Retro POY '04-05 (Voting Complete)

[Doctor MJ]

Guys let's all calm down and refrain from calling anyone else a hater. Project like this are special only as long as the level of maturity remain higher than your average thread free for all.

Thanks,
Doc

[Gongxi]

Uhhh...okay, I guess I'm a hater and didn't know it. Mentioning that the 04 Suns team wasn't healthy is like calling Kobe a rapist. I see. I'm learning a lot from you, and I still think your son is one of the best basketball players of the decade. Have a nice night!

[bastillon]

Uhhh...okay, I guess I'm a hater and didn't know it. Mentioning that the 04 Suns team wasn't healthy is like calling Kobe a rapist. I see. I'm learning a lot from you, and I still think your son is one of the best basketball players of the decade. Have a nice night!

mentioning Suns 04 was a legit point... until it was proved wrong (and it's not like you didn't know that before, it's been done hundred times on realGM PC). what makes you a hater is the tone of your posts - D'Antoni, rules changes and everything in one place ? I'm sorry but I've been in discussions with too many Nash-haters not to see the tendency.

again, I'm fine with you calling Nash not a TOP5 player while giving good reasons i.e. "Nowitzki's more dangerous scoring threat in the playoffs and I value that more" or "Tim Duncan/KG are 2 way players so Nash can't match their impact"... but at some point, when you didn't give Nash one 5th place vote in the whole project while giving some ridiculous reasons "Marbury trade ruined their chemistry, they played one more road game etc" your agenda becomes just too obvious to act like you didn't have one.

you know, I'm a LeBron hater but I didn't diminish his impact based on "crab dribbles" and "nike stealing tape". there's a certan line and IMO you crossed that line by not making rational points. Silver Bullet asked you a question and you still haven't answered that.

[Gongxi]

IT'S ALL IN YOUR HEAD!!

I don't hate Nash at all. Grow up, man.

[mysticbb]

ElGee, nice posts regarding Nash and the impact of individual defenders, especially point guards and wing defenders.

Nash in Dallas in his last 3 years played on a similar level as in Phoenix one year later. Just two things happened: Nash was allowed to have the ball in his hands more, because that's exactly what the Suns needed, and Nash improved his clutch play. Nash had to share the offensive responsibilities with an elite 7ft iso-player in Nowitzki and with a wing player like Finley, who needed the ball in his hand to be effective. Nash also passed up more chances for clutch plays in Dallas, played even awful in that department late in the 2004 season and in the playoffs. But in Phoenix he showed the will to take the big shot and make them, or make the big play at the end of games. That dramatically improved his impact. As I said in my first post in this thread, Nash was more than his OnCourt numbers, he was the direction for the Suns that season, the driving force behind the success.

@Gongxi

You are pointing out the rule change, but that has no effect on the purpose of that thread. We are voting for the 2004/05 POY, we aren't comparing players from previous seasons to the players from that season. Compare Nash to the other players from that year, compare his impact, compare his success, that is the purpose of that project, not how the 2004/05 Nash stacks up against 2001 players or 1997 players.

[lorak]

Nash was an all-NBA level player in Dallas. It's not entirely fair to view it is a magical transformation (I certainly don't).

Good point as well. In Nash' last 3 years in Dallas, there was only one point guard in the league clearly ranked ahead of him (Kidd). Nash didn't come out of nowhere, he went from being arguably the #2 PG in the world to an MVP candidate. Big jump, but not as big as some might think.

First, point guards in All NBA Teams year by year before 2005:
2004 – Kidd (1st team, 421 points ), Cassell (2, 322), Davis (3, 176); outside All NBA Teams: Nash 75 points, Marbury 44
2003 – Kidd (2, 355), Iverson (2, 350), Marbury (3, 141), Nash (3, 85); Francis 18, Payton 14
2002 – Kidd (1, 601), Iverson (2, 272), Payton(2, 284), Nash (3, 96); Andre Miller 32, Davis 24, Stockton 11
2001 – Iverson (1, 612), Kidd (1, 423), Payton (3, 117); Marbury 38, Stockton 32, Francis 29

So just season before he got MVP he was fourth point guard in the NBA and was closer to Marbury than to Baron Davis. Earlier, during two years period he was also fourth best point guard, clearly behind Kidd, Iverson and Payton or Marbury (!).

