I think Nash is more valuable to his team than any other player is to his team. (including Kobe).....but that isn't necessarily an mvp voting criterion.

I actually think Marion has gone from being the most underrated player...to an overrated one. People don't seem to realize how good Nash and D'antoni's system makes players look offensively.

3/24/2007 11:25:47 AM

Marion is sweet. But what I don't like about him is that sometimes he disappears during big games. What I do like about him is his ability to guard whoever they place in front of him. He dosn't always get the best matchups but he does what he does, no complaining.

^what you said dosn't make sense about Nash. Its rather contradicting.

3/24/2007 11:29:19 AM

This thread was started on 1/25, n00b.

^ I think what he's trying to say basically explains why Peyton Manning isn't the MVP in football every year... the Colts would be HOPELESS if Jim Sorgi had to take over for an injured Manning. I'd say the next-biggest dropoff is from Brees to Jamie Martin in New Orleans, and then whoever replaces Steve Smith in Carolina. In that regard, LDT isn't even top 3, but his impressive statistics on an impressive team got him the MVP award.

Kobe's like that LDT... he's the reason Kwame Brown hasn't been a total failure in LA... Kobe doesn't get enough credit for making the players around him better.

[Edited on March 24, 2007 at 3:49 PM. Reason : k]

3/24/2007 3:45:54 PM

No kidding... The guy has averaged 5-6 assists a game every season since 1999. (except last year he averaged 4.5 when he scored THIRTY FIVE pts a game)

His shot selection is actually pretty solid, particularly for a guy who takes so many shots. He gets to the line TEN times a game for gods sake (and hits 87% of them) That's a great attribute to have.

All this talk about Nash makes Phoenix win. What have they won? A couple division titles?

Kobe has THREE championships. Yeah, they had Shaq but are you going to say Kobe didn't have anything to do with those wins?

He's an elite scorer & defender and his all-around game leaves very little to be desired.

I don't like the guy at all and I enjoy seeing them lose, but when a guy strings together 4 striaght 50+ games I'm not dumb enough to criticize him.

3/24/2007 4:30:55 PM

Not to mention, last year Smush Parker and Lamar Odom helped distribute the ball.

3/24/2007 5:30:45 PM

Replace Nash with Kobe into the Suns roster, and you will see some instant championships.

Kobe, Stoudemire, Marion (most underated player in the NBA), Barbosa (incredibly talented and fast), include Bell, Banks and Boris Diaw.

Nash with the Lakers, where would that go?

Nash is good and everything, but it's the players around him that are also making him look that good and vice versa. Yet you don't see them winning a championship.

3/25/2007 1:09:48 AM

Quote :

"^ I think what he's trying to say basically explains why Peyton Manning isn't the MVP in football every year... the Colts would be HOPELESS if Jim Sorgi had to take over for an injured Manning. I'd say the next-biggest dropoff is from Brees to Jamie Martin in New Orleans, and then whoever replaces Steve Smith in Carolina. In that regard, LDT isn't even top 3, but his impressive statistics on an impressive team got him the MVP award. Kobe's like that LDT... he's the reason Kwame Brown hasn't been a total failure in LA... Kobe doesn't get enough credit for making the players around him better. "

Exactly.

You could make the argument that the Chargers would be better off if LT went down for a few games than if Rivers went down for a few games. Because LT doesn't have to touch the ball every play (Rivers does), and he has competent backups (Rivers does not). Therefore you could argue (using Nash for MVP logic), that since Rivers is more important to his team winning, that he should get the MVP, even though LT is clearly better than Rivers is.

3/25/2007 1:21:08 AM

Da Bulls

3/25/2007 2:01:33 AM

^^^that's not really true. Banks doesn't play. Bell is a decent defender and a great spot up shooter. Diaw is a product of the system...he's an unathletic, slower, smaller, softer version of Chris Webber. THose players excel in that sysem. Remember how good the suns were without Amare Stoudamire? still in the conference finals. How is Marion underrated? He was an all star. He's starting to get too much credit. Marion is a good defender/rebounder and an average scorer. He scores almost all of his points off of putbacks or assisted passes at the rim. Amare is an incredibly athletic big man. He scores most of his points from pick and rolls withat that Nash guy..... He also scores on alley oops from that Nash guy. He has no post moves. Most of he scoring he's able to do one on one is because he has a mismatch. He has a mismatch because he is a 4 being guarded by slower centers.....that's a result of the system. A system which is only possible because of Steve Nash's ability to push the ball. Kobe is a better player than steve Nash. but I wouldn't hand them rings if you traded Kobe for Nash.

Steve nash has a better supporting cast, but let's not get carried away.

Dirk will win the mvp. Kobe won't win because his team has not won enough games. Btw....Kobe is probably one of the five greatest players of all time but it looks like he's never going to win an mvp award. This migh be for the same reason that Shaq only has one. People assume he'll win it the next year.....so they might as well reward someone else.

3/25/2007 7:17:12 AM

Quote :

"Nash is good and everything, but it's the players around him that are also making him look that good and vice versa. Yet you don't see them winning a championship."

No way. Nash is the one making these players what they are. Amare has Nash to help make such an easy transition to the pro game. None of the rest of these players were anything before Nash.

3/25/2007 8:25:22 AM

Stoudamire and Marion were nothing before Nash?

Come on man, that's just blatantly false.

3/25/2007 11:30:46 AM

With the exception of FG%, Stoudamire's stats from before Nash got there were pretty much identical to what they are today.

3/25/2007 12:44:01 PM

well they werent all stars......percentages matter

3/25/2007 9:29:36 PM

^^^ obviously someone (or some folks, apparently) didn't know jackshit about the Suns til ~2005...

3/25/2007 10:00:59 PM

kobe's got 21 at halftime...he needs to do some work to keep it going

3/25/2007 10:03:19 PM

no 50.

"only" 43.

3/26/2007 12:22:44 AM

damn kobe sucks

3/26/2007 12:53:18 AM

quick question for all the retards like Earl...

if its so unimpressive that Kobe is "only" scoring 50 against "bad teams" like Memphis and Portland...well how come nobody else is scoring 50 against those teams?

also I just wanted to point out that Chamberlain was 10x the player that Russell was and he pwnt him individually every single time they played each other

3/26/2007 9:10:47 AM

Boy if this doesn't sum it up I dont know what will.

Take notes fellas.

Quote :

" Putting Kobe in perspective By Jemele Hill Kobe Bryant is better than Michael Jordan. Not more successful. Hasn't had a bigger economic impact. Hasn't won more MVPs. Hasn't won more titles. But he's a better player. Kobe can do everything Michael did, and even a few things Michael couldn't do. Kobe is just as good a defender. His killer instinct is just as pronounced. He can shoot, finish and explode. And just like Jordan, the more he's pissed off, the more unstoppable he is. At the very least, Kobe's scoring spree over the last week should put to rest any lingering doubts that he's the best player in the NBA. Yes, better than Steve Nash, who is the best point guard, but not the lethal force that Kobe is. Yes, better than Dwyane Wade, who is certainly closer to the Kobe-Jordan level than LeBron James, but D-Wade's game is not as polished as Kobe's. Kobe's streak of four straight 50-points-plus games is something none of those players can do, and it's something that hasn't been done since Wilt Chamberlain, who had an NBA-record seven straight 50-point games. Truthfully, Kobe should have tacked another 50 on Golden State on Sunday night. Of course, the idea that Kobe is better than Jordan -- or even the best player in this league -- is as repugnant to some folks as a rectal exam. Even though Kobe has proven himself under pressure countless times, he gets the A-Rod treatment. Kobe can't please anyone. And it doesn't help that most people suffer from revisionist history when it comes to Jordan, forgetting that he was just as poor a teammate and a ball hog and that he ran off coach Doug Collins like Kobe ran off Phil Jackson the first time. In fact, you could argue that Jordan was even worse. Far as we know, Kobe hasn't jacked up any of his teammates the way Jordan punched out Steve Kerr and Will Perdue at practice. Kobe will never be forgiven for Shaq's departure, but you're delusional if you think Jordan wouldn't have had any ego issues playing alongside a player with Shaq's star power. The best-player argument shouldn't be determined by personal dislike. But if you want to take it there, fine. Jordan was hardly the ideal husband, but only the tabloids were brave enough to venture into his personal life. And what about those gambling issues? If Jordan's life had been covered like Kobe's, we would have an entirely different opinion of His Airness. Besides a different level of media scrutiny, there was definitely a difference in the level of competition during Jordan's heyday compared to now. Yesterday's NBA player certainly was more fundamentally sound, but there's no question that today's player is bigger, stronger and faster. When Jordan played, he was a singular force that could not be equaled. Jordan was guarded by the likes of John Starks and Joe Dumars, who were fine players but weren't nearly as skilled or physically imposing as LeBron, D-Wade, Tracy McGrady or even Vince Carter. The NBA is tougher now. Kobe, like Michael, is surrounded with mediocre to below-average talent, and Phoenix, Dallas and San Antonio are all better than the Utah, Portland and the Charles Barkley-led Phoenix team that Michael met in the NBA Finals. Hakeem Olajuwon, David Robinson and Patrick Ewing will be among the best centers ever, but none of them affected the league the way Shaq and Tim Duncan have. There are two two-time MVPs in Kobe's own conference (Duncan, Nash), which is a problem Jordan never faced during his championship runs. Seven-footers weren't launching 3s back then. Magic Johnson and the Lakers were on a downward spiral, and the Pistons were on their last legs. It was Michael and everyone else. That's not the case for Kobe. The shame of it is that Kobe might finish his career without a MVP, even though his ability can be compared only to that of Jordan and Wilt Chamberlain. All this time we've been looking for a player who is better than Jordan, but most of us can't get beyond whether we like or dislike Kobe as a person to recognize his contributions to the game. Ultimately the MVP award will go to either Nash or Dirk Nowitzki, who are deserving this season, but neither are as good as Kobe. Dallas and Phoenix are strong enough to make the playoffs without their stars. The Lakers, however, are a lottery team without Kobe. Now that's a valuable player."

