Revisiting the 2006 MVP Award

[Hornet Mania]

Kobe was most impressive to me, and certainly "valuable" in the sense his team would fall to shambles without him. He also had some of the most memorable moments of the season, between the 81pt game and outscoring future WC champion Dallas through 3 quarters. That should have been the pick imo.

Dirk would have been my 2nd place vote, and with team record as it was I would understand voters inevitably going in that direction at the time. Kobe would have been bucking a major historical trend to be awarded MVP with a team that won less than 50 games.

Nash was just not the right choice to me. I felt like Phoenix's style of play (specifically, making the game free-flowing and fun again) was the primary reason the vote swung his way for both MVPs. I didn't like it at the time and still don't now.

[DoubleO8]

I was surprised to see Nash win it that year. There was no way Kobe was getting that award though with his team record that year. My pick would have been dirk for 2006. This was around the time I began to understand the way things work in the league specifically with handing out these awards. Being the best player on a top 1-2 seed team accounts for about 30%. The rest is narrative and keeping your nose clean (looking at you kobe). Nash was the leagues golden boy at this time. With all of this considered Nash wasn't a terrible pick but, I probably would of went with Dirk.

[penbeast0]

My apologies to all the Kobe fans out there.

[LakersLegacy]

Wade and Shaq cancel each other out. It is clearly between Kobe, LeBron and Dirk.

I probably put too much wait on Kobe outscoring the Mavs by himself and then benching himself in the 4th because the game was over, averaging 40 for a month and the 81 point game, 60 point game streak. I've never seen anything like 2006 Kobe. For me it's Kobe. 9 wins less than Nash and 5 wins less than LeBron isn't much when Kwame and Smush are in the starting line up.

Dirk and LeBron didn't have that full killer instinct back then. Dirk was a killer in 2011 because of the short comings he had in '06. LeBron became a killer in 2012 because of the short comings he had in '11. Kobe was the biggest one man wrecking crew I have witnessed. Double game winners in a play-off game. 1 Kwame rebound away from upsetting the Suns in 6. The shots he hit in OT were mind numbing.

[Narigo]

Chauncey Billups is arguably a top 5 player in 2006. This is how he compares to Nash. Billups was just as good as Nash on the offensive end.

OWS
Billups: 12.7
Nash:10.3

OBPM
Billups: 6.9
Nash: 5.4

Offense On-OFF
Billups: +8.8
Nash: +8.0

ORTG
Billups: 127(led league)
Nash: 121


To answer the OP's question to me it was to be either Nowitzki or Wade

[KobesScarf]

Kobe and it should of been unanimous

[Quotatious]

Kobe and it should of been unanimous

The underlined is absolutely ridiculous.

[Asianiac_24]

Chauncey Billups is arguably a top 5 player in 2006. This is how he compares to Nash. Billups was just as good as Nash on the offensive end.

OWS
Billups: 12.7
Nash:10.3

OBPM
Billups: 6.9
Nash: 5.4

Offense On-OFF
Billups: +8.8
Nash: +8.0

ORTG
Billups: 127(led league)
Nash: 121


To answer the OP's question to me it was to be either Nowitzki or Wade

This is the reason I sometimes take advanced statistics with a grain of salt. Billups was definitely not the same level as Nash.

[Quotatious]

This is the reason I sometimes take advanced statistics with a grain of salt. Billups was definitely not the same level as Nash.

I also think Nash was better, but Billups was the best player on the best team in the league in regular season (64 wins, top 5 both offensively and defensively), and a team that reached conference finals, losing to the eventual champions, so he also had a bit more team success than Nash, in addition to those numbers - because of that, I don't think the idea that Billups > Nash should be dismissed right away, even if one disagrees with that).

[eminence]

This is the reason I sometimes take advanced statistics with a grain of salt. Billups was definitely not the same level as Nash.

I also think Nash was better, but Billups was the best player on the best team in the league in regular season (64 wins, top 5 both offensively and defensively), and a team that reached conference finals, losing to the eventual champions, so he also had a bit more team success than Nash, in addition to those numbers - because of that, I don't think the idea that Billups > Nash should be dismissed right away, even if one disagrees with that).

