skeptical about how a run-and-gun team would fare in the playoffs. It really took 3 seasons of the Suns, and the runs by last year's Mavericks and this year's Warriors for people to believe that these type of teams may have a shot at going all the way. It all ties into my point that this season was really the first time the Suns were expected to reach the Finals by a lot of people. That first season surprised everyone, but I think anybody within the organization would admit that they still needed to fine-tune the roster. The way SA dismantled the Suns exposed them a bit and they subsequently acquired Raja Bell and Kurt Thomas so they could compete on the defensive side of the ball as well. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting huevonkiller:</div><div class="quote_post">He really doesn't sound like an MVP they way you worded this paragraph. Nash can choose to be a scorer or distributor anyway so I'm not really buying this. And yes it is obnoxious how people bother Kobe for not winning, but at the same time I'm not completely blaming Nash for the PHX losses these last three years. The real truth is that he just isn't a Tim Duncan caliber player that can dominate both sides of the ball (I don't need to bring up Kobe being a better player than Nash because he's a controversial figure, etc. and I'm sick of Bryant debates).</div> Its because the MVP has traditionally put a lot of emphasis on being the team's primary scorer. I think this is the reason Nash's MVP's were so surprising to some and difficult to get used to. Nash is a terrific scorer, but at the end of the day his main job is still to pass the ball. His scoring complements his passing ability because it keeps defenses off guard, but he's not the Suns best scorer. And that doesn't mean he's automatically less valuable than if he were. It just means you have evaluate him on a different basis than the Kobe's, Lebron's, and Nowitzki's. Also, I wasn't really going after you, just the people in this thread who somehow felt that Nash was the main reason behind Phoenix's inability to get to the Finals and that he was "unclutch." I'm with you on the Tim Duncan point (although aside from him and KG, there really aren't any other players who dominate both sides of the ball, IMO).
<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">They made it to the Conference Finals, so I do think that they made noise in the playoffs. But, they were still a bit of an unknown heading into the playoffs, because IMO people were still skeptical about how a run-and-gun team would fare in the playoffs. It really took 3 seasons of the Suns, and the runs by last year's Mavericks and this year's Warriors for people to believe that these type of teams may have a shot at going all the way. It all ties into my point that this season was really the first time the Suns were expected to reach the Finals by a lot of people. That first season surprised everyone, but I think anybody within the organization would admit that they still needed to fine-tune the roster. The way SA dismantled the Suns exposed them a bit and they subsequently acquired Raja Bell and Kurt Thomas so they could compete on the defensive side of the ball as well.</div> Kurt Thomas was torched in the San Antonio Series. I think it was overzealous to ever think PHX would get past SA simply because of Thomas. People thought PHX would win because they thought SA was "too old" (or maybe because the Suns won slightly more games) or because they just enjoy watching PHX play more and are biased against SA. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> Its because the MVP has traditionally put a lot of emphasis on being the team's primary scorer. I think this is the reason Nash's MVP's were so surprising to some and difficult to get used to. Nash is a terrific scorer, but at the end of the day his main job is still to pass the ball. His scoring complements his passing ability because it keeps defenses off guard, but he's not the Suns best scorer. And that doesn't mean he's automatically less valuable than if he were. It just means you have evaluate him on a different basis than the Kobe's, Lebron's, and Nowitzki's.</div> The History of the MVP voting would also tell us that the more vanilla-dominant forces get screwed by the voting. Nash's MVPs are controversial because it is obvious that Tim Duncan was a better player (and won more than enough games with LESS talent around him) two out of the three years (last year he had a bad foot the entire year). As for the 05-06 season, Dirk/Kobe/LeBron were better individual players and Dirk did win more games. I would continue to argue that Duncan was still more valuable considering how he played in the post-season (he was more effective in other words).
