RealGM

From another thread...

Timmaytime wrote:Pistons don't have insane top end talent but have amazing depth

Isiah Thomas / Chauncey Billups / Dave Bing
Joe Dumars / Richard Hamilton
Grant Hill / Adrian Dantley / Dave DeBusschere
Dennis Rodman / Rasheed Wallace
Bob Lanier / Ben Wallace / Bill Laimbeer

Lots of outstanding players, no MVP's. Is any other franchise's non-MVP roster better?

Laimbeer wrote:From another thread...

Timmaytime wrote:Pistons don't have insane top end talent but have amazing depth

Isiah Thomas / Chauncey Billups / Dave Bing
Joe Dumars / Richard Hamilton
Grant Hill / Adrian Dantley / Dave DeBusschere
Dennis Rodman / Rasheed Wallace
Bob Lanier / Ben Wallace / Bill Laimbeer

Lots of outstanding players, no MVP's. Is any other franchise's non-MVP roster better?

Do you mean a team with no MVPs or just the collection of players that haven't won MVP? If it's the latter, I present Seattle/OKC, which basically includes everyone on their team but Durant.

Russell Westbrook/Gary Payton/Gus Williams
Ray Allen/James Harden/Dennis Johnson
Ricky Pierce/Dale Ellis
Shawn Kemp/Tom Chambers
Jack Sikma/Spencer Hawyood

That's pretty close. Boston you lose Russell, Bird, and KG. Pretty sure you can build a pretty good looking team with what's left.

Laimbeer wrote:From another thread...

Timmaytime wrote:Pistons don't have insane top end talent but have amazing depth

Isiah Thomas / Chauncey Billups / Dave Bing
Joe Dumars / Richard Hamilton
Grant Hill / Adrian Dantley / Dave DeBusschere
Dennis Rodman / Rasheed Wallace
Bob Lanier / Ben Wallace / Bill Laimbeer

Lots of outstanding players, no MVP's. Is any other franchise's non-MVP roster better?

If this imaginary game was played in a league where defense mattered then we win

Although when people talk about MVPs you gotta remember Nash won 2 while Big Ben won NONE!

As great as Nash was offensively wasn't Ben just as great - if not more so - on D?

Ben, Sheed, Hill, Joe, Zeke whip everyone IMO and it wouldn't be close

Pharaoh wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:From another thread...

Timmaytime wrote:Pistons don't have insane top end talent but have amazing depth

Isiah Thomas / Chauncey Billups / Dave Bing
Joe Dumars / Richard Hamilton
Grant Hill / Adrian Dantley / Dave DeBusschere
Dennis Rodman / Rasheed Wallace
Bob Lanier / Ben Wallace / Bill Laimbeer

Lots of outstanding players, no MVP's. Is any other franchise's non-MVP roster better?

If this imaginary game was played in a league where defense mattered then we win

Although when people talk about MVPs you gotta remember Nash won 2 while Big Ben won NONE!

As great as Nash was offensively wasn't Ben just as great - if not more so - on D?

Ben, Sheed, Hill, Joe, Zeke whip everyone IMO and it wouldn't be close

As strange as it sounds though, its easier to hide a defensive liability than it is an offensive one. As impressive as Ben was defensively, he definitely lowered our offensive ceiling. I'm not sure you can say the same for a bad defender to the same degree.

As to Nash in particular, he won MVPs because his teams won more regular season games than ours did. 2006 was a bit of an abberration because the Suns were still strong without Amare Stoudemire. The Pistons won 64 that year, but by then Ben was the second or third best player on the team.

Snakebites wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:From another thread...

Timmaytime wrote:Pistons don't have insane top end talent but have amazing depth

Isiah Thomas / Chauncey Billups / Dave Bing
Joe Dumars / Richard Hamilton
Grant Hill / Adrian Dantley / Dave DeBusschere
Dennis Rodman / Rasheed Wallace
Bob Lanier / Ben Wallace / Bill Laimbeer

Lots of outstanding players, no MVP's. Is any other franchise's non-MVP roster better?

Do you mean a team with no MVPs or just the collection of players that haven't won MVP? If it's the latter, I present Seattle/OKC, which basically includes everyone on their team but Durant.

Russell Westbrook/Gary Payton/Gus Williams
Ray Allen/James Harden/Dennis Johnson
Ricky Pierce/Dale Ellis
Shawn Kemp/Tom Chambers
Jack Sikma/Spencer Hawyood

That's pretty close. Boston you lose Russell, Bird, and KG. Pretty sure you can build a pretty good looking team with what's left.