I'm not really sure how strong his argument as best player on the Pistons is. Billups ranked out as 4th on his own team in impact stats behind the Walli and Prince(to be fair Nash also comes in just behind Diaw, but that's by a hair, while Billups is noticeably back of his three teammates).

[Ballerhogger]

Kobe for me took the lakers to playoffs with a a all time worst playoff roster. In team in the West.

[Fundamentals21]

I would've given this to Nash as well. You need around 50+ Wins to be considered for MVP, and Nash was a deserving candidate. I might've given Shaq the 05 award, however, to balance things out. Love Nash but don't think he should've won back to back the way he did.

Wade or Dirk weren't quite as impressive to me in the RS. What Wade could do really came to light in the playoffs and Dirk took a step up w/killing the Spurs in the WCSF. Nash deserved the RS MVP in my mind.

LeBron - it's strange thinking that he was already putting up those numbers that we've been so accustomed to. There were some subtle things in his game which made me feel he just wasn't quite ready for MVP consideration. Certainly a Top 5 player though.

[tone wone]

I just dont see what argument Nash has over Dirk in 2006.

Honestly, 2005 vote made sense seeing how weak the field was. But 2006 was much more competitive.

What happened that season was just strange. I mean, on paper Dirk should have ran away with this.

[Ballerhogger]

Kobe finished a close second if I recall. They should of gave it to him he really should be a
2x mvp BUT best record nonsense is the only agruement why nash. Everyone at the time said kobe should of won it. Still remember media backlash from it

[Hornet Mania]

Kobe finished a close second if I recall. They should of gave it to him he really should be a
2x mvp BUT best record nonsense is the only agruement why nash. Everyone at the time said kobe should of won it. Still remember media backlash from it

I think Kobe actually finished 6th, which is really the biggest 2006 MVP travesty. You can say others had a better case to ultimately win, but there's no way there were five guys who meant more to their team (AND played as well or better) than 2006 Kobe.

His 6th place finish was clearly influenced by a lot of negative opinion carried over from his 04 trial and Shaq trade.

[eminence]

Kobe finished a close second if I recall. They should of gave it to him he really should be a
2x mvp BUT best record nonsense is the only agruement why nash. Everyone at the time said kobe should of won it. Still remember media backlash from it

I think Kobe actually finished 6th, which is really the biggest 2006 MVP travesty. You can say others had a better case to ultimately win, but there's no way there were five guys who meant more to their team (AND played as well or better) than 2006 Kobe.

His 6th place finish was clearly influenced by a lot of negative opinion carried over from his 04 trial and Shaq trade.

I have come to save the day!

He finished 4th.

Nash
Lebron
Dirk
Kobe
Billups
Wade
Brand
Duncan
Parker
Iverson/Marion

[microfib4thewin]

I would say Dirk is probably the best candidate for MVP. Jason Terry was pretty good but is fairly underwhelming as the second best player, and even though they have good depth the Mavs weren't expected to play this well. Dirk himself did very well leading the league in PER and WS. For those who said Kobe was robbed, doesn't the logic that back Kobe as the MVP also apply to Lebron? He put up monster stats as well with an even worse cast and the team performance are nearly identical.

[KobesScarf]

Kobe and it should of been unanimous

The underlined is absolutely ridiculous.

Why? It was arguably 3-12 the worst roster to ever make the playoffs, Kobe meant the most to his team and had the best numbers, and best individual games, all while playing 80 games, and being 5th in minutes

[HeartBreakKid]

Kobe and it should of been unanimous

The underlined is absolutely ridiculous.

Why? It was arguably 3-12 the worst roster to ever make the playoffs, Kobe meant the most to his team and had the best numbers, and best individual games, all while playing 80 games, and being 5th in minutes

Every year teams with crap players make the playoffs, that's not unique at all.

[Quotatious]

Why? It was arguably 3-12 the worst roster to ever make the playoffs

Jordan's team in '87 and McGrady's in '03 were probably worse. Kobe at least had a GOAT coach and a very versatile all-star caliber forward - Odom.

Kobe meant the most to his team and had the best numbers, and best individual games, all while playing 80 games, and being 5th in minutes

If by best numbers you mean best scoring, then yes, but for instance LeBron had better numbers than Kobe in most categories other than scoring (while still averaging over 31 ppg), and carried a similarly weak team to more wins than Kobe. They are at least very close, even if you want to give Kobe the edge.