Who is the worst player to win NBA MVP?

[D Nice]

NB4 Lebron or Kobe.

I'd say Cowens, then Iverson, then Nash, then Dirk, in order of descending suckitude. Iverson, Nash, and Dirk owe Kobe & Shaq 2 MVPs each.

[D Nice]

wth. honestly, why would anyone choose iverson over nash? i don't get it...

I'd take Nash over AI, but at least one was widely regarded as a top 5 player PRIOR to him winning the award. Not someone who happened to fall into a perfect situation at the perfect time while making a magical quantum leap after physically priming...

[semi-sentient]

Would anyone here seriously take 2001 Iverson over 2005 or 2006 Nash?

[NYK 455]

NB4 Lebron or Kobe.

I'd say Cowens, then Iverson, then Nash, then Dirk, in order of descending suckitude. Iverson, Nash, and Dirk owe Kobe & Shaq 2 MVPs each.

Nash doesn't owe Kobe anything, they both had a strong case, Nash's was better, and the better man won the award.

[Jimmy76]

I feel like Nash is like 3rd after Kobe and lebron in terms of sparking the same debate whenever he's brought up

[D Nice]

Would anyone here seriously take 2001 Iverson over 2005 or 2006 Nash?

2001 Iverson under the 05/06 rules would be terrifying. When defense was allowed to be played, Iverson stood out as the more impactful player. Even an old-man Iverson put up 25/7 .55 TS% when he finally played with other offensive talent in Denver. AI Also trumped better competition in 2001 than Nash in 06 (Nash beat out Old Shaq, Aging Duncan, & Kobe mired on a terrible team, Iverson beat out Prime Kobe, Prime Shaq, Prime Duncan, & Prime KG).

Obviously Nash had the better season on paper, but Iverson actually got his (much less talented) team to the finals, albeit against lesser competition as well. I don't find it cut and dry, but I also think Nash is insanely overrated here, so that might be it.

[nonemus]

WHOAH. 55% TS. That's mind-bogglingly high...

[NYK 455]

Would anyone here seriously take 2001 Iverson over 2005 or 2006 Nash?

2001 Iverson under the 05/06 rules would be terrifying. When defense was allowed to be played, Iverson stood out as the more impactful player. Even an old-man Iverson put up 25/7 .55 TS% when he finally played with other offensive talent in Denver. AI Also trumped better competition in 2001 than Nash in 06 (Nash beat out Old Shaq, Aging Duncan, & Kobe mired on a terrible team, Iverson beat out Prime Kobe, Prime Shaq, Prime Duncan, & Prime KG).

Obviously Nash had the better season on paper, but Iverson actually got his (much less talented) team to the finals, albeit against lesser competition as well. I don't find it cut and dry, but I also think Nash is insanely overrated here, so that might be it.

Terrifyingly inefficent at scoring the ball.

[D Nice]

It's really a shame so many posters here started watching basketball in 2006.

[bastillon]

Suns without Nash in 05 and 06 combined for 2-10 (14W pace)
Sixers without 01 Iverson were 6-5 (45W pace)

Suns were 60-15 with Nash in 05 (66W pace) and 54-25 in 06 (56W), total 114-40 (61W)
Sixers were 50-21 with Iverson in 01 (57W).

[Rapcity_11]

It's really a shame so many posters here started watching basketball in 2006.

It's a shame that some posters know so little about basketball.

How was Nash's situation so perfect if the roster has been re-vamped multiple times and Nash still has the same impact?

[Reasonable Fan]

Nash's inclusion in this poll is a joke. Guys like Willis Reed could be here instead... hell, Kobe 2008 would have been a fairer target, not to mention Malone in 99 and 97.

[Palma Dutch]

Nash's inclusion in this poll is a joke. Guys like Willis Reed could be here instead... hell, Kobe 2008 would have been a fairer target, not to mention Malone in 99 and 97.

That's actually what I was thinking. Malone's MVP year, albeit he was good, wasn't MVP worthy.

[bastillon]

It's really a shame so many posters here started watching basketball in 2006.

