Do YOU THINK Other Players In The League Resent Steve Nash For.........

[respect21]

speaking of nash, just saw this video and it had me

- .gif material
I had a .gif of that as my avatar for a while.

 

[dland24]

Originally Posted by dmbrhs

I find it funny that people post these stats put up by these so-called "beasts" Nash had around him. I'm sorry, what was the Suns' record before Nash got there, with that same cast of "beasts?"

I never bought this argument because the Mavericks record got better the year he left.

 

[gettin it crackin]

Originally Posted by AM 1 FIEND

Originally Posted by khoshabasfinest23

why doesnt he deserve them? he was the most important player to the team who had the best regular season record for the 1st time he won it. and the second one he put up even better numbers than the year before and the suns were the #2 seed. it doesnt make sense on why people hate on nashs mvp trophies. he was the clear winner on both seasons. get over it

 

[sa amg]

Yet, [PTI] YA BOY [/PTI] took the Lakers to the SEVENTH spot in the West. The WEST! And not even with a .500 record. The Lakers went 45-37 that year. Which is impressive when you consider the roster was made up of Kwame, Smush, Cookie Monster, Luke, a rookie Turiaf, a rookie Bynum, pre-Machine Sasha aka "Sasha sucks!", LO, McKie, Jim Jackson, Slava, Mihm, and Devean.

I would of added more emphasis on the [Stephen A.] KAWAMAY BROWN!SLAVA MED! VEDENKO! SLAVA MEDVEDENKO!? [/Stephen A.]


Bottom line: Nash deserved his first one. The Suns had an absolutely magnificent turnaround, as so did the Heat, but they added the most dominant center toever play (That was Shaqs title back then. Not the BEST but most dominant.) The Suns did it with virtually the same roster that sucked it up the year beforeand the addition of Nash. He deserved it because the team made a complete 180 with Nash at the helm.

Now for his second one? That is debatable. I mean, yes they got the 2nd seed, but everyone expected the Suns to be serious contenders. Yes, his numbers werebetter, but that comes along with being more comfortable in the system and gelling with your teammates. He had one year of experience playing with Amare,Matrix and Co., so of course he's going to put up around the same if not better numbers in the system as he gets comfortable with their style, tendencies,etc.

Nash deserved the first one. Save the second one argument for another time.

 

[mo matik]

I don't understand why people single out Nash's MVPs over other MVPs that have been awarded.

You may not agree with how the NBA chooses their MVPs, but you must agree that they are consistent in their thought process.

People will always be able to argue MVPs. Hell, I don't think Kobe deserved it this season, but he got it.

I think Shaq should have gotten it when Nash won his first. But why is THIS always an issue?

Other players that could have arguably deserved the MVP resent Nash, just like how Lebron or Chris Paul probably resent Kobe this season.

It's the same thing.

 

[eddiehouse5]

what's the point of bringing up the 2004 suns season? they traded marbury halfway through the season, of course they weren't going to win games. abetter comparison would be the 03 and 05 suns teams. marbury and nash took the suns to same place; a playoff exit by the hands of the spurs.

how come no one likes to bring up how much better the mavericks got once they let nash walk? they replace him with jason terry, and won ten more games the nextseason. in season two, they go to the finals, and last season they were the best team until they played the warriors. not to mention that dirk didn't winhis first mvp until nash left. how come nash wasn't making him better?

the person that turned around the phoenix franchise was mike d'antoni. his system allowed nash to flourish.

people are always going to talk about nash and his dubious awards because of how many he has in comparision to other great players (shaq, west, baylor,robinson, barkley, isaiah etc), and because nobody knows what the criteria is for the award. for that reason i don't think that anyone resents steve, butrather the voters, who have made a once prestigous award meaningless.

 

[throwedindagame]

Nash didnt deserve any of them.

 

[kal ripped ken]

nash deserved 1 of them IMO, i guess the 1st one since his team had such a huge turnaround

 

[justhotkicks]

In 2005, Nash had the MVP locked up by the ASG. No disrespect to Shaq, because he was deserving as well, but the turnaround in the win column cannot beoverlooked.

With that said, Nash's two MVP trophies does NOT make him one of the greatest.

 

[Girl Thats Jules]

i think jordan deserved it more then malone in '97

and mourning deserved it more then malone in '99

that one year that duncan won jason kidd deserved it more

and whoever wins the championship this year outta KG and kobe should get it

(but kobe already got it)


.

 

[justhotkicks]

and whoever wins the championship this year outta KG and kobe should get it

and mourning deserved it more then malone in '99

We all know the postseason has nothing to do with MVP voting (voiding the first statement), but if it did, Alonzo Mourning would be the last person to nominatefor MVP (voiding the second statement).

