Did Nash deserve his two MVPs?

[Doctor MJ]

But a 2x MVP indicates something more, some level of all time dominance that just never was there. Steve Nash is not a more dominant player than Hakeem or Barkley, and he doesn't even rank as highly on the PG lists as Isiah or Stockton or Oscar and yet there he sits with 2 MVPs.

srsly, how did he beat out Hakeem for MVP!!!

[jaypo]

I didn't make a case for Wade being more valuable. I made a case for Shaq actually helping boost Wade's game and turning a team into a title contender instantly while putting up great numbers. And finally getting them over the hump. Remember, the Heat gave up 2 very good players in Odom and Butler and got Shaq in return. So in 05, there wasn't much different from 04 except for Shaq. Having a dominant big slightly helps the games of their wing players (ask Penny and Kobe). So while Wade may have scored more, Shaq still did so more efficiently, rebounded, and anchored the defense.

[bastillon]

I didn't make a case for Wade being more valuable. I made a case for Shaq actually helping boost Wade's game and turning a team into a title contender instantly while putting up great numbers. And finally getting them over the hump. Remember, the Heat gave up 2 very good players in Odom and Butler and got Shaq in return.

Code: Select all

So in 05, there wasn't much different from 04 except for Shaq.

Having a dominant big slightly helps the games of their wing players (ask Penny and Kobe). So while Wade may have scored more, Shaq still did so more efficiently, rebounded, and anchored the defense.

and except for rules changes making Wade unstoppable, except for Wade and Haslem playing combined ~2500 mins more. that and 3 starters being gone. yeah, not at all much different.

I think Shaq probably deserved it over Nash in 2005. Wade was "the man" on that team, but Shaq came in and made a pretty big impact (17-game turnaround). Nash was awesome as well, but the Suns had a lot of weapons that year (Amare, Marion, Johnson, Richardson, Barbosa...).

In 2006 I thought Nash pretty clearly deserved it. He stepped up his scoring and was 2nd behind Marion, and there was no Amare, Johnson, or Richardson there. Despite all of that, the Suns only fell by 8 games from their 2005 total, so you have to give credit where credit is due. Nash kept that team playing well.

did you read my posts about Amare/Marion/JJ/Q ? what was their real value when they were succesfully replaced by a combo of 3 bench players the next year ? why couldn't they win to save their lives in 04 or 05 when Nash missed games ? combined 13-25 those two years.

the fact that they were so great is a testimony to Nash's playmaking abilities, because they weren't the same players without him.

So you can look at "well, Nash got that team to 62 wins", or whatever you would like to say. I look at the fact that in 05 and 06, barring 1 freak injury to Wade in the ECF, Shaq being added to that team took them from a 500 ballclub (more or less) to a championship, and probably 2.

so Shaq took them from .500 to championship contention. Nash took them from deep lottery to championship contention. see my point ? this argument - team improvement - is clearly in Nash's favour.

+/- numbers strongly back-up this argument:
Miami was +3.9 without Shaq, +10.1 with him
Suns were -2.2 without Nash, +13.2 with him

sample size was big enough. both played approx 2500 mins and missed about 1400-1500. Nash had a lot more impact on his team than Shaq made on his.

[jaypo]

Bastillion- you are proving my point. With 3 starters gone, replaced by Shaq, they became a championship contender. Immediately. And they had a good chance of winning a title if Wade didn't get hurt. Now, if Shaq had gotten hurt in the ECF, the same thing would have occurred. They wouldn't get past the Pistons. And they went on to win it in 06. You can leave all the +/- calculations out there. You can leave all the advanced stats out there. Advanced stats won't show how many times a player gets doubled without the ball in his hands. Or how many times he gets the other team in the bonus early. Or how many times players won't drive the lane because of who is waiting there in the paint. There is 1 thing that needs to be considered. The Suns weren't a serious contender. They never have been. The Heat were, as evidenced by the TITLE THEY WON! And they didn't even sniff the finals without Shaq. Now, have the Suns ever even made it to the finals with Nash? Nope. That's not what I call "championship contention". Maybe "WCF contention. But not championship contention.

Hell, people knock Shaq for not excelling at the PNR defense. At least he plays some facet of defense. Nash's attempts at defense are to flop and hope he gets the call!

[Jimmy76]

+/- would pick up the effect of double teams and lane intimidation

[bastillon]

couple of thing:

+/- numbers include drawing double teams and defense. it includes everything if it makes impact. when Shaq is drawing double teams, his teammates are more efficient which means it translates into higher on-court ORtg. when Shaq isn't playing, these advantages are lessened and their ORtg is worse. same with defense... and even then when Nash was off-court his team was hurting much more. your raping on Nash's defense doesn' really make sense: if Nash was this league's worst defender you're making him out to be, then how did his team improve so dramatically when he was playing ? that takes defense into account and they were still MUCH better.

championship contention. Spurs won with 7.84 SRS. Pistons had 3.31 SRS but they were coasting throughout RS. Suns had 7.08 SRS, which was good enough for #2 in the league. Heat were 4th with 5.76, right after Dallas' 5.85. I'm not sure how Suns weren't championship contenders. they lost to the best team in the league, beat Dallas despite injury to key player (that cost them Spurs series btw). you provided no evidence for this ridiculous claim. at least Suns beat some serious competition in the playoffs, unlike Miami beating up inferior .500 Wizzards and Nets that had no business being in the playoffs in the first place.

Heat record misrepresents their value because they were playing in the terrible EC. Suns were 24-6 against east, 38-14 against west. Heat were 41-11 against east, 18-12 against west. there's no question Heat couldn't duplicate their record in the west.

let's see pt differential: Suns +10.2 against east, +5.3 against west. Heat +8.6 against east, +3.0 against west.

it's clear that Suns were much more of a championship contender than Heat based on 2005 data. not to mention that Suns were 60-15 when Nash played (66W pace), while Heat were 53-20 when Shaq played (59W). there's some major disagreement between what you said and what really happened.

[jaypo]

I wouldn't think it would. Doesn't it include whole team stats? Therefore, if Shaq shares the floor with 4 scrubs, his +/- would be lower than if he had 4 HOF'rs playing well at his side. As I understand it, it calculates points scored less points given up while a player is on the floor. Since a player shares the floor with 4 others, it would take into account their deficiencies also. Am I right? I'm asking.

[Doctor MJ]

Bastillion- you are proving my point. With 3 starters gone, replaced by Shaq, they became a championship contender. Immediately. And they had a good chance of winning a title if Wade didn't get hurt. Now, if Shaq had gotten hurt in the ECF, the same thing would have occurred.

Things to remember:

-The '03-04 Heat were very young, and started poorly. There record toward the end of the year was very strong. To the point where if they hadn't made the trade, and Wade hadn't taken a quantum leap forward, the Heat still would have been expected to win more than 47 games which would have meant they'd be a 2 seed and expected to make the ECF. Add in Wade's quantum leap, maybe they even do better. So this idea that the team did vastly better because they got Shaq in place of Odom & Butler is not correct.

-As you mentioned, the Wade injury probably kept the Heat from making the finals. What you didn't mention is that Shaq got hurt in the ECSF, and the Heat still easily won their road games. Basically, without Shaq and with Wade's quantum leap, there's still a good chance the Heat make the ECF, so the matter that having Shaq on the team wasn't enough to lift them one more round once Wade went below his 100% self boxes in Shaq's value a good amount.

Shaq was good that year, but it was very clearly him leaving his prime. Note Shaq's playoff MPG numbers. Before the trade to the Heat, Shaq was a 40+ MPG guy. On the Heat he fell into the low 30s immediately, and he stayed there the next 4 years. Shaq had a great case for being the best player in the league for 10 years - it was a good run - but it ended in '04-05, and people just didn't realize it at first because of how good Wade was. In retrospect, now that it was clear that we were seeing a Top 25 all-time level player emerge, I'm really surprised that anyone is still confused about what happened.

[Doctor MJ]

I wouldn't think it would. Doesn't it include whole team stats? Therefore, if Shaq shares the floor with 4 scrubs, his +/- would be lower than if he had 4 HOF'rs playing well at his side. As I understand it, it calculates points scored less points given up while a player is on the floor. Since a player shares the floor with 4 others, it would take into account their deficiencies also. Am I right? I'm asking.

+/- is a category of stats so I understand the confusion.

In basketball no one uses what I'll call "raw +/-", where we just go by how well the team does when they guy is on the court. The two big variants used are:

team net +/- which subtracts how well the team does per X minutes when he's not on the court from when how well the team does per X minutes when he is on the court.

adjusted +/- which basically does the same thing but makes adjustments based the specific teammates a guy plays with. So if a guy tends to split time between the 1st and 2nd unit, they gets accounted for.

For full disclosure, Shaq did worse in than Nash in the stats we have for this in'04-05, but he did do better than Wade, and neither Nash nor Shaq was at the top of the leaderboard. Tim Duncan was first in team net +/-, and second in adjusted +/- to Paul Pierce. Remember though that Duncan missed time due to injury which was probably the main reason he wasn't a stronger candidate.

Also, understand that +/- stats in general are more prone to high variance with low sample size than most of the other stats we used. In other words, I wouldn't feel comfortable forwarding Paul Pierce as the "real MVP" for '04-05.

[jaypo]

Thanks for clarifying +/-. I don't put much faith in it personally.

I do realize everything you're saying about the 04-05 season. But Shaq got hurt and still played. He didn't play at 100%, but he was still on the court. Wade was put out during the ECF. But you can't discount the effect that Shaq has regardless of the numbers. They absolutely would not get past Detroit without Shaq. Without Shaq commanding the attention of the Detroit Wallace boyz, they would be free to roam and help on defense. And you remember how their defense was! There is no way that they get past Detroit without Shaq in the middle.

And I will not say that Shaq "made Wade great". That is a stupid statement. But he did make the game easier for Wade and took pressure off of him. Wade didn't HAVE to carry as much of a burden with Shaq down low. What I always say is that Shaq didn't make great players great. But he allowed them to flourish. I always point to Penny and to Kobe the year after Shaq left. Kobe was reduced to demanding a trade because he realized he couldn't do it on his own. I won't say the same about the Heat, because the whole team was in shambles in 2008.

[bastillon]

just curious, who do you put higher in 06, Doc ?

[joe.linnen]

No. Shaq in 2005 and Kobe in 2006. I thought he had his best year in 2007 and it was only year he actually was MVP in my eyes.

I'm incling to agree the should put an * beside both of his MVPs because he can't play defence on a chair and his tem didn't win a damn thing either but a playoff spot

[bastillon]

No. Shaq in 2005 and Kobe in 2006. I thought he had his best year in 2007 and it was only year he actually was MVP in my eyes.

I'm incling to agree the should put an * beside both of his MVPs because he can't play defence on a chair and his tem didn't win a damn thing either but a playoff spot

if he can't play defense and it hurts his team so much, then why did they improve so dramatically when he was on the court ?

his team lost to a better RS team and had a major injury in that series. there have been numerous MVPs with much bigger failures in the PS.

[Rapcity_11]

Jaypo just got completely owned. Great posts Doctor MJ and Bastillon.

[ElGee]

Bastillion- you are proving my point. With 3 starters gone, replaced by Shaq, they became a championship contender. Immediately. And they had a good chance of winning a title if Wade didn't get hurt. Now, if Shaq had gotten hurt in the ECF, the same thing would have occurred.