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting huevonkiller:</div><div class="quote_post">Kurt Thomas was torched in the San Antonio Series. I think it was overzealous to ever think PHX would get past SA simply because of Thomas. People thought PHX would win because they thought SA was "too old" (or maybe because the Suns won slightly more games) or because they just enjoy watching PHX play more and are biased against SA.</div> Are we talking about this year or 2004? I thought Thomas did a decent job defending Duncan (a hell of a better job than Amare at any rate). But obviously, there was no stopping him through that series. I also think people underestimate the Spurs, but honestly, when it comes to those 3 teams its hard to come out with an odds-on favourite. It was a back-and-forth affair until the suspensions and I think saying the Suns choked is denying how good a team the Spurs are. I can't really say any of those 3 teams should win when they matchup against each other. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting huevonkiller:</div><div class="quote_post">The History of the MVP voting would also tell us that the more vanilla-dominant forces get screwed by the voting. Nash's MVPs are controversial because it is obvious that Tim Duncan was a better player (and won more than enough games with LESS talent around him) two out of the three years (last year he had a bad foot the entire year). As for the 05-06 season, Dirk/Kobe/LeBron were better individual players and Dirk did win more games. I would continue to argue that Duncan was still more valuable considering how he played in the post-season (he was more effective in other words).</div> I don't really want to get into another MVP debate, but the point I was trying to make was that Nash should be looked at differently. You don't evaluate point guards with same criteria that you do with shooting guards or forwards and, I think Nash should be evaluated differently as well. Of course he needs to score for his team to do well, but that's not his primary role. At the end of the day, his job is to maximize the considerable offensive talent around him.
<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Are we talking about this year or 2004? I thought Thomas did a decent job defending Duncan (a hell of a better job than Amare at any rate). But obviously, there was no stopping him through that series. I also think people underestimate the Spurs, but honestly, when it comes to those 3 teams its hard to come out with an odds-on favourite. It was a back-and-forth affair until the suspensions and I think saying the Suns choked is denying how good a team the Spurs are. I can't really say any of those 3 teams should win when they matchup against each other.</div> I can't see how you thought Thomas did a decent job against Duncan; Duncan was more than efficient. Thomas had brief moments possibly, that is it. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> I don't really want to get into another MVP debate, but the point I was trying to make was that Nash should be looked at differently. You don't evaluate point guards with same criteria that you do with shooting guards or forwards and, I think Nash should be evaluated differently as well. Of course he needs to score for his team to do well, but that's not his primary role. At the end of the day, his job is to maximize the considerable offensive talent around him.</div> I don't understand. Yes Duncan and Nash play different positions but it was still extremely ignorant of the writers to take Duncan for granted.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting huevonkiller:</div><div class="quote_post">I can't see how you thought Thomas did a decent job against Duncan; Duncan was more than efficient. Thomas had brief moments possibly, that is it.</div> Obviously he didn't shut him down. But he did a good enough job to give the Suns a chance to win. I thought he did a good job of making Duncan work for his position and take contested shots. Now TD still hit most of those shots, but Kurt did as much as you can do against a player like that. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting huevonkiller:</div><div class="quote_post">I don't understand. Yes Duncan and Nash play different positions but it was still extremely ignorant of the writers to take Duncan for granted.</div> I get the impression that we're arguing about two completely different issues. The only reason I brought up that different positions point, is because I thought it showed that you have to expect different contributions from Nash down the stretch of a game. Didn't really make a point about Duncan at all.
