The reason why Nash is surrounded by 'all-stars' is because he makes everyone around him better through his own selfless play and awareness of the game. The definition of MVP is Most Valuable Player, not Who Scores 65 Points While Losing ala Kobe Bryant.
The reason why Nash is surrounded by 'all-stars' is because he makes everyone around him better through his own selfless play and awareness of the game. The definition of MVP is Most Valuable Player, not Who Scores 65 Points While Losing ala Kobe Bryant.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
His numbers this year are just insane. 19ppg on 53% shooting. 2.2 3pt attempts per game at 47%. Just shy of a 90% free throw shooter. 11.6 assists per game.
TO's are a bit high but that comes with the assists.
He has no equal and his team goes from championship caliber to barely making it to the first round without him. You can make the argument that Kobe or Lebron are more important to their teams, which is fair. But that's not what the MVP is about.
It's about a player that makes the team better, not one that *IS* the team. Nash doesn't go out and score 60 points to get his team a win. He creates opportunities that take advantage of his teammates strengths - pick & rolls to Amare. Breakaways with Marion. Great passing to the spot up three, ect. He makes 4 other people on the floor better. That's an MVP.
TO's are a bit high but that comes with the assists.
He has no equal and his team goes from championship caliber to barely making it to the first round without him. You can make the argument that Kobe or Lebron are more important to their teams, which is fair. But that's not what the MVP is about.
It's about a player that makes the team better, not one that *IS* the team. Nash doesn't go out and score 60 points to get his team a win. He creates opportunities that take advantage of his teammates strengths - pick & rolls to Amare. Breakaways with Marion. Great passing to the spot up three, ect. He makes 4 other people on the floor better. That's an MVP.
An MVP brings up the game of everyone that is on the team -- not a showboat like Kobe. If you are able to bring up the best in all the players on the team, I consider that an MVP. Jordan was an MVP for sure. Olajuwan was an MVP. Not because they were just talented, but because they brought out the best in the players on their teams as well.
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2004
- 11,465
- 1
- 0
Still a little sore from that 2OT loss?
I agree with Nash=MVP although they probably won't give it to him, but just because Dirk missed a couple of critical FT's that would have iced that game doesn't make him a choker.
How many games has Dirk won with a buzzer beater? How about the series against the Spurs in last years finals? How about the last two games that he took over in the fourth, including last night making all his FT's down the stretch?
Miramonti
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2000
- 28,653
- 100
- 106
Of course he's overrated.
He happens to play in a style where he can get away with being the worst defender on the floor yet still be on a successful team because all they try and do is outscore the other team, which makes his assists and points stats overrated, and his lack of position defense under emphasized.
The MVP race is usually a joke anyways, since the hack voters want to instead award GM's for putting together a talented and deep team together rather than the worthiness of a given player.
Nash is an allstar, but never should have been nor should ever be considered more than that.
He happens to play in a style where he can get away with being the worst defender on the floor yet still be on a successful team because all they try and do is outscore the other team, which makes his assists and points stats overrated, and his lack of position defense under emphasized.
The MVP race is usually a joke anyways, since the hack voters want to instead award GM's for putting together a talented and deep team together rather than the worthiness of a given player.
Nash is an allstar, but never should have been nor should ever be considered more than that.
If he can get the 3pt. and FT shooting up a bit by the end of the season, he'll be the only player in history to average over 50% shooting 50% 3pt. shooting and 90% FT shooting.
but if you want to compare apples to apples, it could be argued that Kidd surrounded by the same talent could be extremely successfull as well.
Kidd compared to Nash would, play better D, get more rebounds but would score less and his FG% would be less.
Kidd in his prime was better than Nash now, IMO, i don't think Kidd ever had a complete team around him the way nash does now.
BrokenVisage
Lifer
- Jan 29, 2005
- 24,771
- 14
- 81
I can't believe a thread like this exists.. if you can't tell that Steve Nash is one of the most talented Basketball players of this era then I weep for you.
Darkstar757
Diamond Member
- Feb 1, 2003
- 3,190
- 6
- 81
I take nothing from Nash as he is a great player. However with that being said he is no Kobe and he can not completely win a game on his own. Without barbosa,marion and other he would not be as great.
BrokenVisage
Lifer
- Jan 29, 2005
- 24,771
- 14
- 81
That's not the question being raised though. Of course he's not Kobe, or even a McGrady, they are scorers by definition and make their bones by putting points on the board and being the go-to guys on their team. Nash has shown he can pass the ball off to someone in a key position to make a bucket AND be a scoring threat when his team needs him to be late in the game (10 points in the final :55 against Dallas anyone?)
He's also a great shooter, but has high shooting percentages primarily because he's a great decision maker too. Rarely will he try to force a shot up when he doesn't have to, so instead he'll find someone in a better position to score. So because of how smart he is giving the ball up defenses look to block out his options, and THEN he steps back and drains a couple 3's in your face and they're back to concentrating on him.
Also, he never has the same people on his team except for a select few. Throughout the last few years his role players have gotten hurt, gotten traded, or signed with another team. The players that come in then have great years because they're involved with a team that spreads the ball around as good as any other team while still having a relatively short rotation.
If Nash up-ed his defensive game, then he would clinch the MVP, but yes I can see some of you guys points on having terrible defense.
BrokenVisage
Lifer
- Jan 29, 2005
- 24,771
- 14
- 81
He's so much more then just talented though, do you even watch him play? Talent doesn't even begin to describe his play on the court, he transforms the entire team just by being the ball handler.
Okur mirror's Dirk somewhat, but he doesn't keep the numbers as consistent as Dirk does. If anyone is to be compared to Dirk right now it should be Chris Bosh.
Actually, my friend just made a valid point. None of the leading offensive all-stars are great defensively, so Nash still gets my vote.
meltdown75
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2004
- 37,548
- 7
- 81
But does he bring up the game of his fellow teammates. Mind you, I think Dwayne Wade is a much better athlete than Nash, and he is clutch too, but does he make everyone else on his team better because of the way he plays? I would say Nash is a much better passer than Wade.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter