They probably would have but for different reasons than what you think. People don't have enough time during the regular season to gameplan for their style of play so they would always win alot of games. They would just lose in the playoffs when they go up against a good defensive team that can score in the post. I know that their style of play is flashy and appealing to the casual fans but i don't understand how all of these real NBA fans could like to watch a team consistently take bad shots, not post up, and be utterly useless on defense. It is terrible basketball. I think good coaches who teach real basketball like Sloan, Phil Jackson, and Larry Brown should just lobby to get Nelly and Dantoni kicked out of the league because all they do is preach a fun, fools gold, regular season style of basketball. They completely ignore the foundations of what winning basketball is built upon. Nobody wins championships that way. No one ever will.
milos.....ur kinda crazy. Did steve nash run off with your wife? Nash won the mvp years ago in the world of basketball. He was also very deserving the years he won. Out of your list, I would've taken Nash over gp.
This whole thread is so anti-Nash it's not even funny. I admit the McGrady bashing gets out of hand from the media, but Nash is the anchor to the Suns and has made them a legitimate title contender. Tracy, even with Yao, have never made the Rockets a *title contender*. Before Phoenix signed Nash, the Suns were nothing. They had no identity, no establishment of fear into their opponents, and no title aspirations. Every playoff matchup they had in the Nash-era, no one was certain they were the underdog. You do not compare the Suns to the Rockets in the past 4 year span. It has everything to do with Nash and T-Mac. You put Nash on our team for that 4 year span ( since 2004 ) and the Rockets don't lose to the Mavs in 7, they don't lose to Utah twice, and we probably would have made it in the playoffs in '05. You put T-Mac with the Suns in the 4 year span and he remains a second-round virgin...mostly because he's incapable of running D'Antonio's offense the way we saw Nash did. I defend Tracy a lot, mostly because he gets unfairly beaten by the media ( though a lot of it his own doing too ), but I'd trade him for Nash straight up if that offer was made today. Tracy, if you haven't noticed, hasn't been a good defender in the past several seasons. I don't see why defense is an issue comparing those two. Finally, Nash won those two MVP's because he impacted the Suns. Yes, they were great marketing-wise, but the media votes the MVP, so he's not so much Stern's darling as he is the media's. If Stern had it his way, it wouldn't be Nash. It would be Lebron. I believe there's a conspiracy too, but it's more of the media. Nash deserved it the first year, and last year when he didn't win the MVP. The second year he got it, Kobe should have gotten it. MVP's are determined by the regular season, not the playoffs. With that definition, Nash shouldn't be questioned on his first MVP, just like Dirk last year.
Nash is the 3rd best PG you have ever seen? Watch the guy playing PG for the Hornets against the Spurs in the 2nd round this year. That is what an MVP PG looks like. Granted, he has had some success in the playoffs. As for my argument that he is the worst MVP ever, and by far the worst multiple winner, and much closer to Jason Kidd (whom he backed up in Phoenix for christ sakes!!!) than Magic Johnson, let's do a little correlation between MVP winners and playoff success, just for fun. I'll start with the most recent and work backwards, but to stay relatively current, let's stay post-1970. Players with mulitple MVPs since 1970: Steve Nash - 2 Best Finish - Western Conference Finals Tim Duncan - 2 Best Finish - 4 rings Karl Malone - 2 Best Finish - 2 Finals Jordan - 5 Best Finish - 6 rings Magic - 3 Best Finish - 5 rings Bird - 3 Best Finish - 3 rings Moses Malone - 3 Best Finish - 1 ring Dr. J - 4 (including ABA) Best Finish - 1 ring Kareem - 6 Best Finish - 6 rings So on this list we have 8 first-ballot hall-of-famers, with a combined 28 MVP trophies and a combined 26 championships over the last 38 years of the NBA. And then we have Steve Nash. The guy who freaking backed up Jason Kidd when he came into the league. Who did Michael ever back up? Or Kareem? Or Magic? Oh yeah.......they were all among the best ever at their positions, much less on their own team. Probably never had to ride the pine since the day they were drafted. Hell Magic started at center for a Kareem-less Lakers squad in his rookie year and proceeded to win them a championship by himself. 8 All-Time Great HOFs,............and the little canadien PG who had a nice three-year run as playoff fodder for real champions. hmmmmmmmmm.........reminds me of a song I learned as a young lad from my friends at Sesame Street: One of these things is not like the others, one of these things just isn't the same. One of these things is not like the others, now it's time to play our game. Du-du-du-du-du-du. It's time to play our game! So please, continue to make the case how Steve Nash in any way, shape or form belongs in this elite class of NBA legends. I still say he's more McGrady than Magic.