Second, in 2004 MVP voting Kidd get some votes, but also Cassell and Baron Davis. Nash was nowhere to found among 16 players. Suddenly In 2005 he won MVP. That’s was as big jump as it could be. I don’t check it but how many players where in similar situation – no recognition as MVP and suddenly won award?

Well, I have some time, so I’ll check it.
2009 LeBron year before was 4th and in top5 in two another seasons
2008 Bryant was 3rd in 2007 and in top5 four other season
2007 Nowitzki was 3rd in 2006 and 3rd in 2005
2004 Garnett was 2nd in 2003
2002, 2003 Duncan was second in 2001 and in top5 three other seasons
2001 Iverson was 7th in 2000 and 4th in 1999
2000 Shaq was 6th in 1999, 4th in 1998 and 2nd in 1995
1997, 1999 Malone was 7th in 1996 and 3rd in 1995 – overall in top 8 for 8 straight seasons
1988, 91, 92, 96, 97 Jordan was 2nd in 1987
1995 Robinson was 2nd in 1994 and in top6 other four seasons
1994 Olajuwon was second in 1993
1993 Barkley was 2nd in 1990, 4th in 1991 and in top6 four other seasons
1987, 89, 90 Magic was 3rd in 1986, 2nd 1985 and again 3rd in 1984 and 1983
1984, 85, 86 Bird was 2nd in 1981, 1982 and 1983
1982, 1983 Moses was 4th in 1981 and 1st in 1979
1981 Dr J was 2nd in 1980
1980 KAJ was 4th in 1979 and 1979 and was 1st in 1976 and 1977

And here comes Nash, who before 2005, in 2004 gets 0 votes and in 2003 he had 1 point and 5 points in 2002. So his MVPs look like Iverson’s in 2001, but AI still got more recognition before 2001 (7th in 2000 and 4th in 1999).

So overall before 2005 he was fourth PG in the league according to All NBA Teams and got almost none (1 and 5 points) recognition in MVP voting. SO that was VERY BIG jump. Really no one come close in HISTORY when we look at MVPs since journalist have been voting.

[mysticbb]

So overall before 2005 he was fourth PG in the league according to All NBA Teams and got almost none (1 and 5 points) recognition in MVP voting. SO that was VERY BIG jump. Really no one come close in HISTORY when we look at MVPs since journalist have been voting.

First of all, Iverson is not a point guard, but a scoring guard. Marbury had huge boxscore numbers, but look how the Nets did without him or then the Suns.

All you proved with your post is that Nash wasn't recognized before, nothing more. On the Mavericks he was overlooked, because Don Nelson ran the offense more through Nowitzki (how surprising) and Finley. In games in which Nash had more control he had similar scoring and assists numbers on the Mavericks as he had one year later on the Suns. Nash had a couple of 20/10 games on the Mavericks, he just hadn't that many, because of the fact that he played together with players who were able to create for themself and did so.

Nash's numbers on the Mavs 02-04: 17/8 on 59 ts%, 21.2 PER, 0.18 WS/48
Nash's numbers since then on the Suns: 17/11 on 63 ts%, 21.9 PER 0.19 WS/48

What you can see is a similar scoring output, but his increased scoring efficiency. He had a similar PER and WS/48 numbers. His increased scoring efficiency made him a better player overall, you can see that, btw., also on his better FT%. His better playing in clutch situation (most likely due to more confidence in his abilities) improved his impact on the team. Nash running the show with making the plays for his teammates on the Suns made him a more important player. But these are all the differences.

[lorak]

All you proved with your post is that Nash wasn't recognized before, nothing more.

And that no other MVP in HISTORY was in similar situation – non recognition for whole career and suddenly in one summer, at age of 30!, he made leap from 3rd- 4th best at his position to the MVP. That’s odd, very odd.

[drza]

Oh yeah, and Dr. MJ, full disclosure: I don't plan to vote Nash first in '05 either. Some of that is my impressions/beliefs on the better players, some of it is that I do value the advanced stats, and I'm sure there are other factors as well. Again, I don't expect that either of us will completely change our thought processes with this side conversation. I'm merely interested in finding out where it is that we do diverge, from your POV. And I will admit that at this very moment, after following your post and then relating Nash's 05 to KG's '08, I am seeing '05 Nash in a more positive light than I ever have before and am considering moving him up my rankings. Not to first, but considering he was battling for 5th on my sheet when we began this year I see that as a significant change based primarily on the discussions here.

