I might have been with him in year 1, but it's plain as day--when Nash goes down--that team doesnt win. Does that mean nash is the best player? He's a great great player--and he propells his teams to win huge amounts of games--they have great players and when he is not playing--they usually lose. I don't think of one guy who hs as much impact on one team except Duncan who was also 3 time MVP. Nope Nash is worthy--i don't know where I could come to a different conclusion--there are other players worthy as well--and maybe this year the media looks at Dirk really hard because they have been the best player 2 yeras running and he is the difference maker. But Nash is still worthy

Their 2nd PG is Barbosa, who has no clue how to run an offense. The effect of Nash;s absence would be smaller (though still substantial) if they had a backup PG who could run an offense.

Posted by fishmike:

is he the best player?
NO

is he the most valueable?

He's proven it

I agree, many people confuse the MVP award for "Best Player in the NBA".

with you guys logic, KG=MVP, Labron=MVP Wade=MVP should I go on??? Nash was not the MVP and still isn't. Not before KG,Kobe,Labron and even Kidd. Thanks Shaq.

Posted by Killa4luv:

My point is now and always has been, that if Nash is the MVP, Kidd should have been the MVP twice in a row, when he lead a team to the finals twice in a row and his best complimentary player was Kenyon Martin. The last 2 were tainted.

[Edited by - Killa4luv on 02-24-2007 7:00 PM]

killa i'm not sure about that. i think you had a unique situation the years that kidd didn't win because of the phenomenal success of the winner, tim duncan. in 01-02 he won it after averaging 25.5 ppg on 51% with 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg and 2.5 blocks. his team went 58-24 (kidd's went 52-30). in 02-03 he won it with 23.3 ppg on 51%, 12.9 rpg, 3.9 apg and 2.9 bpg. his team went 60-22 (kidd's went 49-33). plus the voters are casting before the playoffs start. did nash have anyone the last 2 years that was the caliber of duncan on a team the caliber of the spurs?

he shouldnt have won the 1st, 2nd ill give him.

Dirk deserves this years.

Shaq deserved it in 05.

My point is now and always has been, that if Nash is the MVP, Kidd should have been the MVP twice in a row, when he lead a team to the finals twice in a row and his best complimentary player was Kenyon Martin. The last 2 were tainted.

Zackly.

oohah

Posted by GhandiOrr:

I don't know if this is off topic. but I have an MVP pain in my heart.

In 83-84 I thought Bernard King deserved it, Larry Bird got it.
Then in 84-85 Larry definately deserved it and got it.
Larry even got it again the next year.

I have always felt that Larry got the first one because the voters didn't know Larry would get even better and they had to give him just one, so they gave him the 84 one. Then he blew up in 84-85 and actually deserved it.

Obviously I'm a knicks fan, but I thought Bernard was completely robbed. Has this been causing anyone else out there pain and suffering over the last 23 years?

Thank you.

Bernard was the best player in the league that year.

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by GhandiOrr:

I don't know if this is off topic. but I have an MVP pain in my heart.

In 83-84 I thought Bernard King deserved it, Larry Bird got it.
Then in 84-85 Larry definately deserved it and got it.
Larry even got it again the next year.

I have always felt that Larry got the first one because the voters didn't know Larry would get even better and they had to give him just one, so they gave him the 84 one. Then he blew up in 84-85 and actually deserved it.

Obviously I'm a knicks fan, but I thought Bernard was completely robbed. Has this been causing anyone else out there pain and suffering over the last 23 years?

Thank you.

Bernard was the best player in the league that year.

Thank you, that helps.

I also would like to hear the exact quote Shaq made and what it's context was because the Suns have their "system," they have great role players, but Nash is this magical ingriedient that raises that team out of mediocrity. Shaq does the same in Miami, but the fact that Shaq has been their second best player after Wade the last two years, it would be hard to know which of those two guys to give MVP to. In Phoenix, Cleveland, Dallas and LA it's easier to tell.

Posted by BRIGGS:

I might have been with him in year 1, but it's plain as day--when Nash goes down--that team doesnt win. Does that mean nash is the best player? He's a great great player--and he propells his teams to win huge amounts of games--they have great players and when he is not playing--they usually lose. I don't think of one guy who hs as much impact on one team except Duncan who was also 3 time MVP. Nope Nash is worthy--i don't know where I could come to a different conclusion--there are other players worthy as well--and maybe this year the media looks at Dirk really hard because they have been the best player 2 yeras running and he is the difference maker. But Nash is still worthy

I'd have to say it should go to Dirk this time. Look at Dallas's season. On a projected 73-9 record.