Look, I don't care if you believe Kobe is better than Jordan. That can definitely be argued either way.

What can NOT be argued is that Kobe is a legendary player and is not only the best player in the league, he's one of the greatest we'll ever see. At the very least he's easily the best player of his era.

3/26/2007 12:23:59 PM

^really really really good article

I knew he was good but I never looked at it like that.

3/26/2007 12:30:04 PM

Horrible article, with nothing to back it up.

3/26/2007 12:41:54 PM

eehh you either hate him or you love him

im impartial at this point

3/26/2007 1:02:58 PM

I don't necessarily agree that he's better than Jordan, but I would put Kobe in the top 5-10 players of all time category. And that just reiterates the fact that it's a crime that Kobe has never won an MVP (and could possibly never win one) while Steve Nash has won 2 (and could make it three). I know that people that claim Nash should have won those MVPs make the argument that "It's not 'Most Outstanding Player,' it's 'Most Valuble Player.' "

And therein lies the predicament. The name of the award is indeed "Most Valuble Player," but I'm not convinced that is what the spirit of the award should be. Personally, I'm in favor (in all sports, not just the NBA) of giving the award to the best player in the league that year, and not trying to get into silly arguments which can't be proven either way about who is more important to their team's success. I just have trouble believing that whomever came up with the idea (decades ago) of an award called the MVP intended for someone like Steve Nash to win consistently over a player like Kobe Bryant.

3/26/2007 1:03:47 PM

That article is complete bs. Basketball a team sport. Jordan won 6 titles with a bunch of different players. Kobe hasn't smelled a title since shaq left. When Jordan matured as a player, it didn't matter who he played with (within reason - Wizards) they were going to compete for a title. He made everyone on his team a better player. He was a coach on the floor, one of the best defenders in the league, and the most clutch player of all time.

Kobe is all about Kobe. He's a great scorer but I don't think he's even close to Jordan as far as being a team player. I will laugh at anyone who thinks Kobe is a better player than Jordan until he wins 6 titles with his own team (and not shaq's).

3/26/2007 1:38:43 PM

Kobe is a freak and is the best player in the NBA.

3/26/2007 1:45:36 PM

^^ Kobe hasn't won won without Shaq

Jordan never won one without Pippen

Quote :

"eehh you either hate him or you love him im impartial at this point"

haha, you just contradicted yourself.

3/26/2007 1:46:16 PM

Pippen ain't exactly on the same level as Shaq.

Shaq is the most dominant big man of our generation and probably top 5 all-time. Scotty Pippen was a dubious choice for top 50 all-time on that SI list or whatever it was.

3/26/2007 1:52:31 PM

^^Are you kidding me? Are you comparing Shaq and Pippen? Shaq won w/o Kobe. How many did Pippen win w/o Jordan?

In the 3 titles the Lakers won w/ Shaq, he was MVP each time. In the 6 titles Jordan won, he was MVP each time. I think we know who was the reason those teams won.