<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Obviously he didn't shut him down. But he did a good enough job to give the Suns a chance to win. I thought he did a good job of making Duncan work for his position and take contested shots. Now TD still hit most of those shots, but Kurt did as much as you can do against a player like that.</div> Kurt Thomas was a complete non-factor during games 1-3. I don't think it was simply because Duncan was unstoppable (I believe Duncan's production didn't start to decline until he was double-teamed more often). This is just a matter of semantics that I think we can overlook Chutney. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> I get the impression that we're arguing about two completely different issues. The only reason I brought up that different positions point, is because I thought it showed that you have to expect different contributions from Nash down the stretch of a game. Didn't really make a point about Duncan at all.</div> We were talking about the MVP weren't we? What I understood from your posts, is that since Nash is a PG, one should have different expectations of his impact on the game; meaning he did produce MVP numbers. I simply disagreed with this view seeing as his On/Off court numbers were not the most impressive and there have been other MVP candidates that do almost nothing but win with less talented players.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting huevonkiller:</div><div class="quote_post">Kurt Thomas was a complete non-factor during games 1-3. I don't think it was simply because Duncan was unstoppable (I believe Duncan's production didn't start to decline until he was double-teamed more often). This is just a matter of semantics that I think we can overlook Chutney. </div> I think he looked a bit better than he was, in my eyes, because of the player he was subbing in for. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting huevonkiller:</div><div class="quote_post">We were talking about the MVP weren't we? What I understood from your posts, is that since Nash is a PG, one should have different expectations of his impact on the game; meaning he did produce MVP numbers. I simply disagreed with this view seeing as his On/Off court numbers were not the most impressive and there have been other MVP candidates that do almost nothing but win with less talented players.</div> No not at all. I think the discussion veered off towards the MVP award, but I never intended it to. I was mainly making the point that you have to expect a different sort of impact from Nash at the end of the game, in response to the people who said he wasn't clutch or was mainly responsible for Phoenix's losses. I don't think Nash deserved the MVP this year.
Chutney, you obviously watched all the games in the Spurs/Suns series, Thomas was a factor on Duncan, once D'Antoni put him in for Game 2 he made Tim work for the shots, the shots still went in, but even ESPN made a point that Kurt's defense wore down Tim so by the 4th quarter Duncan wasn't playing his best game (offensively or defensively). HoopsHype even ran an article about Thomas' play on Duncan after Game 2. Plus as you can see by Duncan's numbers his offensive rebounds were up in the games Kurt didn't play many minutes (Games 1 and 6). Games 1, 6: 16 Off Reb combined Games 2, 3, 4, 5: 12 Off Reb combined Thomas wasn't an answer for Duncan, they didn't shut down Tim like they did Manu for most of the series, but it was the best they could've hoped for. If the MVP is the player with the least talent around him, shouldn't Pau Gasol, Paul Pierce, or KG have won the MVP then? They have less talent around them than Duncan.
<div class="quote_poster">scorbutic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Chutney, you obviously watched all the games in the Spurs/Suns series, Thomas was a factor on Duncan, once D'Antoni put him in for Game 2 he made Tim work for the shots, the shots still went in, but even ESPN made a point that Kurt's defense wore down Tim so by the 4th quarter Duncan wasn't playing his best game (offensively or defensively). HoopsHype even ran an article about Thomas' play on Duncan after Game 2. Plus as you can see by Duncan's numbers his offensive rebounds were up in the games Kurt didn't play many minutes (Games 1 and 6). Games 1, 6: 16 Off Reb combined Games 2, 3, 4, 5: 12 Off Reb combined <font color=""Red"">{We judge defense solely with Offensive Boards? The other PHX players are undersized or aren't great rebounders, correct?}</font> Thomas wasn't an answer for Duncan, they didn't shut down Tim like they did Manu for most of the series, but it was the best they could've hoped for. If the MVP is the player with the least talent around him, shouldn't Pau Gasol, Paul Pierce, or KG have won the MVP then? They have less talent around them than Duncan.</div> Why bother with semantics? Obviously, "non-factor"/"factor" to me means something different then how you took it. Did you watch all the games in the PHX/SA series? Even if SA lost that series Duncan was still the best player on the court, he was a monster. However, what the hell are you talking about with this Pau Gasol or KG talk? Duncan had better On/Off court numbers and PER than either KG or Gasol this year. Duncan was the better individual player and won many more games. Why are you acting ignorant about that? MVP means one has the best combination of talent plus success in this league. Anyway, if we want to discredit the teammates around one, then Kobe is the MVP the last two years. Steve Nash doesn't have the most On/Off court impact, hasn't won the most games (aside from 2004-2005 when PHX was stacked but lost to SA pretty quick), isn't the MVP if one even takes into account the playoffs, either of the last three seasons.
its been a long time since ive been here... and now yeah I guess all we can do is wait for next year. season went by so fast. damn.
