Do we need to say it again? Take the 6 players who have had tho most impact this year in NEw Yersay. Kidd Van Horn (last year he was injured) Kittles(last year he was injured) Martin (last year he was injured alot) Macolluch (played with 76ers last year) Jefferson (was a rookie last year) if you take away al the starters of any team and then let them play the hole next year you will see a huge turnaround every time. How the H*ll can Marbury win a game if Aaron Williams is the nexzt scoring option?????? Ok Kidd is a great player i agree, but the turnaround isn't al because of him. With marbury still in the team NJ would also be in the play offs. I don't think someone who scores less than 15 points and has a FG% below .400 can be a MVP. I think it is between Shaq And Duncan
Actually Jefferson was playing at Arizona last year so they did not even have him as a rookie . But your right last year the Nets had a lot of injuries to key players, Kittles and KVH, and they did not even have a Todd Muccolough downlow. I do not feel Kidd deserves MVP as much as a Tim Duncan does. Duncan as probably a weaker supporting cast and still does better in a tougher conference. He is my MVP.
So Marbury would lead the Nets to the playoffs, would he? Just like he's leading the Suns into the playoffs this year? Yeah right.. Take a look at Phoenix's record this year as compared with last year. What's the difference? The absence of Jason Kidd. Kidd leads teams into the playoffs. Marbury leads them into the gutter.
I may be a Magic fan, and Tracy McGrady may be doing everything he can, but Duncan is the MVP. Without him, the Spurs are a 30 win team at best.
oops my mistake, i thought i wrote Jefferson is a Rookie Now. i agree with you that Kidd is better than Marbury, But i think The net would have made the play offs with Kidd or Marbury, because the east is so weak. I know the Nets are better with Kidd, just like the suns where. But that doesn't make Kidd MVP. it makes him a better player than Marbury, and i think that is something almost everybody agrees on. But i think he is not the MVP.
Nets have better talent when healthy than Phoenix. Keep in mind, Phoenix lost Cliff Robinson, a key scorer, along with swapping Kidd and Marbury. That is a big loss for them. Kidd is a good player, but touting a player as MVP based largely on the difference of a team's record from one year to another when SO many other factors have changed between those years (outside of Kidd) is not good evidence. No one can say for certain how good the Nets would be with Marbury over Kidd. Sure, you can think that maybe the Nets would have done poorly, but there is really no evidence to support that, as no situation like what New Jersey is in right now was even close to being duplicated with Marbury at the point instead of Kidd. Kidd fell into a good situation. Sure, he made the most of it, but that is not enough reason to get the MVP. Personally, I say give it to Duncan. As unstoppable as Shaq is, I go by the name of the award, and I think Duncan is more valuable to the Spurs than Shaq is to the Lakers. Shaq is the better player, it seems, but if you took both of them off of their respective teams, I see LA being a LOT better than San Antonio.
It's hard to say the suns Lost Robinson, more like they gave him away... you know... too many good players I guess?
Duncan and it's not even close. Kidd plays in the East, throw him out. I'm a little puzzled why so many people are touting Shaq as the MVP. Best player I can see, but MVP, no way. If you think Shaq is the MVP, you must not think Bryant is a Top 10, or even a Top 20 player. The Lakers and Spurs have the same record -- who do you think is a better team, the Spurs without Duncan, or the Lakers without Shaq? If you think Shaq is the MVP, your vote must be for the Spurs, which would make Bryant NOT THAT GOOD.
Has to be Duncan......EASILY. Personally though, I say Tmac......best player in the League IMO, and without him.......let's just say it ain't pretty.
TheFreak: I disagree, but for the reason I disagree, didn't vote for Shaq. Shaq only started 66 games. Duncan played in every single game this year. If Shaq starts every one, LA probably finishes a few games ahead of San Antonio. There's a secondary reason I might vote against Shaq, too... I think he (and Bryant) take games off. You sort of do get the sense watching them, that they think as long as they're "up there" in the win column, it doesn't really matter because they "know they're the best." I don't think Duncan feels that way... ...of course, I don't take that second reason too seriously, since shaq was injured this year. What looks like him not being aggressive enough, might just be not wanting to hurt himself. He was injured most of the year, right?
