Sat May 03, 2003 8:39 pm
Kevin Garnett did the most and was the most valuable to his team.
Steve Nash is now considered among the best players playing guard, not something everyone would say last year, inspite of the fact that he made the all-star team, he is something better now. He has shown big improvements.
Ditto Dirk Nowitzki, except he is now consider a top all-around player.
Michael Jordan and Allen Iverson are not being compared now are they?
You guys are backing up Gilbert Arenas and Allen Iverson. Fine do that.
I'll take Steve Nash and Kevin Garnett.
Steve Nash is now considered among the best players playing guard, not something everyone would say last year, inspite of the fact that he made the all-star team, he is something better now. He has shown big improvements.
Ditto Dirk Nowitzki, except he is now consider a top all-around player.
Michael Jordan and Allen Iverson are not being compared now are they?
You guys are backing up Gilbert Arenas and Allen Iverson. Fine do that.
I'll take Steve Nash and Kevin Garnett.
Sat May 03, 2003 8:42 pm
I never missed the points, okay............. 
Sat May 03, 2003 8:48 pm
Kevin Garnett did the most and was the most valuable to his team.
I agree.
Steve Nash is now considered among the best players playing guard, not something everyone would say last year, inspite of the fact that he made the all-star team, he is something better now. He has shown big improvements.
Personally, I would have called Steve Nash a top 5 point guard last year as well, but even if he has improved in that sense, MIP is based on statistical improvement - something that Nash didn't actually accomplish this season.
Ditto Dirk Nowitzki, except he is now consider a top all-around player.
As with Nash, he might have improved a "level" in terms of where he ranks among players, but MIP is a measure of statistical improvement.
Michael Jordan and Allen Iverson are not being compared now are they?
No, that wasn't my intention. I apologise if that's how my post came off.
You guys are backing up Gilbert Arenas and Allen Iverson. Fine do that.
Actually, my vote for this year's MVP would be Kevin Garnett. I was talking about Iverson winning in 2001, as you brought it up. Iverson is still the most valuable player on the Sixers' roster - every star player is valuable to his team. Iverson just hasn't been the most valuable player among the league's stars this season, since he has a good supporting cast. He's in the running to win the award, but he won't due to the abilities of his supporting cast.
I'll take Steve Nash and Kevin Garnett.
And you're entitled to do so (and I agree about KG). But you have to expect disagreement about Nash, since he's not eligible for an award that is based on statistical improvement.
Sat May 03, 2003 8:55 pm
Again I don't want to come off as a know-it-all jerk-off.
I am sorry for any such behavior.
I didn't bring Iverson up, someone else did.
Everyone is eligible for most improved, I am quite sure.
I see the award as some weird award to encourge young players or something, nothing wrong with that, except at face value it can be looked at in different ways. Sorry for any smug language ect...
I love watching Iverson play, but the MVP I believe should be Garnett or Duncan.
I am sorry for any such behavior.
I didn't bring Iverson up, someone else did.
Everyone is eligible for most improved, I am quite sure.
I see the award as some weird award to encourge young players or something, nothing wrong with that, except at face value it can be looked at in different ways. Sorry for any smug language ect...
I love watching Iverson play, but the MVP I believe should be Garnett or Duncan.
Sat May 03, 2003 9:00 pm
No need to apologise, it wouldn't be much of a discussion if there wasn't two sides. My intention was not to moderate, just present my side of the discussion.
You're right, everyone is eligible for pretty much any award (except sixth man, which requires a player to start less than 50% of the games they play), but given the criteria used to select the winner, a player who is eligible in one sense may not actually be eligible for the award. If that makes sense.
You're right, everyone is eligible for pretty much any award (except sixth man, which requires a player to start less than 50% of the games they play), but given the criteria used to select the winner, a player who is eligible in one sense may not actually be eligible for the award. If that makes sense.
Sat May 03, 2003 9:09 pm
how can you say Duncan deserves MVP!!
he doesnt!!
his ppg are down and he barely improved his numbers
and hows about the spurs getting 60 wins.......yer thats great.
but lets see, they didnt have that long winning streak till Ginobili finally broke out, and the emergence of Stephen Jackson would've helped
also Tony Parkers great play
it wasnt just Duncan who got that team the wins.
Now Garnett did almost everything himself
Wally was injured for the start of the season. Brandon out for the year, and with the exception of Hudson and maybe Nestorovic, no-one else really played well, but yet, wodya know the T-wolves finished 4th(but lost to lakers in the 1st rnd
).
that'll be the only reason garnett dont get mvp, coz of the early exit.........again.
Kobe got the Lakers to the playoffs this year. he got em out of the slump, now anyone who cant see that just must hate the guy.
he upped his level of play(9 40pnt games in a row anyone?? 40.2ppg in the month of febuary).
Of course shaq played a part, but it was kobes show.
Allen Iverson is a top 5 candidate every year, coz of what he does for the sixers.
if you didnt know who hewas and looked at his numbers, you would think he was kobe or t-macs height. then ya see how tall and skinny he is and the numbers are even better.
this year IMO he did a better job at getting his teammates involved.
He had another good year, led the league in spg for the 3rd straight year i think. and was a top 5 scorer.
for a guy not even 6 feet(hes listed 6'0, but definatley dont look it) its amazing he averages 27+ ppg.
he doesnt!!
his ppg are down and he barely improved his numbers
and hows about the spurs getting 60 wins.......yer thats great.
but lets see, they didnt have that long winning streak till Ginobili finally broke out, and the emergence of Stephen Jackson would've helped
also Tony Parkers great play
it wasnt just Duncan who got that team the wins.
Now Garnett did almost everything himself
Wally was injured for the start of the season. Brandon out for the year, and with the exception of Hudson and maybe Nestorovic, no-one else really played well, but yet, wodya know the T-wolves finished 4th(but lost to lakers in the 1st rnd
).
that'll be the only reason garnett dont get mvp, coz of the early exit.........again.
Kobe got the Lakers to the playoffs this year. he got em out of the slump, now anyone who cant see that just must hate the guy.
he upped his level of play(9 40pnt games in a row anyone?? 40.2ppg in the month of febuary).
Of course shaq played a part, but it was kobes show.
Allen Iverson is a top 5 candidate every year, coz of what he does for the sixers.
if you didnt know who hewas and looked at his numbers, you would think he was kobe or t-macs height. then ya see how tall and skinny he is and the numbers are even better.
this year IMO he did a better job at getting his teammates involved.
He had another good year, led the league in spg for the 3rd straight year i think. and was a top 5 scorer.
for a guy not even 6 feet(hes listed 6'0, but definatley dont look it) its amazing he averages 27+ ppg.
Mon May 05, 2003 8:41 am
that was a great debate by paul pierce the truth and company. too bad i missed out on this one
it's about time someone sparked a great discussion on this forum.
paul pierce the truth- hope you make more posts in this forum
it's about time someone sparked a great discussion on this forum.
paul pierce the truth- hope you make more posts in this forum