 

[hellofromnyc]

Originally Posted by khoshabasfinest23

why doesnt he deserve them? he was the most important player to the team who had the best regular season record for the 1st time he won it. and the second one he put up even better numbers than the year before and the suns were the #2 seed. it doesnt make sense on why people hate on nashs mvp trophies. he was the clear winner on both seasons. get over it

i felt he deserved the first one, it was either he or shaq that should've gotten that one. however, the second mvp was complete b.s. he did put upbetter numbers the second year, that is true, but when did the award become the steve nash award? because he was able to exceed his performance individuallyfrom the year before, he should automatically receive it? were his numbers better than tim duncan's when he received the mvp? was it better than any ofjordan's numbers when he received the mvp? it's a little ridiculous to use the argument that he should receive because his numbers were better than theyear before. and they had the #2 seed, but they had the 3rd or 4th best record in the league.

 

[ace3han]

Going back to the original thought of this thread. I do not think any NBA player would resent him. I think most of them would however like to play with him.Because he is not an actual ball hog that everybody seems to be in the NBA. He can get you the shots you want in the places you want. Most coaches and playerswanted him on their teams for those years and that is how he won the awards. MVP voting is simple. If it becomes too hard to judge. Just vote for the playeryou want to play on your team.

 

[nycknicks105]

A lot of people think the first time around it should've gone to Shaq, but Nash completely turned that Sun's team around.

Someone brought up Stephan Marbury. He has the same players as Nash, but he didn't have as much success as Nash did. But, if you go by turning teams aroundI think Jason Kidd sort of resents Nash, because Kidd was the engine to that whole Nets team, all those years he took them deep into the playoff's.

 

[cameronsdad0424]

Nash won the second MVP mainly because of the people he lost (Joe Johnson & Quentin Richardson via trade, Amare to injury). They still won the divisionthat year when no one expected them to do anything.

 

[Girl Thats Jules]

Originally Posted by justhotkicks

and whoever wins the championship this year outta KG and kobe should get it

and mourning deserved it more then malone in '99

We all know the postseason has nothing to do with MVP voting (voiding the first statement), but if it did, Alonzo Mourning would be the last person to nominate for MVP (voiding the second statement).

no i only counted the post season this year cuz i felt like kg and kobe had about the same impact on the league during this reg season


so if you dont wanna count the post season i think it should be a tie between kg and kobe

maybe even cp3

 

[carlos tevez]

The MVP is a team award. I think the 1st MVP was between Nash and Shaq. Nash got the edge because of his team's miraculous turnaround.

There weren't as many candidates for Nash's 2nd MVP award in 05-06 as you might think...
-Duncan put up 18 and 11 (#1 seed, best regular season in Spurs history, individually, the worst statistical year of his career)
-Nowtizki (team won 60 games, he averaged 27 and 9)
-Kobe (averaged 35 ppg, was the most dominant player in the league, however only being the 7th seed KILLED his chances)
-Shaq (only played 59 games that season)
-LeBron (great season but 4th seed in the East)
-The Pistons won 64 games that season but they're commonly viewed as a "team", they dont really have an individual player that stands out

Overall in the 05-06 season, I'd say the MVP was between Duncan, Nowtizki and Nash. I love Kobe, but you cant give the MVP to a guy on a 7th seeded team. What's next, Durant averaging 39 ppg on the 14th placed Sonics next season and getting MVP?

 

[justhotkicks]

If Nash DIDN'T win either trophy, y'all would say:

"Nash was robbed in '05."
"Nash deserved at least ONE MVP in those two years."

Well, he got his. Some of you can't take success PERIOD. The MVP trophy isn't necessarily overrated, but it doesn't mean "best player in theleague".

As for 2006, the candidate pool was somewhat weak, but Nash still deserved it. The Suns still won 50+ games without Amare.

I don't care for Nash, but he rightfully won both trophies, and i'm not losing a single second of sleep over it.

 

[RyGuy45]

Nash had as much a right to the MVP as much as anyone both years he won them and we been over this countless times. But we always need to keep in mind this isNT, filled a lot with young kids which is cool. Nash also has the misfortune of being a white player in the NBA which doesnt help his case with the kids mucheither as we have seen countless times.

Anyway, Other players probably dont resent Nash nor do they probably care as much as the public thinks. And as someone mentioned, Nash wins player polls by awide margin of players other players would like to play with. He won his MVPs during years that saw the Suns have major regular season success and him beingthe key cog...I think other players understand that.

I always hear two definitions of what MVP means.

1. The guy who is the best overall player in the L.

Or 2. The guy who if you take him away from his team, that team would be lottery-bound.
I think you have the wrong league.

1) If we went by best player in the L then Shaq would have many more than 1 and MJ would certainly have more than 6.
2) If we went by "take him away from his team then the team would be lotto bound" then Magic wouldnt have any MVPs, Bird wouldnt have any MVPs, etc.

Im not seeing that reasoning ever being applied to NBA MVP to be honest. It's quite simply typically given to a player on one of the top 4 teams in theleague standings, simple as that.