<div class="quote_poster">huevonkiller Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Steve Nash doesn't have the most On/Off court impact, hasn't won the most games (aside from 2004-2005 when PHX was stacked but lost to SA pretty quick), isn't the MVP if one even takes into account the playoffs, either of the last three seasons.</div> Just wondering where you got this on/off court info. Also, remember that in 04-05 Joe Johnson was injured in the SA series, Kurt wasn't on the team, Steven Hunter was our back-up center, Jim Jackson was our only bench player, Barbosa was a non-factor, and the Spurs were a younger, faster team, Nazr killed us in that series, and we had no defensive stopper in Raja. This year was the first year we had our really strong team with great potential. I just hate that we have an excuse, I don't want an excuse. If this line-up is not going to work we need to tweak it, but it makes it difficult to push on with all the "what-if's" As far as Nash being MVP, who cares anymore, he didn't win this year, the award means little on the grand scheme of things. It is simply something we suns fans take pride in. I am just excited for next year, not only for the suns, but to witness all these rookies in this extremely stacked draft.
<div class="quote_poster">*Scotch Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Just wondering where you got this on/off court info.</div> 82games, great site (not as good as JBB though!). <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> Also, remember that in 04-05 Joe Johnson was injured in the SA series, Kurt wasn't on the team, Steven Hunter was our back-up center, Jim Jackson was our only bench player, Barbosa was a non-factor, and the Spurs were a younger, faster team, Nazr killed us in that series, and we had no defensive stopper in Raja. </div> Doesn't this sound like the earlier sarcastic point that was made, that Nash should never be criticized? What are you trying to say, that winning is incidental because it relies on the teammates around one? Well this is completely true. My point however, is that PHX still had two ALL-NBA players and that Nash isn't as good as Duncan and wasn't the real MVP that year. Did I say Nash isn't the best PG? Never, but that's not the point. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> This year was the first year we had our really strong team with great potential. I just hate that we have an excuse, I don't want an excuse. If this line-up is not going to work we need to tweak it, but it makes it difficult to push on with all the "what-if's" As far as Nash being MVP, who cares anymore, he didn't win this year, the award means little on the grand scheme of things. It is simply something we suns fans take pride in. </div> Understandable, but it annoys the hell out of other people that Sports writers can be so ignorant. What also bothers some other people is that you were saying Duncan was not worthy of an MVP this season, even though that is empirically not true. Sometimes you just reiterate what has been fed to you.
<div class="quote_poster">huevonkiller Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Understandable, but it annoys the hell out of other people that Sports writers can be so ignorant. What also bothers some other people is that you were saying Duncan was not worthy of an MVP this season, even though that is empirically not true. Sometimes you just reiterate what has been fed to you.</div> ^^I never said Duncan was not worthy of an MVP.
<div class="quote_poster">*Scotch Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">^^I never said Duncan was not worthy of an MVP.</div> I meant to refer to scorbutic.
Nash was 2nd in MVP voting, had 1013 and lost to Dirk by only 125 points. Duncan was 4th in voting with 286 points... I'm not the only one who thought that. KG & Carlos Boozer had better numbers than Duncan, Amare had 1 less rebound per game, even Yao had 5 more PPG with only 1 less RPG than Tim. The +/- is fine and all, it proves he should've been considered for the Defensive Player of the Year (he came in 3rd), but he had no first place votes for the MVP, everybody knows he had an off-year. Granted it was still a very solid year, but Dirk, Nash, and Kobe had great years.
