English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I agree that the Suns would lose more games without Nash, but that doesn't makes him the best player/most valuable on the team or that doesn't mean that he makes his teammates better. Nash is the STARTING point guard on the Suns lineup(a key player). If you take a key player from any lineup that team is going to lose more games. Example: In 04 the Pistons openly admits that they wasn't a championship team without Rasheed joining them, right?
Well that doesn't make Rasheed the best player/most valuable player on the team, does it? No, they just needed that good power forward to complete them. You see when Ben departed the Pistons there clearly not the same team without Ben(a key player). Another example: D-Wade is the best player on the Heat, but with Shaq(a key player) being out of the lineup the Heat lose more games. Now that doesn't make Shaq the Heats best player, does it? No, it just means they're missing their starting center.
Anyways, see my point.

2007-03-06 08:11:22 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports Basketball

Hey cthomp99,
what are you talking about? The Pistons entire lineup was an all-star in 05. You're not making any sense & that wasn't a legit point.

2007-03-06 09:31:46 · update #1

11 answers

i agree with you totally. i live in AZ and many of my friends are Suns fans, so i have this talk often. in my opinion, that honor goes to Shawn Marion. if you look back on their last few seasons... the Suns could have been this good with Marbury. Even with Amare a rookie, they took a championship bound Spurs to 5 games and almost won in round one. The reason they lost is because Marion played well below his regular season level. Again the same thing happened against the Spurs in Nash's first year, when Bruce Bowen's defense forced Marion to have a sub-par performance in their battle to rep for the western conference (of course it didn't help that Parker and Ginobli had a field day). The argument could not be made for Amare, because the Suns made it just as far without him. Truth of the matter is, let Marion be out for a while, and see if Nash can keep the Suns winning. just my opinion.....

2007-03-06 08:50:41 · answer #1 · answered by Bk2Az 4 · 0 0

Nice point.

To the above poster, if you think that Marion and Amare aren't effective without Nash, you've never seen their numbers without Nash.

The Suns lost that stretch of games because both Nash and Diaw, two key facilitators which constitute 1/3 of their normal lineup, were out. PLUS take the fact that the dominant ball handler was not handling the offense. Shawn Marion missed two games, and the Suns lost to Philly, arguably the worst team in the league. By this comparison, Marion should be MVP, no?

I agree, claiming that the Suns lose more games without Nash is the indicator to a MVP award is a logical fallacy.

2007-03-06 21:58:05 · answer #2 · answered by G K 3 · 0 0

The difference is that those teams didn't supposedly have 2 other all-stars on their team. The fact that Steve Nash is so important to a team with 2 other all-stars in Marion and Stoudamire makes him the MVP. With Steve Nash out, those 2 other all-stars, players that you would think would be able to carry the team, not only didn't keep pace with their record with Nash in the lineup, but didn't even manage to post a winning record, including a loss, at home, to the Atlanta Hawks who are one of the worst teams in the league. This is why Nash is the MVP because even though he's on a team with 2 other all stars, he is the reason for their success...and I'm not even a Suns fan.

2007-03-06 17:07:33 · answer #3 · answered by cthomp99 3 · 0 0

People say that cause its true. Before Nash was there, they had Marion, Stoudemire, Joe Johnson, and Stephon Marbury and only won 27 games. With Nash they won 62. Try to explain that. Granted they had injuries but they barely made the playoffs the year before in a league where the majority of the teams make the postseason. Cut the Shawn Marion crap. He's Antawn Jamison with defense. He's an All Star, with a very unique skill set. Just because his skill set is different doesn't make it any more or less impressive.

2007-03-06 18:31:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

People people...get away from the numbers for a moment...for those of you that have actually played organize ball at least on a collegiate level understand that while numbers are important at the end of the day it's who can impose their will on a games tempo and style...Steve Nash imposes his high energy, high skill game everytime he steps on the court...he goes where he wants, and does what he wants. Not to may guys can disrupt his plans...Marion, Stoudemire and anyone else on that team owe there numbers to NASH he puts the ball where and when they need it, he actually willfully creates passing and cutting lanes for the high flying finishers on his team...he effect a whole defense by himself...seriously you can argue he has surpassed or at least approaching Magic Johnson status as a point guard! And if you still want to hold on to the numbers...well for a point guard...I don't know if there has been anything like him in that position in the history of the league....do your point guard homework and I think you will find no need to question NASH as an MVP! All he needs is the rings...and may just be the greatest point guard to play the game.

2007-03-06 21:20:14 · answer #5 · answered by Rey Luna 2 · 1 0

i have to disagree wtih that. steve nash is the best point gaurd in the league. he is the best passer by far. he is one of the best passers in history. he is also a great shooter. he might not lead the league in points but he prolly could. he is in the top 5 of three point shooters behind r.bell, r.allen, m.miller. he has the highest shotting perscentage for a point guard at about 52%. he shoots almost 90% free throws. he is an underrated defender. the pheonix suns system of run and gun would not go without him. he can make the most unbelievable passes. he makes everyone around him better. 20 points and 12 assists. that accounts for at least 44 points. more likely around 50 with all the three pointers the suns shoot. but still 50 points beacause of one player is unrivaled

2007-03-06 16:49:53 · answer #6 · answered by James 4 · 0 0

I agree with you.I hate when ppl say that without him Marion and Amare would be nothing,They were great players before Nash.

2007-03-06 17:31:19 · answer #7 · answered by metsgurl716 4 · 0 0

man I disagree with you about steve nash but agree with most of the other stuff you said. definately you need the right player at the right time in the right moment to make something amazing happen unless you have jordan then he could play 1 on 5 and still school everyone. take scottie pippen out of the bulls and jordan still woul have won so think about that as well. without steve nash the suns would probably BARELY make the playoffs and they would lose if they made it. nash is averaging 11.7 assists and 19 points a game making him responsible for 41 points a night (on average) hmmm if thats not MVP material I must be retarded or something.

2007-03-06 16:26:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

its not the mbp or most best player its mvp most valuable player. its about helping ur team not getting ur numbers

2007-03-06 16:33:15 · answer #9 · answered by slicknj13 3 · 1 0

2 MVP STRAIGHT & SOONER OR LATER 3 IN A ROW!

2007-03-06 16:16:22 · answer #10 · answered by Yo 100$ (YUWL) (X-way ECW) 4 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers