Did Steve Nash Deserve To Win His MVPs?

This is the only reason I'm on hold because I want to know if this name means anything. The two-time league MVP, Steve Nash, no, no, no, but Kenny, the coach, Reggie, was he a true MVP or was he a sympathy MVP? now he was a real mvp over me twice

steve

nash

won the mvp in 2005. He also won in 2006. Everyone knows this but did you know he also came so close to winning the mvp in 2007 in that season that dirk won the mvp with 83 first? votes and a final score of 1138

nash

was right behind him with a score of 1013 only three other players have won the mvp three years in a row those players were bill russell will chamberlain and larry bird nash were so close to joining that group A As the years have passed, Nash's MVPs have become quite a controversial topic.

People listen to Shaq. People listen to the media and just look at the numbers without any context and claim that there is no way he could have won two MVPs let alone come this close to winning three. and over time there have been many misconceptions about why and how he won those

mvps

. How are you doing friends? My name is Andy and today we are going to talk about a topic that I have received many requests about. Did Steve Nash really

deserve

those MVPS? I'm going to break down all the details of those years. We have to understand the context of this situation.

Let's go back to the 2003-4 season and see what the NBA was like back then. The game was very slow. The average pace in the league was. 90.1 in the last 15 years, that season had the lowest pace and the lowest effective field goal percentage, basically the offenses looked very bad, there were a lot of post-ups, a lot of isos in general and a lot of low scoring games, teams like the Spurs and Pistons. and pacers were the best defensive teams in the league and scoring 80 points in a game was very common now as we enter the 2004 offseason and look at the phoenix suns, a team that was near the bottom of the standings and needed some changes , Steve Nash was a free agent and Dallas didn't pay him what he wanted, so he signed with Phoenix.

At first everyone thought it was a decent move by the Suns, his team was going nowhere, so they might as well try to change something at that point, even though Nash was marginal. All-Star, he was good, but not that good, no one expected him to change the entire franchise, but that's what he did during an era where the game was very slow and the best teams in the league struggled defensively to win games the suns went in the complete opposite direction nash and mike d'antoni set the standard for the modern nba offense with a team of super athletes like amari stottemeyer sean marion leandro barbosa and great shooters like joe johnson quentin richardson and later raja bell and tim thomas sons had all the personnel to be a dominant offensive team, they abused the pick and roll for maximum efficiency, which very few teams believed was a legitimate strategy because back then most teams did not have the space and the athleticism to make it work. but the Suns did it and it was incredible to see Nash average over 15 points and 11 assists per game with incredible efficiency, but most importantly he led the Suns to 62 wins.

One of the biggest changes in NBA history from Nash's two MVPs in 2005 is The least controversial, I mean, in most years, the NBA usually picks the best player from the best team in the regular season and that was for sure he wasn't the best player in the league and statistically he wasn't even in the top 20 in the league. in vorp or box plus minus two advanced stats that predict mvp pretty well, in fact both sean marion and amari stoddamyard had a higher vorp than nash nash also came in 8th in win percentage per 48 minutes that's good but i understand why a lot of people I don't agree with nash winning because just looking at the stats and advanced stats it doesn't look like the mvp but you have to remember no one cared about advanced stats in 2005. if you consider sun's success and the fact that they brought a revolutionary style of play to the league during a time when it was getting a little boring with all these slow games.

It makes sense why he won MVP. It was the transition between two different eras and everyone loved his style of play. A great team player, selfless, the model for What the NBA Wants in an MVP, the narrative was in his favor now, moving on to 2006, this MVP might be a little controversial at the time, it was debatable, but not as much as When people look back today, in fact, I think a lot of the controversy came when Westbrook won the MVP in 2017. He put up great stats, broke the record for triple doubles, but his team only finished sixth. seeded and still won the MVP.

Everyone saw that and instantly made the connection to 2006 where Kobe had an amazing season with ridiculous scoring numbers but his team only finished as the 7th seed, some fans say oh kobe

deserve

d that mvp, look at his numbers man, If westbrook won, kobe should have won in 06 too, but this is not a good way to look at it. They are two completely different years and the MVP criteria changes over time. Kobe was the best player in the league in O6, but if the MVP went to the best player in the league every year, then Jordan and Lebron would have like 10 MVPs.

It doesn't work like that, looking back at the 2005-6 season, the voting for MVP was pretty balanced, the votes were very spread out and no one knew for sure who deserved to win, there were three teams in the league that finished with a better record than the Suns. the pistons, spurs and mavs, so why not give the mvp to a star player from those teams? Well, the Pistons and the Spurs were two teams that, honestly, the media and the general public didn't like, as I mentioned before, despite having great players, some superstars. the style of play was not appealing to watch, which definitely played a role in his players not getting many MVP votes.

The Mavs also had a better record than the Suns. Dirk Nowitzki, who had an incredible season averaging 27 and 9 and led the Mavs to 60 wins. The term. third in MVP voting and in my opinion I think Dirk had a great case to win MVP that year, all you know is that with those weird seating rules back then because the Mavs were in the same division as the Spurs, the highest spot they could in the playoffs. get was fourth, which was obviously changed the following season because those rules were ridiculous, so even though they won 60 games, they were still only fourth place, which probably caused Dirk to lose some votes.

Rarely do you see a player win MVP if his team is outside the top three seeds, not to mention Lebron finished second in MVP voting that year, the Cavs finished with 50 wins, but the individual bronze game was absolutely spectacular with averages of 31, 7 and 7. And then nash, the Suns were expected not to. very well that year because Stoddameyer was out basically the entire season with an injury and yet Nash led them to 54 wins while averaging a career high in points and shooting efficiency. It was arguably the best season of his career from an individual standpoint, even without Stoddameir. who averaged 26 points per game the previous season, nash still led them to the western conference finals again, the 06 suns starting lineup was all kinds of crazy, marion was still there playing well, but then you had boris dial playing as a power forward and center The guy was a backup shooting guard last season for the Atlanta Hawks.

Raja Bell was also new to the team and had a pro season playing alongside Nash and then there was Kurt Thomas, 33, starting 50 games and playing center, yeah, that. It was the lineup that Nash carried to the Western Conference Finals, of course these awards are given before the playoffs begin, but by the way, it's just further validation of Nash's impact on the team, if you want to know where he ended up Shaq in the MVP voting. He didn't even make the top 10 this year, he finished second in o5 in a very close race and now moving on to the 2006-7 season, nash almost won the mvp again if it weren't for dirk and the mavs won 67 games. nashville won three in a this time the suns finished the season with 61 wins second best in the league looking at the rest of the nba landscape he very well could have won the mvp again that's pretty crazy so long story short all in all i think nash's mvp's were definitely deserved according to the nba at the time nash's style of play was something voters really liked the game needed a breath of fresh air from all the isos and slow games and nash always that, furthermore, his passing ability, his unselfishness and his team-oriented approach were what basketball should be about.

I should also mention that it was the perfect situation for Nash to win some of the best players in the league like kobe and kevin garnett had mediocre teams while promising new stars like lebron d wade and mello were not in their cousins ​​however it was perfect timing above all else and that's it folks, this Steve Nash MVP debate has been going on for years and generally the criteria for MVP are always different. The criticism of him winning these awards is unwarranted anyway, what do you guys think about Steve? Nash, I've made a couple of videos about him and his kids before, but there are always mixed opinions about him, what do you think about his

mvps

and what do you think about the mvp award in general?

If team success is valued more than individual success, let me. I know his opinion. Thank you all so much for watching and as always, we'll see you next time. Peace.