Full disclosure appreciated but not needed. Like you, I've thought enough about this stuff I don't change my mind that often. I certainly hope that people don't consider it a waste of time discussing with me if they don't manage to swing my vote.

I don't necessarily think it's a waste if there are some things you feel strongly about and you're trying to get your point across. But taking it to the extreme, if nobody was ever willing to change their stance once new information (or a new interpretation) came to light then yeah, it would seem to be somewhat of a waste to spend so much time on discussion. If folks are just set in their ways, we may as well just vote...in some respects. In others, it'd be nice to have everyone's opinion out there for posterity sake as well, so I understand that to be another benefit of the project. But in the short term, it'd be harder to take the energy and time to try to really make my best case if it's just really not going to make any difference.

That said, making a difference doesn't have to just be swinging a vote completely. There's room for gray area in there, and I'm seeing a lot of it for this year. One example is Nash, who wasn't as impressive to me in live action but based upon this thread I'm re-weighing exactly how I see him and where he might differ from KG, who I was (and am) adamant was #1 in '08.

Another example is Duncan, who in live action I was not as impressed by his Finals performance. Real time, I absolutely had Manu as the Finals MVP and was disappointed when it went to Duncan. But again, in the '08 thread I was the one that really went in-depth and pointed out that KG was arguably the MVP of the Celtics even when his offense was off due to his defensive presence and that in the Celtics' 3 most important Finals wins KG was clearly the best player. So if I think KG should have been Finals MVP for those reasons in '08, can I begrudge Duncan his award in '05 in similar circumstances?

Now, neither of these examples will necessarily make me vote Duncan or Nash #1 if I wasn't going to before. But it's at least forcing me to think more about it, to consider what exactly it is that I'm valuing in my vote, to make me look even further at my reasoning to try to isolate the analyst from the fan, and to sometimes make me reconsider if what I was fairly convinced of at the time is really the best way to interpret things now that I have the benefit of hindsight.

If, on this KG '08 and Nash '05 thing you have been wrestling with similar epiphanies and have been weighing out whether your stance is really the one you want to take, then no, I don't feel like this is a waste of time. If, on the other hand, you're just kind of reading what I (or someone else that you don't agree with) wrote and thinking "hmm. That's nice. But I know my mind and it's made up" then...yeah, in a lot of ways it is a bit of a waste to debate with you.

[mysticbb]

And that no other MVP in HISTORY was in similar situation – non recognition for whole career and suddenly in one summer, at age of 30!, he made leap from 3rd- 4th best at his position to the MVP. That’s odd, very odd.

Odd is that you don't understand the reasons why that happened. Nash played next to a player who also became a strong MVP candidate. Nowitzki before 2005 was also not considered a Top3 candidate. Nash was only more overlooked, because the system of the Mavericks didn't allow him to rack up huge assist numbers. In fact the Mavericks had usually a below average assist to fgm ratio. The ball was in more hands and they ran isolations for Nowitzki very often.

If I'm not mistaken in 2004 was also the summer in which Nash started his crazy off-season routine to be better prepared for the playoffs. That together with the fact that Nash didn't face many injuries and didn't play many minutes until that point doesn't make it so suprising that he was able to improve his game from being an All-NBA caliber point guard to be the best (while others faded, btw.).

That point guards in great shape and with great shooting abilities can be still very effective or even improve their game overall isn't that odd at all. John Stockton made 1st team All-NBA the first time in his career in 1994 when he was already 32 years old.

[lorak]

And that no other MVP in HISTORY was in similar situation – non recognition for whole career and suddenly in one summer, at age of 30!, he made leap from 3rd- 4th best at his position to the MVP. That’s odd, very odd.

Odd is that you don't understand the reasons why that happened.
.

Oh, I understand them perfectly. But It still is very odd that no other MVP in HISTORY gets no recognition in MVP voting (and was consider as 3rd-4th best player at his position) just season before his first award.

[mysticbb]

Oh, I understand them perfectly. But It still is very odd that no other MVP in HISTORY gets no recognition in MVP voting (and was consider as 3rd-4th best player at his position) just season before his first award.

You are wrong here. Dave Cowens was also not considered a MVP candidate before he won in 1973, he didn't even make a single All-NBA team before.

Anyway, what you are seeing as "normal", that MVP candidates were recognized before, is actually a flaw of the voting system. There is a bias towards players with reputation, that makes it possible that some players are getting the MVP award as something like a "lifetime achievement award" instead of actually going with the more deserving candidate in that respective season.

