KnightXC1 wrote: Fly - My bad on the year Dirk won, had my years mixed up. But the MVP is not a postseason award so Dirk was deserving that year. Same goes for Nash as he took the Suns from a 29 win team to a 62 win team in one year. That is incredible and won 54 the following year when he got the second MVP. The second one may be up for a little more debate but their is no denying he deserved it over anyone in 2005.

I agree that you can make a case for Nash his first year... although it's hard to overlook the big fundamental... the Spurs did win 59 games that year and he was putting up 20 and 11 with two and a half blocks per game.

But he's a non-exciting player so never really gets respect in the MVP ring, but I'm sure he's happy with the championships.

But I really don't think Nash had ANY business winning the 2nd MVP... the arguement was well he had better stats... sorry, but that's a lame excuse. If you give a player the MVP one year, do you have to continue to give as long as his numbers improve?

I will grant you that the second year he may not have been the top choice but he was still a worthy winner. However, with your logic, Lebron should not win the MVP this year even if his numbers are slightly better.

I will agree that Tim Duncan is very underappreciated because he is not flashy, which is why he is and has been one of my favorite players for a long time.

KnightXC1 wrote: However, with your logic, Lebron should not win the MVP this year even if his numbers are slightly better.

How?

KnightXC1 wrote: I will grant you that the second year he may not have been the top choice but he was still a worthy winner. However, with your logic, Lebron should not win the MVP this year even if his numbers are slightly better.

I will agree that Tim Duncan is very underappreciated because he is not flashy, which is why he is and has been one of my favorite players for a long time.

100% truth.

-4× NBA Champion
-3× NBA Finals MVP
-2× NBA Most Valuable Player
-12× NBA All-Star
-9× All-NBA First Team
-3× All-NBA Second Team
-8× All-Defensive First Team
-4× All-Defensive Second Team
-NBA All-Star Game MVP in 2000
-NBA Rookie of the Year
-11 seasons of 20+ and 10+
-12 seasons of 2 blocks a game.
-Won a playoff series in every season but 2.
-Every full season they have played(strike season cut the 98-99 season short), they have won 50+ games.

Quietly he is having a HOF career. Not throwing teammates under the bus or feuding with them. Just goes about his business.

Loved this commercial when Duncan was at Wake Forest. (GOOOULLLETTT)

SQ_Crazies wrote:

KnightXC1 wrote: However, with your logic, Lebron should not win the MVP this year even if his numbers are slightly better.

How?

Because he said "
But I really don't think Nash had ANY business winning the 2nd MVP... the arguement was well he had better stats... sorry, but that's a lame excuse. If you give a player the MVP one year, do you have to continue to give as long as his numbers improve?" So basically hes saying just because he won the MVP the previous year and put up better numbers the next year doesnt mean he deserves the MVP 2nd time around. Basically what LBJ is doing this year

Hb31187 wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote:

KnightXC1 wrote: However, with your logic, Lebron should not win the MVP this year even if his numbers are slightly better.

How?

Because he said "
But I really don't think Nash had ANY business winning the 2nd MVP... the arguement was well he had better stats... sorry, but that's a lame excuse. If you give a player the MVP one year, do you have to continue to give as long as his numbers improve?" So basically hes saying just because he won the MVP the previous year and put up better numbers the next year doesnt mean he deserves the MVP 2nd time around. Basically what LBJ is doing this year

I said he doesn't deserve it solely just because he has better numbers... but that was the argument. There were other more deserving players... Shaq for example... but the pro-Nash people were saying, but he has better stats this year, how do you not give again?

But LeBron is still having an MVP worthy season... better stats, AND he's the only All-star on his team which is one of if not the best teams... how is he not the MVP so far?

You didn't say solely which is why I brought it up. Lebron is having a very good season to this point and will likely be considered to be the MVP because quite frankly the Cavs would stink without him. However, the same goes for a lot of teams with star players (Kobe, Wade, Durant, Duncan). And being an All Star doesn't make you worthy of being the MVP. Hell, frickin Allen Iverson is starting the All Star Game and McGrady started it previous years when he stunk. I don't put too much worth into being an All Star, at least for some players. If fan voting wasn't the 100% factor in determining starters, it would be better.

Fly4Fun wrote:

KnightXC1 wrote: Fly - My bad on the year Dirk won, had my years mixed up. But the MVP is not a postseason award so Dirk was deserving that year. Same goes for Nash as he took the Suns from a 29 win team to a 62 win team in one year. That is incredible and won 54 the following year when he got the second MVP. The second one may be up for a little more debate but their is no denying he deserved it over anyone in 2005.

I agree that you can make a case for Nash his first year... although it's hard to overlook the big fundamental... the Spurs did win 59 games that year and he was putting up 20 and 11 with two and a half blocks per game.

But he's a non-exciting player so never really gets respect in the MVP ring, but I'm sure he's happy with the championships.