You got it. A collection of players who never won a MVP. This would be a great matchup, but I see a pretty clear advantage in the frontcourt.

Snakebites wrote:

Pharaoh wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:From another thread...



Lots of outstanding players, no MVP's. Is any other franchise's non-MVP roster better?

If this imaginary game was played in a league where defense mattered then we win

Although when people talk about MVPs you gotta remember Nash won 2 while Big Ben won NONE!

As great as Nash was offensively wasn't Ben just as great - if not more so - on D?

Ben, Sheed, Hill, Joe, Zeke whip everyone IMO and it wouldn't be close

As strange as it sounds though, its easier to hide a defensive liability than it is an offensive one. As impressive as Ben was defensively, he definitely lowered our offensive ceiling. I'm not sure you can say the same for a bad defender to the same degree.

As to Nash in particular, he won MVPs because his teams won more regular season games than ours did. 2006 was a bit of an abberration because the Suns were still strong without Amare Stoudemire. The Pistons won 64 that year, but by then Ben was the second or third best player on the team.

Ben wasn't on the team in 06, but Chauncey deserved it over Nash that year.

Todd3 wrote:

Snakebites wrote:

Pharaoh wrote:
If this imaginary game was played in a league where defense mattered then we win

Although when people talk about MVPs you gotta remember Nash won 2 while Big Ben won NONE!

As great as Nash was offensively wasn't Ben just as great - if not more so - on D?

Ben, Sheed, Hill, Joe, Zeke whip everyone IMO and it wouldn't be close

As strange as it sounds though, its easier to hide a defensive liability than it is an offensive one. As impressive as Ben was defensively, he definitely lowered our offensive ceiling. I'm not sure you can say the same for a bad defender to the same degree.

As to Nash in particular, he won MVPs because his teams won more regular season games than ours did. 2006 was a bit of an abberration because the Suns were still strong without Amare Stoudemire. The Pistons won 64 that year, but by then Ben was the second or third best player on the team.

Ben wasn't on the team in 06, but Chauncey deserved it over Nash that year.

Ben Wallace absolutely was on the team in 2006 when we won 64 games. He was definitely in a distinguishable decline, but he was there.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DET/2006.html

I love Chauncey, but he was never an MVP caliber guy and I've never bought the "best player on the best team should always get it" argument either. I don't think Nash deserved it that year either, though.

Dirk was the guy that year. Mavs won 60 games and Jason Terry was their second best player. Enough said.

Snakebites wrote:

Todd3 wrote:

Snakebites wrote:
As strange as it sounds though, its easier to hide a defensive liability than it is an offensive one. As impressive as Ben was defensively, he definitely lowered our offensive ceiling. I'm not sure you can say the same for a bad defender to the same degree.

As to Nash in particular, he won MVPs because his teams won more regular season games than ours did. 2006 was a bit of an abberration because the Suns were still strong without Amare Stoudemire. The Pistons won 64 that year, but by then Ben was the second or third best player on the team.

Ben wasn't on the team in 06, but Chauncey deserved it over Nash that year.

Ben Wallace absolutely was on the team in 2006 when we won 64 games. He was definitely in a distinguishable decline, but he was there.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DET/2006.html

I love Chauncey, but he was never an MVP caliber guy and I've never bought the "best player on the best team should always get it" argument either. I don't think Nash deserved it that year either, though.

Dirk was the guy that year. Mavs won 60 games and Jason Terry was their second best player. Enough said.

True on Ben. I think I got the 06 & 07 teams mixed up.

I'm not big on the MVP "criteria" either, but it does often go to the player with the best record (Dirk won it the following year with the best record), so I just think if that's how it is most years, they shouldn't change it when Chauncey does it.

imo MVP should be given after the playoffs. Makes no sense why more stock is put in 'best player in the best regular season' than 'best player in playoffs'. The Pistons have no MVPs, but they have 3 FMVPs, but regular season MVP is perceived as being better by the general public for some reason. Should just be 1 award at the end of the year to the best player on the team that wins the championship.

Snakebites wrote:

Pharaoh wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:From another thread...



Lots of outstanding players, no MVP's. Is any other franchise's non-MVP roster better?

If this imaginary game was played in a league where defense mattered then we win

Although when people talk about MVPs you gotta remember Nash won 2 while Big Ben won NONE!

As great as Nash was offensively wasn't Ben just as great - if not more so - on D?