It's a shame that some posters know so little about basketball.

How was Nash's situation so perfect if the roster has been re-vamped multiple times and Nash still has the same impact?

exactly.

+

Suns without Nash in 05 and 06 combined for 2-10 (14W pace)
Sixers without 01 Iverson were 6-5 (45W pace)

Suns were 60-15 with Nash in 05 (66W pace) and 54-25 in 06 (56W), total 114-40 (61W)
Sixers were 50-21 with Iverson in 01 (57W).

how was this situation perfect when they couldn't win to save their lives without him ? 2-10 during MVP years without Nash. does that tell you something ?

also, both times Suns had significant postseason injury (05 - Marion, JJ; 06 - Amare, Kurt Thomas, entire line-up in the postseason after playing 15 games in 30 nights in the first 2 rounds), making their situation FAR from perfect. not to mention that those teams were misconstructed. people think r'n'g suits Nash, but what he REALLY needs is spacing and defensive bigs. Suns were at their best when they had the most defensive talent. perfect line-up for Nash would be something like: P.Gasol-Ch.Oakley-B.Bowen-K.Kittles

[Reasonable Fan]

I've started a new thread with better options...

[D Nice]

My basketball knowledge is limited because I don't subscribe to Nash = GOAT PG. Expected.

Why do people post w/l differentials like they mean anything without context. If a team is completely structured around the talents of one player, and lack depth at that player's position, they will struggle without him. It's like the people who like to point out the Laker's w/l differentials with Shaq and with Kobe, acting like the Lakers perimeter depth was comparable to having Samaki Walker, Slava Medvedenko, and AC Green as your replacements.

How was Nash's situation so perfect if the roster has been re-vamped multiple times and Nash still has the same impact?

Yeah. The roster was "revamped" to continually sport undersized athletic finishers at the 4/5 with shooters/all-star wings up and down the perimeter. Seriously

05: Amare, Marion, JJ, Q, Barbosa
06: Diaw, Marion, TT, KT, Bell, Barbosa
07: Amare, Diaw, Marion Bell, KT, Barbosa
08: Amare, Shaq (18/10), Hill, Diaw, Bell, Barbosa
10: Amare, J-Rich, Frye, Lopez, Dudley

Yeah, there have been plenty of teams that could replicate that talent, shooting, and athleticism.

People like to blame Nash's failures on lack of defensive big men, completely ignoring the fact that the reason he's able to lead offensive teams like that is because he's running up and down the court with small forwards as his center. Color me confused (but not surprised).

Superstars are superstars are superstars. They're talented and explosive enough that you can't suppress their talent with a system, scheme, or set of players. A young Kobe playing under Shaq is a perfect example of this. T-Mac going to play with Yao is another example. There are several others.

Steve Nash is the outlier. He looked normal until he was 30, the rules changed, he joined a stacked team with a specific system, and he's become better than John Stockton and on the heels of Magic Johnson. It's freaking insane.

Nash's inclusion in this poll is a joke. Guys like Willis Reed could be here instead... hell, Kobe 2008 would have been a fairer target, not to mention Malone in 99 and 97.

Not the brightest tool in the shed, are you? Paul being on Kobe's heels for the award doesn't make him a worse player for it. Question was not who was or was not most deserving of their award, it's about who was the worst player. Pretty simple subject.

Unless you understood that and crafted that reply anyway. In which case.

[NYK 455]

Yet he's running the second best offense this year with offensive mismatch juggernauts like Hakim Warrick and Robin Lopez.

[D Nice]

Yet he's running the second best offense this year with offensive mismatch juggernauts like Hakim Warrick and Robin Lopez.

- They're 5-4.
- You have a 9 game sample size.
- There are about 5 point guards playing better basketball right now.

[Sinant]

The fact that Nash has 3 votes is incredibly depressing.

[Reasonable Fan]

The fact that Nash has 3 votes is incredibly depressing.

Must only be 3 kobe fans on right now... go to my alternative poll I suggest, where joke candidates haven't been added.