But I really don't think Nash had ANY business winning the 2nd MVP... the arguement was well he had better stats... sorry, but that's a lame excuse. If you give a player the MVP one year, do you have to continue to give as long as his numbers improve?

KnightXC1 wrote: You didn't say solely which is why I brought it up. Lebron is having a very good season to this point and will likely be considered to be the MVP because quite frankly the Cavs would stink without him. However, the same goes for a lot of teams with star players (Kobe, Wade, Durant, Duncan). And being an All Star doesn't make you worthy of being the MVP. Hell, frickin Allen Iverson is starting the All Star Game and McGrady started it previous years when he stunk. I don't put too much worth into being an All Star, at least for some players. If fan voting wasn't the 100% factor in determining starters, it would be better.

I didn't say solely, but it was implied. The only thing I addresssed was people saying that Nash deserved the 2nd MVP because he had better stats than when he won the first one. Reading comprehension... try it.

And the second part of your post is irrelevant. I never said being an all-star makes you worthy of being the MVP. But I'd certainly say you have to be an All-star to be an MVP... that's just being realistic. And while those guys you mentioned are certainly important to their team... their teams aren't achieving on the level the same the Cavs are... so realistically, based upon recent voting they aren't goign to have a legit shot to be the Regular season MVP.

Bahahaha! Now we're comparing LeBron's improvement to Nash's? That's not the point, he's right--that is the only reason Nash won it that year. LeBron should have won it that year. Kobe should have won it the year Dirk won it too.

But anyways, you guys are making the mistake of making this all about stats--not Fly. A players stats are a big part of it, but not all of it and I already know you agree with me. But you can't say that LeBron is on top of the discussion because his stats have improved from last year and that's it. He's on top of the discussion because he is the most valuable player to the NBA, more valuable to his team than any other player, the best player and only All-Star on the best team (which means a lot to the voters, your team has to be good), he has the MVP highlight tape from this season and his team has beat Kobe's Lakers twice--once without the 2nd best player on the team. All things that will be considered, add stats in there too and it's clear that this isn't even a race as of right now. There is too much season left to play anyways, but as of January 27th no one is even within striking distance of LeBron for the MVP.

As for the All Star thing, looking over MVP winners the last 20 years--I don't think a single one of them wasn't in the All Star game. The point Fly is trying to make (I think) is that LeBron's team has the best record in the league and he's the only player from it headed to the All Star game--that's pretty rare and speaks volumes about how great you are as a leader.

But I really don't think Nash had ANY business winning the 2nd MVP... the arguement was well he had better stats... sorry, but that's a lame excuse. If you give a player the MVP one year, do you have to continue to give as long as his numbers improve?
[/quote]

I didn't say solely, but it was implied. The only thing I addresssed was people saying that Nash deserved the 2nd MVP because he had better stats than when he won the first one. Reading comprehension... try it.

And the second part of your post is irrelevant. I never said being an all-star makes you worthy of being the MVP. But I'd certainly say you have to be an All-star to be an MVP... that's just being realistic. And while those guys you mentioned are certainly important to their team... their teams aren't achieving on the level the same the Cavs are... so realistically, based upon recent voting they aren't goign to have a legit shot to be the Regular season MVP.
[/quote]

Your original statement says you think Nash only won because his stats got better and "others" have said it as well. Yet he was on one of the best teams in the league that made it to the Conference Finals before losing to the eventual NBA Champions. I think my comprehension of that was fine

I would say the Lakers are playing quite well and are at the Cavs level and achieving just as much. Beating them now means nothing except for fans to brag. If the Cavs beat them in June, then it's important.

SQ - I know the MVP is not all about stats because Lord knows if it were, there would have been some other winners along the line. Basically the MVP comes down to best player on the best team which is sad because that player is not always the most valuable to the team, although usually is. I do think Lebron is the MVP right now and deserved it last year because he is 98% of the reason the Cavs are the best team in the league. Without him, they are hunting in the bottom of the playoff race, but he is that valuable to them. Same can be said for Wade as he doesn't have a lot of help either. Kobe has more help to rely on than others but still leads the Lakers in tight spots.

Lebron being the only All Star from the best team in the league is honestly nothing special. Outside of maybe Mo Williams (who has been hurt) no other Cav should be an All Star. Shaq doesn't have the numbers to support it and no one else should be. Nothing wrong with that at all since Lebron does a lot on his own. Lebron could have 2 MVP's already and will probably get number 2 this barring an injury or something drastic happening. But like I said, being an All Star doesn't mean as much to me anymore since fans can vote so many times and generally vote the wrong players in (AI). Being first team All NBA means more imo, since that is done by writers who follow the game much more closely.

Quote fail^

^^ I know

lol..

You forgot to put

at the beginning of the paragraph you wanted to quote...

Um, the All Star point was that almost never does the team with the best record in the league have ONE All Star. That speaks volumes about what LeBron means to the Cavaliers.

Other than that, figure out how to use the quote feature because I'm not going to pick apart all that bullshit and figure out what you're trying to say.