Dude, You're getting more and more irrational. He backed up Jason Kidd, because he was a rookie. T-Mac sucked when he was a rookie and played from the bench. What's your point? Clyde Drexler averaged 9 points a game in his earlier days. Does that make him a bad MVP when he was awesome years later? And you've shifted your argument from Nash being the same as T-Mac to Nash doesn't deserve his MVPs. I don't see how those two are directly related. Now you're comparing Nash to Chris Paul. Chris Paul is definately better than T-Mac. Nash is better than T-Mac, and worse than Paul. Paul should have won the MVP this year over Kobe. None of what you're saying connects with one another. You don't seem very bright. I'm sorry.
" I still say he's more McGrady than Magic " He is neither McGrady or Magic. Those guys have different strengths than Nash. McGrady is more athletic, more versatile, a better driver, and from time to time, a better defender. Nash plays an up-tempo team, has excellent court vision, and is a threat from long-distance. And he's short and not very athletic. Comparing Nash to Chris Paul is fine.
If you say so Milos. Does this mean you think he deserved the MVP, and you just think that the league lacked good canidates? I personally think Dirk is a worse MVP and I have no idea how Allen Iverson ever won an MVP. I agree he is closer to Kidd than Magic, his game is even similar to Kidd's. Kidd & Nash are HOFs in my book. I have no idea how good the players were back in the day. I didn't get to watch them, so I definitely can't compare at all, not that people should compare generations considering how different the sport is today than 50 years ago.
no it is not. Chris Paul has been much better than Nash has ever been. I don't like Milos's comparison of Tmac and Nash but his criticisms of Nash and his MVP's is spot on. It is a travesty when an MVP averages 15pts unless he is a total beast on defense and grabs like 23 boards a night like Bill Russel. Despite his great fg%'s everyone has to realize that 15 and 11 is not an MVP season and there is no way around this.
He goes beyond stats though. He won MVPs because he made the everyone better and only looked to score at the end of games when his team needed big shots. CP3 could have easily won the MVP award this year. Kobe won because everyone felt he deserved to get one eventually, and they got reason to with the Lakers finishing with the best record out west. CP3 & Lebron are the two guys in the league that have really shown the ability to carry a franchise on their backs and have success in recent years.
i wouldnt. his D is horrid. you dont give your team a chance when you cant keep the opposing PG in front of you
Exactly my point. Chris Paul has the same STRENGTHS as Nash, only times 10. It's apples and apples. So it's quite possible to compare them both.
Besides, all those people b****ing about Nash getting it his first time...who was really a heavy favorite that year? It was a weak MVP race. People forget that...
Last add-on: Steve Nash winning his first MVP was like Mike Miller getting the ROY. They had to give it to someone, when in reality, no one should have gotten it.
No I realize the part about him backing up Kidd was a little off-topic and irrelevant. I was referring more to the fact that he was a late bloomer, unlike every other multiple-MVP in league history. Basically, what got me fired up enough to post this was the disparity between the treatment and respect Nash and Tmac get for accomplishing more or less the same thing in their postseason careers, which is nothing for Tmac and slightly more than nothing for Nash. I was simply pointing out that Nash and Tmac are more similar in their rank among the all-time greats than, for instance, Nash and any other NBA player ever with multiple MVP awards. I was not trying to say that they are the same player, or even similar in style. Just that both have been miscast as top dogs, when in reality the playoff record for both shows that neither has it in him to LEAD a team to the top, like a Jordan, Magic or (in my opinion) Chris Paul. Despite their similarities as excellent second-bananas miscast as go-to guys, the disparity in recognition between the 2 just astonishes me every time either one of them is a topic among NBA fans, media, etc. I mean, why isn't Phoenix talking about how over-rated Nash is for never even reaching the Finals, despite playing the majority of his career with talent-laden regular-season juggernauts who always choke away their high seed in the playoffs? Why didn't Nash have it in him to close out game 1 this year, when the Suns let a huge second-half lead dissappear, along with their chances of winning that series? That's what everyone says about Tmac every time he throws up a goose egg in the 4th quarter of an important game. Essentially, this is what it boils down to for me: Why does Nash get all of the praise for his team's success, yet bears none of the blame for their failures, while Tmac gets all of the blame for his team's failures, yet none of the credit for getting 55 wins out of a team where the 2nd, 3rd and 4th options are Luis Scola, Rafer Alston and Shane Battier? History has proven that for a player to be recognized repeatedly as the best in his league (MVP), he has to win (Rings), and Nash is the only one in the group who does not hold that standard. Neither does Tmac, but then again, how many MVPs has he received?
Nash is done so I would not trade him for Tmac at this point BUT 2-4 years ago he was a wizard on the offensive end. Defense has always been a problem but up until recently he did so much on the offensive end it more than made up for his inability to guard anyone. BTW, Dirk is the worst player to ever win MVP but I never believed Nash deserved it either. Certainly not two years in a row.
While you've clearly got a huge hate on for Nash, the question is really this: which is right? Are you saying it is wrong to not blame Nash for the Suns 'failures' (which, this season, probably has a lot more to do with the 'team' than him), as McGrady is rightfully blamed? Or are you saying that it is wrong to blame McGrady, and therefore the treatment you perceive Nash to be getting is 'right'?
Damn, homey - now you're venting on the Sean & John show? haha.. tell 'em how you really feel... (i agree with you, btw.)
Milos, you sir have a serious problem.. here are some suggestions: 1. watch some basketball.. in this universe, not in a parallel one 2. watch some more basketball..0 Nash is one of the greatest players to EVER play the game.. He wasn't 2 times MVP for no reason.. now I tell you, LeBron is overrated and always gets benefit of the doubt (even though some are starting to question his "clutchness"), but Nash is just one hell of a player.. I'd even say that Nash is one of the most underrated offfensive players ever.. the guy can score pretty much whenever the heck he wants, he is just so unselfish that no one notices his offensive skills.. How he does it, I don't know.. he isn't that athletic, he isn't tall, he isn't big/strong, he isn't quick (like Parker), but the guy can shoot it with the best of them, and the guy can drive to the basket and hit easy shots.. he has a little sweet runner that always goes in, he can go off the glass, he can take you however he feels like.. he is pretty much the most creative player since Magic Johnson (and Magic isn't ahead of him by that much).. Now, Tmac is my favorite player, but you can't compare him to Nash dude.. compare Mac to LeBron, to Wade, say how people diss Tmac and yet they love Wade and LeBron and they don't criticize them, but don't come close to Steve Nash.. he had a bad series against San Antonio, I admit, but do you realize how many clutch 3's he made to save the Suns.. in fact, the series was so close that the Suns could've easily won 4-1 had they had some luck (Duncan 3, Parker 3, B.S calls ...etc).. But again, Steve Nash is NOT overrated, he is one of the greatest Point Guards to ever touch a basketball.. personally, I think he is the most fun player to watch along with Baron Davis..
I agree with Milos Nash is a great PG, but he shouldn't be a two time MVP. And I'd take Tmac all day every day for eternity over Steve Nash.
