How in god's name can anyone argue that Nash shouldn't have been a 2 times MVP? he is the freakin' epitome of MVP.. you know, most valuable player; you know, his team sucks without him..you know, they're a bunch of r****ded 1 dimensional players .. yes, he has NO backup point guard (unless you count Barbosa as a point guard).. when are people gonna realize that "MVP" doesn't mean "best player", if it was that, Kobe would win every year for a million years.. it's MVP, meaning who's most VALUABLE to his team, meaning that this guy is so important to his team that his team would essentially fall apart without him (exactly what happened to the suns without Nash when he went out 5 games I think and they lost all 5 in his 1st MVP season).. put Kobe on the 04-05 Suns, and they would be a lottery team.. but Kobe or LeBron or Tmac or freakin' Jordan on the 05-06 team, and they would be lottery bound, or, if they get lucky, an 8th seed.. Nash IS Phoenix.. Nash IS Stoudemire, without Nash, Amare doesn't exist, he sucks, he has a great athletic ability but he has ZERO brain, yes zero, nada, zip, no IQ whatsoever.. he turns it over carelessly.. in fact, the majority of Nash's turnovers are a result of the carelessness of his teammates in receiving great passes from him. pick on someone other than Nash..
Nash may be the worst MVP in history. But the reason why is not a conspiracy. In the late 80's early 90's there were so many great players it was hard to choose an MVP. So the case was made that it should go to the best player on a top team. Even that became difficult when you had many great teams and players. Jordan, Barkley, Magic, Bird, Hakeem, Robinson, Malone. So they just kind of started giving to the guy who was due. Now a couple of years ago, the two best players, Kobe and Lebron were on average teams. Only guys like Dirk and Nash fit the unofficial criteria that had developed. Nash's second MVP was the same thing. No one really fit the unofficial criteria better and he had better stats than the previous year. So they justify their choice by picking him again. Now you have a real travesty because a guy who probably did not deserve one MVP has two of them.
I agree 100% Nash is overrated, media should give him more hard time. But he's white and looks nice, that's why. Tmac deserves the slashes though. You are 0 of 7 in first round, you have no excuse.
TMac was only favored in one of those 7 series. He has always been a great player on a bad team. One guy can carry a team only so far. Next year will be the year if everyone stays healthy. He finally has another star and some good role players on his team.
Here's my few cents, not to really justify or defend Nash, but to give perspective on how Steve Nash is perceived. Some points have probably been already mentioned. Dallas might have gotten better after Nash left, but Phoenix got A LOT better when Nash joined. Nash has been the assist leader with one of the best A-TO ratios the past few years. Even when he has declined this year, Nash is shooting (close to) 50% from field, 50% from 3's, 90% from the line. Those are incredible numbers. Nash HAS BEEN clutch, evident by the shots he had made in the closing seconds to help his team win or force OT. His turnover-fest in the PHO-SA series can only be described as either an anomaly or his age catching up to him. Nash won MVP not because he's one of the best players in the history, but because he's the best player for the two seasons he won. The league had down years with very few outstanding MVP candidates, unlike this year with Kobe, Lebron, Paul all putting up spectacular numbers. He might've been the worst MVP(s) ever, but he's still the Most Valuable Player for those two years, regardless of the competition. Last but not least, we all like to root for the underdogs. Nash isn't the tallest guy on the court, or the fastest guy on the break, or has the highest vertical, and doesn't have the fancy moves. He does, however, have an amazing work ethic, is the perfect team player, and helps his team WIN. It also helps your image when you filter information through your brain a little bit before speaking to the media, unlike some player on our roster. I can understand how it bothers you that McGrady always (undeservedly) takes abuse from the media year after year. But it's equivalently unfair to channel all your frustration to Steve Nash, imo
The unofficial criteria has been there a long time. MVPs better be on elite teams (1st or 2nd in your conference). The only exception for 2 decades + was Jordan, when his team was tied for 3rd in a competitive east AND he had the best statistical season by anyone since at least the early 70s. And for all the proclaimed anti-Kobe biases, Kobe got his MVP under the same criteria. Only this time the most outstanding player and player statistically the best, Lebron, was outside looking in. If anyone has been kinda lost out, it has been Lebron. As for Nash vs other MVPs. No, I am not going to tell you he was Jordan, Hakeem, Barkley, Magic, Shaq, Bird, Duncan, level. He wasn't, and isn't. But recent MVPs include Dirk, KG, AI and Nash. In the history of the NBA Bob McAdoo, David Robinson, Dave Cowins and Bob Cousy also got MVPs--let's not pretend Nash isn't in their company. In isn't Nash's fault since Duncan and Oneal started tailling off there really hasn't been any generational players and generational leaders. Dirk, Nash, KG and Kobe each just had a strong enough case vs the rest. Unless you wanted to go with the league not handing out MVPs for 5 years because noone is at a Jordan/Hakeem/Shaq in his prime standard.