Kobe was Shaq's Pippen, not the other way around.

[Edited on March 26, 2007 at 1:56 PM. Reason : ^^]

3/26/2007 1:56:21 PM

Quote :

"Kobe hasn't won won without Shaq Jordan never won one without Pippen "

Neither Kobe nor Jordan won one without Jackson

only one Shaq won without Jackson was with Wade and Riley

3/26/2007 2:00:11 PM

And Jackson never won without a top 10 player of all time on his team. We could go all day with this argument.

3/26/2007 2:02:23 PM

Quote :

"^^Are you kidding me? Are you comparing Shaq and Pippen? Shaq won w/o Kobe. How many did Pippen win w/o Jordan? In the 3 titles the Lakers won w/ Shaq, he was MVP each time. In the 6 titles Jordan won, he was MVP each time. I think we know who was the reason those teams won. Kobe was Shaq's Pippen, not the other way around."

How many did Jordan win without Pippen?

If anything you just proved that Shaq is greater than Jordan.

And Pippen was an incredible player, don't let your love fest for jordan tell you that he was nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottie_Pippen

Quote :

"Michael Jordan unexpectedly retired in 1993, and the 1994 season marked Pippen's stepping out from Jordan's shadow and he performed as one of the best players in the league. That year, he earned All-Star Game MVP honors. He had perhaps his best season, leading the Bulls in scoring, assists, and the entire league in steals, averaging 22.0 points, 8.7 rebounds, 5.6 assists, 2.9 steals, 0.9 three-pointers, and 0.8 blocks per game, while shooting 49.1% from the field and a career-best 32% from the three-point line. For his efforts, he earned the first of three straight All-NBA First Team nods, and finished third in the MVP voting. The Bulls finished the season with 55 wins, only two less than their previous championship year with Jordan still on the team."

Plus he led them to game 7 of the eastern conference finals that year.

3/26/2007 2:03:07 PM

Shaq is certainly more dominant than Pippen I completely agree

but the FACT still is, Jordan COULD NOT get past the Pistons, let alone win a title until Jackson came onboard

and Shaq and Kobe played together in LA for a few years and couldnt win...until Jackson came

3/26/2007 2:03:39 PM

^ I can't believe you guys are arguing this. Pippen was good but it was Jordan that won the titles. I think he could have won w/o Pippen.

Kobe is great but hasn't won since Shaq left.

Not sure why you guys brought coaching into the mix. I never said Jackson wasn't a great coach. But that just proves my point that Jordan is a better player that Kobe. Jordan matured as a player (Jackson helped) but Kobe hasn't (despite playing for Jackson for years). I don't think its Jackson's fault they haven't won since Shaq left.

3/26/2007 3:00:45 PM

I still believe Kobe has to win at least another championship to be given the title of "better than jordan"

I have watched the NBA with a passion for almost 2 decades and I thought I would never EVER see a player make it look possible to average 50 points a game, i just thought Wilt was a mythical legend but KOBE made it look easy for him to come out and get 50

3/26/2007 3:45:56 PM

I agree that what Kobe did was amazing but come on folks. This sounds like an anti-everything-UNC bias (which I posess myself).

What Jordan did essentially was win 6 titles in 6 years. How can you even talk about Kobe being better than that. If you want to argue that Kobe is a better scorer than Jordan, ok that's a reasonable argument. But Kobe is no where near as good a player as Jordan was.

6 NBA Finals MVPs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0 NBA Finals MVPs. FTW.

3/26/2007 4:40:26 PM

All these guys saying that Jordan could have won without Pippen are just out of it. Pippen was the man, and he is the reason (along with Paxon hitting all those shots) why they beat the Lakers for their first championship. He is the one that stepped up and guarded Magic Johnson and that eventually killed the offense of the Lakers. He is well known for his incredible defense as well as being a great all around player.

Don't forget, Jordan never won until Pippen was there. He couldn't win without Pippen and Pippen couldn't win without him.

Shaq could never win without Kobe. Remember how many clutch games Kobe had in those playoffs and finals, while Shaq would be on the bench so he doesn't get fouled and throw up bricks. Yet because there was nobody to really contest Shaq, he did his thing during the game. Yeah Miami won it last year, but lets not forget how. They basically had an all-star team headed by D.Wade. For those who actually watched the finals can remember how it was D.Wade taking over a lot of the games while Payton made the most important basket of the series which made it 2-1 instead of 3-0. Also in that final game Alonzo, Walker, Williams and Payton were great. Basically and sadly for you Shaq fans, ESPN showed that Miami was negative some number when Shaq was in the games and did better when he went to the bench.

3/26/2007 5:44:54 PM

^do you think dwayne wade is a poor mans kobe bryant?

like shaq couldnt have won in la without kobe, just as shaq couldnt have won in miami without dwayne wade?

3/26/2007 5:50:40 PM

^^Not to be an ass, but if you're too young to actually have watched Jordan play, you should probably not post to avoid sounding like an idiot.

It's a shame someone has to defend MJ on a sports board.

Pippen's career stats good but not great. 16ppg, 6rpg, and 5apg. So let's stop kidding ourselves about how great Pippen was.

You can talk meaningless stats all you want. The only stat that really matters is championships. Jordan was the best player to ever play in the NBA finals....period. The finals are where the pressure is the greatest along with the competition. No one has ever won more than 3 finals MVP and he won 6.

3/26/2007 9:15:52 PM

WHO GIVES A DAMN HOW GOOD KOBE IS COMPARED TO JORDAN, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, JORDAN ISN'T IN THE RUNNING FOR MVP THIS YEAR.

This argument only serves to strengthen the Kobe for MVP argument.

Does anyone say Nash is better than Jordan was?

3/26/2007 9:23:04 PM

^^you seem to forget what kind of players Jordan had on his teams.

- Rodman, already established beast on the rebounds (in case you don't know, that can really help win games and get more shots for someone like Jordan.)
- Paxon was a master at the 3 point shot and made a lot of big ones for Chicago.
- Horace Grant another very good inside player that helped a lot.
- Pippen, we all know about Pippen.
- B.J Armstrong was pretty good
- Ron Harper was solid
- Kerr another master at the 3 pt shot and hit many clutch shots
- Kukoc a very good wing player

[Edited on March 26, 2007 at 9:29 PM. Reason : .]

3/26/2007 9:29:02 PM

^^ by the way, how come they don't seem to factor player of the week/month honors when thinking about MVP.

Kobe already has 1 player of the month in December, it seems very possible that he will get it again in March, so that would be 2 compared to 1 each from Dirk and Nash.

So does that mean anything?

3/26/2007 9:33:35 PM

I think player of the month is more about stats

I can remember good players from shitty teams winning it because they take every shot

3/26/2007 9:35:56 PM

Phil Jackon agree's with me so enough said.

3/26/2007 10:05:50 PM

Quote :

"- B.J Armstrong was pretty good - Ron Harper was solid"

3/27/2007 1:41:32 AM

Quote :

"Does anyone say Nash is better than Jordan was?"

No, because unlike the Kobe supporters, fans of Steve Nash aren't fucking retarded.

3/27/2007 1:54:45 AM

^^^babzi all those players were considered "good", "solid", and "good wing player" because jordan made them better. He was much better including his whole team than kobe is now

3/27/2007 1:55:46 AM

for those who say that jordan couldnt win without pippen i agree.
there's no way the bulls could have won with only four guys on the court.
now if they replaced pippen thats a whole 'nother story.

3/27/2007 1:58:44 AM

i think MJ and pippen are the perfect example of mutualism in nature

3/27/2007 2:03:09 AM

Oh God, some of you just get dumber and dumber in this thread

3/27/2007 7:51:29 AM

no matter what you say, jordan never won a title without pippen and phil jack

matter of fact, he probably prevented the wizards from making the playoffs his years there

oh and btw

oh and another btw...for everybody acting like jordan is and always will be the king...thats just cause he's the best in your era...everybody said the same thing about Dr. J being the best ever and he seemed to fade away

and also kids on the playgrounds nowadays arent wearing michael jodan jerseys...they dont want to be like mike in 2007...they want to be like wade and lebron and kobe and carmelo because thats who they see on ESPN...thats who they see on TV and in commercials

You know I don't want to burst anybody's bubble who thinks the NBA has essentially fallen off since Jordan...but there were NBA fans in the 60s and 70s who thought the NBA fell off before Jordan...all this shit is cyclical and generational...thats why I would say Barry Sanders is the best running back ever and my dad says Gail Sayers...and I'm sure somebody who is 10 years old right now will say Ladainian or somebody like that

3/27/2007 10:08:07 AM