[lorak]

Oh, I understand them perfectly. But It still is very odd that no other MVP in HISTORY gets no recognition in MVP voting (and was consider as 3rd-4th best player at his position) just season before his first award.

You are wrong here. Dave Cowens was also not considered a MVP candidate before he won in 1973, he didn't even make a single All-NBA team before.

I said in one of my earlier post – since 1980, or 1981, when journalist became voters. You should notice that my list ended with KAJ’s MVP in 1980…

Besides, Cowens is another example of very controversial choice, so thx for bringing it. That’s only proves my point.

[mysticbb]

Besides, Cowens is another example of very controversial choice, so thx for bringing it. That’s only proves my point.

Well, and your point is not even a little bit related to the question whether someone deserves the award or not. ;)

[lorak]

Besides, Cowens is another example of very controversial choice, so thx for bringing it. That’s only proves my point.

Well, and your point is not even a little bit related to the question whether someone deserves the award or not.

Well, I think that when choices are as controversial as Cowens MVP or Nash’s MVPs or Iverson’s MVP then it’s some kind of warning for us, information that something was wrong with the voting.

[Sedale Threatt]

Final:

1. Duncan -- It was down to him and KG for me, and I chose Tim simply because I think he's a better player. Offensively, defensively, he was the heart and soul of that team.

2. KG -- Outstanding individual season, so good that I'm not going to punish him for playing on an absolutely crap team. He did everything he could.

3. Nash -- It was either he or Shaq here, and the Nashophiles won me over. I do think it's glossed over what a bad defender he is, but even so -- his impact was indisputable.

4. Shaq -- Could have gone either way, but I bumped Shaq down a spot because I think Nash had more of an impact on his new team than Diesel had on his.

5. Stoudemire -- Basically flipped a coin here between him, Dirk and LBJ. He obviously benefited from Nash, but it didn't hurt Steve to have a freakish athlete to work with.

[mysticbb]

Well, I think that when choices are as controversial as Cowens MVP or Nash’s MVPs or Iverson’s MVP then it’s some kind of warning for us, information that something was wrong with the voting.

Only under the assumption that the voting got it right in all other years. ;)

@Sedale Threatt

Quick question, quick answer please: At the start of the 2004/05 season with the knowledge we possess how the players performed that season, which player would you choose to start your championship caliber team, which player would be your core piece: Amare Stoudemire, LeBron James or Dirk Nowitzki?

I most certainly wouldn't choose David Lee in 2009 to build a team around him.

[Sedale Threatt]

At the start of the 2004/05 season with the knowledge we possess how the players performed that season, which player would you choose to start your championship caliber team, which player would be your core piece: Amare Stoudemire, LeBron James or Dirk Nowitzki?

Stoudemire and Nowitzki, circa 04/05 are basically a pick 'em for me. So I go LeBron, for the youth and long-term potential.

[Gongxi]

@Gongxi

You are pointing out the rule change, but that has no effect on the purpose of that thread. We are voting for the 2004/05 POY, we aren't comparing players from previous seasons to the players from that season. Compare Nash to the other players from that year, compare his impact, compare his success, that is the purpose of that project, not how the 2004/05 Nash stacks up against 2001 players or 1997 players.

Let's be honest: the reason Nash was the MVP that year and the reason he's garnering attention in this POY vote is because of the Suns' huge turnaround. If they were 41-41 that year, he'd be on no one's list. So the prior season is extremely apt. It's the entire crux of the Nash argument.

[mysticbb]

Stoudemire and Nowitzki, circa 04/05 are basically a pick 'em for me. So I go LeBron, for the youth and long-term potential.

No, I mean for that specific season, just for 04/05, no long term plan. You would really choose Stoudemire over Nowitzki or James to build a team around? Even with the knowledge that you will need the 3rd best player in your ranking to see Stoudemire play as efficient as he played in that year?

FYI: Stoudemire in games without Nash in 04/05 was 22.4 ppg, 7.4 rpg on 56.3 ts% and 13.3 turnover rate. The team went 2-5 in those games. In comparison Stoudemire in games with Steve Nash: 26.1 ppg, 9.1 rpg on 62.2 ts% and 9.1 turnover rate, 58-15 record (Suns were 2-0 without Stoudemire and with Nash).

Would you really pick a worse rebounding 2009/10 David Lee as your center piece of your championship contender team for that specific season?