Ben, Sheed, Hill, Joe, Zeke whip everyone IMO and it wouldn't be close

As strange as it sounds though, its easier to hide a defensive liability than it is an offensive one. As impressive as Ben was defensively, he definitely lowered our offensive ceiling. I'm not sure you can say the same for a bad defender to the same degree.

The 2 time MVP Nash won nothing of great importance and there's a laundry list of no defense-playing clowns that never won ****, including the MVP trophy.

Meanwhile, the no offense-having, no MVP trophy winner Ben Wallace was THE anchor on a team with 2 Finals appearances, 6 ECF appearances and a championship.

And there's gotta be just as many defensive minded players that were extremely limited offensively that won big or contributed greatly to a team being successful.

I'm offended as a basketball fan that Steve Nash has 2 MVP trophies! But I've already said my piece on that years ago

As to Nash in particular, he won MVPs because his teams won more regular season games than ours did. 2006 was a bit of an abberration because the Suns were still strong without Amare Stoudemire. The Pistons won 64 that year, but by then Ben was the second or third best player on the team.

Winning more games shouldn't be the be all, end all though.

Let's say we won 60 games with Big Ben and the Suns won 60 games with Nash - Nash still gets it cause the system is currupted.

But, since we know the system is BS that means we don't accept it's choice of MVP and instead give it to the real MVP...

And in that situation one can argue - legitimately - that for a long **** time Ben Wallace was the real MVP of the league

Also, starting to wonder if we should claim all of those players in the OP? I mean a number of them played more time other franchises...

I think the Knicks have a team that would be pretty tough to beat:

Walt Frazier/Mark Jackson
Earl Monroe/Allan Houston/John Starks
Bernard King/Carmelo Anthony
Dave DeBusschere/Charles Oakley
Patrick Ewing/Bill Cartwright

The Lakers also have probably 3 of the best players to never win MVP in West, Baylor, and Worthy that can build a team around.

I would never believe I could read something putting Ben Wallace on a MVP conversation.

In SVG We Trust wrote:I would never believe I could read something putting Ben Wallace on a MVP conversation.

The fact he wasn't in the conversation is the bloody problem!

Pharaoh wrote:

In SVG We Trust wrote:I would never believe I could read something putting Ben Wallace on a MVP conversation.

The fact he wasn't in the conversation is the bloody problem!

Here's the case for Ben Wallace:

Led the team to the ECF for 6 years - pick any of them and he's an MVP candidate

Won the Defensive Player of the Year award how many times? Pick any season he won that and he's an MVP candidate

Was THE unquestioned leader of the team that is mostly responsible for the league changing rules to limit what you can do on D!

They changed the **** rules of the sport! That takes some kind of influential seasons yeah?

What's the case against? He didnt score enough? Didn't do enough offensively?

How is it justified that Nash won 2 because of his offense and Ben can't even get in the conversation with defense?

You can't justify it! No one but Suns homers should even attempt to!

The system is corrupt! Ain't no other way to say it

Pharaoh I think you should stop with the jagger

In SVG We Trust wrote:Pharaoh I think you should stop with the jagger

And I think you should put forward your case against Ben.

It's a few weeks to training camp - we've got time

Ben finished top 10 in MVP voting in '02 (10th), '03 (8th), and '04 (7th).

Chauncey was 5th in '06.

My case against Ben is simple: Just like in all sports...MVP is an offensive award. You have to do something completely earth shattering to win MVP for defense and not have anyone do anything well offensively. If you compare it to baseball, Pitchers don't win MVP very often, they win the Cy Young (DPOY). Ben Wallace was fairly recognized by winning all the DPOYs.

BdeRegt wrote:My case against Ben is simple: Just like in all sports...MVP is an offensive award. You have to do something completely earth shattering to win MVP for defense and not have anyone do anything well offensively. If you compare it to baseball, Pitchers don't win MVP very often, they win the Cy Young (DPOY). Ben Wallace was fairly recognized by winning all the DPOYs.

To the bold: No, the MVP is not an offensive award. It's the Most Valuable Player award, which should take into account every aspect of the game.

They already have an Offensive Player of the Year Award - it's the scoring title!

Todd3 wrote:Ben finished top 10 in MVP voting in '02 (10th), '03 (8th), and '04 (7th).

Chauncey was 5th in '06.

So Ben never made it into the top 5 - which is the problem!

People might argue he split votes with Chauncey every year...and my rebuttal to that is Durant/Westbrook