Count the NBA rings between ALL of those guys, and you'll have one "earned" by a former all-star who got a ring by riding the coattails of D-Wade and Shaq. But to answer your question: (1) Stockton (2) Nash -- because HE CAN SHOOT AND TAKES CARE OF THE BALL (3) Kidd (4) Payton
His old team got better when he left. I guess you could argue that one thing doesn't have anything to do with the other but to me the MVP should not only be the most valuable player on HIS team but he should be the type of guy that would make most any other team much, much better if he was added to the rotation. Add Jordan, Dream, Magic, Bird or even Kobe to any team in the league right now and the team gets much, much better. Nash's departure from Dallas proved that some of the holes in his game were so big that they got better by getting rid of him.
To RocketsMac who said by adding Jordan to the 05 Suns wouldn't get them into the playoffs at anything at a higher seed than 8 or may be lottery bound needs to stop posting for the love of Christ.
Avery Johnson was what took them to the next step, along with Howard becoming an all-star player. They didn't play defense under Nelson.
Milos, I am jumping on your bandwagon....or might not have been on but pretty close to it. Steve Nash is good player, but he is not a great player and might be one of the worst MVPs of all time.....18 ppg 13 ast are just good numbers, not necessarily great. Shaq was great player, Kobe is great player, TD is great player....Nash is not in the same league with those players....Sorry. All three players should have more MVPs than Steve Nash. He's easily one of the worst superstar defenders in the league and can't seem to get the more tougher points when his team needed it. All three players above have been dominated at many times in the playoffs even won the championship for their teams. Even though Nash has won 2 MVPs and made the Suns a title contender, I wouldn't put him above players like Barkley, K.Malone, Stockton, K.Johnson, Ewing, M.Malone, and many others. I won't say that he didn't deserve those MVPs entirely....because for the most part he did. But you do have to consider, that he does get dominated on defense and has never taken his team to Finals. Every player above has. Nash has been out of the 1st Round before, but when your teammates are people, like Shawn Marion, Joe Johnson, Leandro Barbosa, Dirk Nowitkzi, Michael Finley, Nick Van Exel, Amare Stoudemire, and etc. That's going into a battle with a M-16. Why wouldn't they not make it out of the first round? T-Mac teammates have been Gordon Gircek, Pat Garrity, Drew Gooden, Juwan Howard, Bobby Sura, David Wesley, and poor offensive coaching...going into the battle with one bullet loaded into a 200 year old revolver. How do you expect win such poor talent against teams that were pretty good. T-Mac has played with much more inferior supporting cast than Nash ever has. T-Mac has never played on any great teams, so you can't really discredit him for that .... it would be like comparing Bernard King to Tony Parker....one player never really played on any great teams, while the other ones have. While both serve two totally different purposes, King is to be dominate scorer for mediocre team, while Parker is to be souped up role player on an already good NBA championship team. It's pretty much a given you are not going to advance in the playoffs 9 times of 10 with a weaker roster. Most Rocket fans can easily bash T-Mac, because they see him every single game. You can point to his weakness, but at the same time....if you traded him Nash....they would be complaining about his unclutchness and lack of defense. For all of his playoff losses, T-Mac does not take most of the blame...his teams just weren't good enough. Especially in the Orlando and Houston, name one good player or close to an all star ....that was on either team outside of Yao Ming. MVP race has never been weak in the last five years...you've always had viable candidates even last year....if not given to Dirk or Nash....it would've fell in the hands of Lebron....who is war machine. I don't think controversy would've been stirred there, especially since he was averaging nearly 30 a game, 7 rebs, and 7 ast and lead his team to Finals. Year before, say Nash gets injured, the MVP is now Kobe Bryant, who in there right mind would say Kobe is not deserving MVP....He was averaging 35 ppg and did get his team to playoffs. Next in line is Dirk, who was actually pretty good that season and was big reason Dallas finally arrived to NBA FInals. I can't say same for Nash. Nash's First MVP had a little more controversy, Nash winning by few points over Shaq....Nash rightfully earns the MVP....gets his team to WCFs and team that had losing record..but at the same time...You do have a Shaq that was quickly guiding a Heat team to Finals. But in many cases, Nash probably gets the edge, better conference and better record. But in argument of who makes there teammates better, is it Nash because of his passing ability or Shaq because of his dominance in the paint and his ability to find open men on perimeter (teams tend to leave shooters open on the wing). Hard to say. At the same time, Shaq is probably a better defender and more well rounded player than Nash...and was expected to be force on defense as well as offense, while Nash is only expected to play offense. Nash is probably one of the weakest MVP, simply because he is not even good defender, which makes one aspect of his game somewhat of achilles heel. Even as I like to point out lesser players, like Yao or even Chris Bosh , who is great example. Lot of people say that Yao is too slow, soft and not very athletic, but truth is doesn't he make the game better for his teammates on both sides of the floor. Bosh being too soft and not aggressive at times. Unlike Dirk or Nash, both are actually pretty good defenders (not the best). As far as Yao goes, I've never seen too many players his size dominate him on defense. And his offense speaks for itself. Trade him out for Nash....does Phoenix get better or worst? No more running and gunning probably, but Yao, Amare, Diaw, Bell, and Barbosa could that team not dominate the West. Or imagine Phoenix with someone like Lebron or Kobe, instead of Nash are they not capable of a title. Or let's take Bosh for instance and throw him in Dallas... Dampier, Bosh, Howard, Terry, and Kidd.....hard to say how much better or worse. But, one thing is they are slightly better defensively.
Steve should have won maybe one MVP but not two. I watch other teams when the Rockets have an off day or right after the game is finished. And I don't claim to know everything but Steve Nash in his prime (I believe he has began his decline this year) made everyone better. He orchestrated the offense much like Payton Manning does for the Indianapolis Colts. He is their go-to playmaker/scorer, you are wrong in saying he is not. He cut up defenses like a butter knife. McGrady and Nash are hardly two peas in a pod. McGrady can't do what Nash does because he doesn't have the motor to do it for a whole game like Steve Nash can. Their only similar in their court vision and maybe possibly being a go-to player but that's it..
I agree, but Nash could never do what McGrady does. *Violent Scoring Tears and taking over games *Rebounding ability *Defending his position *Could Nash take team as bad as the Magic was into the playoffs and take Detroit to 7 games. Hard to say. *If you stop Nash from passing and getting assist, you're pretty much taking him out of the game, while T-Mac is a bit more versatile.
You don't think removing the slow, fragile, weak link defensively (Nash) played any role their defense going from a joke to respectable? Their offense certainly didn't suffer from Nash's departure either.
I've seen Nash take over games. I don't ever remember seeing a team shut down Nash in his prime in both scoring and assisting. It was always the lesser of two evils because he keeps his dribble. McGrady and Nash both don't exert much energy on defense but McGrady even if he isn't trying is a better defender than Nash due to his athleticism and length.
this is how you know nash is not on the level of tmac. if tmac makes those same turnovers he did in game 5, he'd be GRILLED by the media for choking. i never heard anyone said nash choked after that game. coincidence? i think not.
If Tmac can take a team to confierence finals w/o their best player then there is an argument Tmac is better.
A difference is Steve Nash playing bad in the 4th quarter big time playoff games is the exception. Usually he has hit big shots or made big assists and been extremely steady with the ball. He has been fairly clutch his whole career down the stretch in the playoffs and he has been on the winning side of more playoff games and series than not. The 4 best teams I remember him on just got stopped by the Spurs (and at least 2 times with major injuries on his team, 3 if you count Hill), and the Spurs have happened to beat a whole lot of other really good teams (Detroit, Lakers) and other great players (Kobe, Shaq, Lebron, Kidd) along the way to their recent titles. If you ask the Spurs the last few years which was their greatest threat and team they were most relieved to get by they will say the Nash lead Suns is right at the top. But no, he ain't Jordan or Magic or Bird in terms of clutchness and impact--if your demanding your MVPs be at that level (not that any other current NBAers have been that either for at least 5 years running).
Not really a good comparison, but for all the T-mac has never been out the 1st round comments and Nash has taken his team to the WC Finals. Just look at the supporting cast. Switch T-mac and Nash and T-mac would have been out the 1st round by now. Now put Steve Nash on those horrible orlando magic team and I'm not sure they make the playoffs. Put Nash on the Rockets team and he's not the same because of the style of play. It's hard to compare these two because they both are in complete opposite situations when it comes to the players around them and the style of play. Nash is a good player though and he deserved atleast 1 of those MVPS.
