visions wrote:I get where you are coming from but then what about players who have won championship rings and players who haven't? For instance Scott Williams has a ring and Karl Malone does not. Does that mean SW was a better PF than Malone? Obviously not.
I'm not even talking about championships, I'm talking about players who have an elite impact on both ends of the floor and had a similar impact on their teams.
If Jordan had never won a regular season or playoff MVP award, we would all still rank him as the greatest (or one of) player of all time.
Horrible example. MJ was exciting and what-not, but his first MVP came in 88, when he was so obviously the best player in the league they couldn't deny it anymore. AND he was also DPOY that year. IN any case, it was functionally clear that he was the best in the league at that point.
And then he collected rings, and he built an image of being a winner and that helped lead to titles. But again, accolades followed. Volume, efficient scoring with low turnovers, outstanding defense and team success? That's a perennial MVP candidate.
If, by season's end, Nash truly is the MVP then he deserves the award based purely on that and not on legacy or anything.
It remains a problem, but again, I don't think he's in position to deserve it this year compared to what other guys are going to do in the league if they're healthy and based on similar team results.