Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

[Stumbleweed]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

Like the article said, everyone fell in love with the Nash-led Suns and let that blind them to the better individual play going on in the league, often with similar success in the win column. I knew it was wrong when it happened and it still feel wrong now...

But yeah, that Estimated Wins Added metric is cool -- pretty instructive for guys who are getting decent minutes but you can't figure out why they're getting so much time (some are contributing despite not putting up great nmbers, and others are in the negative despite getting time from the coach). Once again, I look at Dahntay Jones, then look at JR Smith, put another pin in my George Karl voodoo doll, and shake my head.

[TMagic]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

I don't ever think there will be any magical formula that will be able to determine who the rightful MVP is.

The years that Nash won, he was EVERYTHING to that team. If I remember correctly, they had a bad record with him missing action. He was definitely the catalyst to that whole offense and was the reason they were so good those years. It shows even more when they were still able to be an elite team with Amare missing the entire year.

Think about that for a second. They lost Amare. Not Bell or Diaw. AMARE! That is a huge blow. If another team lost their second best player and leading scorer, they struggle. The Suns were still atop the western conference with 50+ wins. Mostly because of Nash.

For that reason, I can't understand how someone can say that they don't know why he got the MVP that year or the year before.

[23]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

Like the article said, everyone fell in love with the Nash-led Suns and let that blind them to the better individual play going on in the league, often with similar success in the win column. I knew it was wrong when it happened and it still feel wrong now...

But yeah, that Estimated Wins Added metric is cool -- pretty instructive for guys who are getting decent minutes but you can't figure out why they're getting so much time (some are contributing despite not putting up great nmbers, and others are in the negative despite getting time from the coach). Once again, I look at Dahntay Jones, then look at JR Smith, put another pin in my George Karl voodoo doll, and shake my head.

Nash and the Suns were predicted to not even make the playoffs that first year without Amare

Not only did they exceed that, but the team fell apart without Nash and they ended up with a 50+ win season which netted him the MVP

The 05-06 award or was it the 06-07 award should've went to LeBron James. He wasnt a victim of a bad team, they ended up with 50+ wins... he deserved it as much or more than Nash did that time around.

[23]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

...and all the years of my life i've never heard of a lifetime achievement award when it came to MVPs and best players in the game.

MJ, Malone, Barkley, Magic, Bird, Kareem ,D Rob,etc... they all battled on the court and at the end of the day it was determined through the wars.

What is this crap they've done today and invent some name to bias in their voting

[Kashanova]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

I've learned nothing new from this thread. I've known for years LBJ was robbed from an mvp on more than one occasion. The whole he's too young he has many years to in it arguement imo sucks, as well does the he's been in the league for too long his window might close soon.

[SpacemanSpiff]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

I don't ever think there will be any magical formula that will be able to determine who the rightful MVP is.

The years that Nash won, he was EVERYTHING to that team. If I remember correctly, they had a bad record with him missing action. He was definitely the catalyst to that whole offense and was the reason they were so good those years. It shows even more when they were still able to be an elite team with Amare missing the entire year.

Think about that for a second. They lost Amare. Not Bell or Diaw. AMARE! That is a huge blow. If another team lost their second best player and leading scorer, they struggle. The Suns were still atop the western conference with 50+ wins. Mostly because of Nash.

For that reason, I can't understand how someone can say that they don't know why he got the MVP that year or the year before.

Kidd with the Nets when they were going to Finals > Nash with the Suns when he was winning MVPs

Kidd meant everything to the Nets as well, made Kenyon Martin look like an All Star. He even played better defense than Nash did back then. It's amazing how Nash has two MVPs and Kidd has none when it seems the criteria used to justify Nash could've easily fit for Kidd at the time.

[23]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

...but you can't compare different years and circumstances to make a detemination.

Kidd lost out to one of the greatest players ever in Tim Duncan, and that is understandable.

[SpacemanSpiff]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

Yeah but Nash should've similarly lost to Dirk/Shaq and LeBron who are also great players but he didn't. I'm not advocating that Kidd should've definitely been named MVP over Duncan but Nash probably shouldn't have won two unless you were playing the, "wow this point guard took a mediocre team and turned them around" card which applied for Kidd as well. Nash wasn't even in the Top 3 for EWA in either year but I bet Kidd was.

[Cebby]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

...and all the years of my life i've never heard of a lifetime achievement award when it came to MVPs and best players in the game.

It's a little ridiculous to consider it a "lifetime achievement award" when a player leads the NBA in points and finishes with the best record in what people were touting as "the most competitive conference ever" while missing your starting center for 47 games and your future starting PF for 55.

[AlexBrady]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

Does anyone even know what the requirements for MVP are? This award is a joke in my opinion. All it does is make for nice "barber shop" or "water cooler" talk. I'm sure all the casual fans banter about this sham of an award all day. The ONLY award that matters is the championship trophy.

[KG]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

Does anyone even know what the requirements for MVP are? This award is a joke in my opinion. All it does is make for nice "barber shop" or "water cooler" talk. I'm sure all the casual fans banter about this sham of an award all day. The ONLY award that matters is the championship trophy.

I don't think there are "set" requirements.

[AlexBrady]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

I don't think there are "set" requirements.

Most clutch? Best stats? Best player on the best team?

[KG]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

Most clutch? Best stats? Best player on the best team?

I looked around various sites but nothing was defined. I wouldn't mind seeing the players get some sort of vote back, maybe 2/3 writers and 1/3 players.

[AlexBrady]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

I looked around various sites but nothing was defined. I wouldn't mind seeing the players get some sort of vote back, maybe 2/3 writers and 1/3 players.

See, I value Finals MVP much more than regular season MVP.

[KG]

Re: Hollinger's take on past 5 MVP's by the numbers-- Nash and Kob weren't deserving

See, I value Finals MVP much more than regular season MVP.

I can see your point. Player X performs when it really matters. The argument I have against that it only takes 1 opponent into account. I prefer a larger sample size.