Things to remember:

-The '03-04 Heat were very young, and started poorly. There record toward the end of the year was very strong. To the point where if they hadn't made the trade, and Wade hadn't taken a quantum leap forward, the Heat still would have been expected to win more than 47 games which would have meant they'd be a 2 seed and expected to make the ECF. Add in Wade's quantum leap, maybe they even do better. So this idea that the team did vastly better because they got Shaq in place of Odom & Butler is not correct.

-As you mentioned, the Wade injury probably kept the Heat from making the finals. What you didn't mention is that Shaq got hurt in the ECSF, and the Heat still easily won their road games. Basically, without Shaq and with Wade's quantum leap, there's still a good chance the Heat make the ECF, so the matter that having Shaq on the team wasn't enough to lift them one more round once Wade went below his 100% self boxes in Shaq's value a good amount.

Shaq was good that year, but it was very clearly him leaving his prime. Note Shaq's playoff MPG numbers. Before the trade to the Heat, Shaq was a 40+ MPG guy. On the Heat he fell into the low 30s immediately, and he stayed there the next 4 years. Shaq had a great case for being the best player in the league for 10 years - it was a good run - but it ended in '04-05, and people just didn't realize it at first because of how good Wade was. In retrospect, now that it was clear that we were seeing a Top 25 all-time level player emerge, I'm really surprised that anyone is still confused about what happened.

This is good stuff - i had actually forgotten about their poor start. To break it down further:

Caron Butler missed the first 20 games of the season. The Heat went 5-15. They trotted out rookie Wade with Odom, Eddie Jones, undrafted rookie Udonis Haslem and on his last legs, Brian Grant.

Wade missed the 4th and 5th game of the year. Miami started 0-7.

When the starting lineup was intact with Butler's return, Miami went 7-2.

More injuries set in...Miami stayed afloat and sat at 25-36. With the starting lineup mostly intact, they closed 17-4. For the season, that lineup played 33 healthy games and went 23-10 (a 57-win pace). Wade, as a rookie, progressed as the season grew and was established as The Man by the postseason. Odom played extremely well (and it's a testament to his value that they did so well).

They beat New Orleans in the first round, and lost a competitive series to the 61-win Pacers in the second round. So while they were clearly improved the following year (and a legitimate championship contender), a lot of that had to do with Wade's jump (Haslem improved as well).

[rsavaj]

Good post about the numbers Nash put up against Dallas. But do you account for the points that he allows to be scored? I have a very hard time giving an MVP trophy to a player that only plays 1 end of the court. And you say that Shaq had DWade so he didn't deserve it? Well, Nash had some guy by the name of Amare to feed the ball to. And a guy named Marion covering his matador defense.

Plain and simple- the Heat went from a 500 ballclub to the ECF and would have made it to the finals if Wade's rib didnt' get hurt in the ECF when they were up 3-2. And Shaq's production was arguably better than Wade's in 05 based on numbers and efficiency. You say Wade jumped from 16 ppg to 24? No coincidence that when a dominant big man gets paired with him, his production goes up. And the team becomes a title contender. The next year, they won the friggin title! Sure, Wade was great and he blossomed. But Shaq put up good numbers and powered them, literally thru Detroit. They don't sniff the finals without Shaq.

So you can look at "well, Nash got that team to 62 wins", or whatever you would like to say. I look at the fact that in 05 and 06, barring 1 freak injury to Wade in the ECF, Shaq being added to that team took them from a 500 ballclub (more or less) to a championship, and probably 2.

Plain and simple: Nash took a 29-53 team, transformed them into a 62-20 team, and led them to the WCF.

Joe Johnson left. Quentin Richardson left. Amare Stoudemire got injured.

He took newcomers Kurt Thomas, Eddie House, Atlanta's backup point guard Boris Diaw, Raja Bell, and perennial reject Tim Thomas one game FURTHER the next year.

[rsavaj]

No. Shaq in 2005 and Kobe in 2006. I thought he had his best year in 2007 and it was only year he actually was MVP in my eyes.

I'm incling to agree the should put an * beside both of his MVPs because he can't play defence on a chair and his tem didn't win a damn thing either but a playoff spot

And he can't dunk, either. That's another knock against him.

[NYK 455]

Good post about the numbers Nash put up against Dallas. But do you account for the points that he allows to be scored? I have a very hard time giving an MVP trophy to a player that only plays 1 end of the court. And you say that Shaq had DWade so he didn't deserve it? Well, Nash had some guy by the name of Amare to feed the ball to. And a guy named Marion covering his matador defense.

Plain and simple- the Heat went from a 500 ballclub to the ECF and would have made it to the finals if Wade's rib didnt' get hurt in the ECF when they were up 3-2. And Shaq's production was arguably better than Wade's in 05 based on numbers and efficiency. You say Wade jumped from 16 ppg to 24? No coincidence that when a dominant big man gets paired with him, his production goes up. And the team becomes a title contender. The next year, they won the friggin title! Sure, Wade was great and he blossomed. But Shaq put up good numbers and powered them, literally thru Detroit. They don't sniff the finals without Shaq.

So you can look at "well, Nash got that team to 62 wins", or whatever you would like to say. I look at the fact that in 05 and 06, barring 1 freak injury to Wade in the ECF, Shaq being added to that team took them from a 500 ballclub (more or less) to a championship, and probably 2.

Plain and simple: Nash took a 29-53 team, transformed them into a 62-20 team, and led them to the WCF.

Joe Johnson left. Quentin Richardson left. Amare Stoudemire got injured.

He took newcomers Kurt Thomas, Eddie House, Atlanta's backup point guard Boris Diaw, Raja Bell, and perennial reject Tim Thomas one game FURTHER the next year.

100% correct. But you know, haters gonna hate.

[RocketPower23]

Good post about the numbers Nash put up against Dallas. But do you account for the points that he allows to be scored? I have a very hard time giving an MVP trophy to a player that only plays 1 end of the court. And you say that Shaq had DWade so he didn't deserve it? Well, Nash had some guy by the name of Amare to feed the ball to. And a guy named Marion covering his matador defense.

Plain and simple- the Heat went from a 500 ballclub to the ECF and would have made it to the finals if Wade's rib didnt' get hurt in the ECF when they were up 3-2. And Shaq's production was arguably better than Wade's in 05 based on numbers and efficiency. You say Wade jumped from 16 ppg to 24? No coincidence that when a dominant big man gets paired with him, his production goes up. And the team becomes a title contender. The next year, they won the friggin title! Sure, Wade was great and he blossomed. But Shaq put up good numbers and powered them, literally thru Detroit. They don't sniff the finals without Shaq.

So you can look at "well, Nash got that team to 62 wins", or whatever you would like to say. I look at the fact that in 05 and 06, barring 1 freak injury to Wade in the ECF, Shaq being added to that team took them from a 500 ballclub (more or less) to a championship, and probably 2.

Plain and simple: Nash took a 29-53 team, transformed them into a 62-20 team, and led them to the WCF.

Joe Johnson left. Quentin Richardson left. Amare Stoudemire got injured.

He took newcomers Kurt Thomas, Eddie House, Atlanta's backup point guard Boris Diaw, Raja Bell, and perennial reject Tim Thomas one game FURTHER the next year.

That previous seasons record is deceiving, the team suffered many injuries that year, Marbury was traded and their head coach was fired.

As for the thread, he had as good a case as anyone at the very least, so definitely deserved. I felt Shaq may have deserved it more in 2005, but can't go wrong with Nash that year. The year following, no Amare or JJ, still a talented team, but only an 8 games drop off from the year before, which is damn impressive, pretty well deserved.

People have a problem with Nash winning it mostly because he isn't the prototypical star and his years with Dallas, which were good, but not MVP good. People like to label him as a "product of the system", I use to, but you have to have somebody pretty damn good to run that system, just ask New York and D'Antoni.

[Andrewchos]

I felt Shaq deserved it in 05, but Nash wasn't a terrible choice either.

Thought he deserved it the same year Iverson won also.