The Perpetual NBA Thread

[empy]

Its Over for the Lakers...

From Finals to Lottery

you know what sucks? LA doesn't even have a 1st round draft pick!! they traded it to the celtics. they do have the heat's 1st rounder, but since the heat will finish in the top 3 it won't get them top talent.

speaking of the draft, is it too early to start talking about it? cuz here's some players to watch in '05

Hakim Warrick - Carmelo's running mate at Syracuse. if he can improve his jumpshot he's like a cross between Shawn Marion and Emeka Okafor.

Charlie Villanueva - looks more like an alien than Sam Cassell, but his game is sick

Gerald Green - this HS senior is simply amazing. in the McDonald's HS All-American slam dunk contest, he tossed the ball in the air from the 3-pt line, caught it in the air on one bounce, put it through his legs, and windmill-dunked it. game over.

a few big guys....Ronny Turiaf from Gonzaga, Wayne Simien from Kansas, and Sean May (the NCAA finals MVP) all look good. there's also this big white guy from Utah, Andrew Bogut, who is projected to go #1 or #2 but imo has bust written all over him.

[baiskee]

next season ulit.

[theveed]

Looks like Orlando is out of the playoff race, Cleveland might go down real fast...

As for the MVP, Burns has a good write up... As much as I want Nash to be MVP, Marty's opinion does make a lot of sense...

Bigger is better
Marty Burns, SI.com

Headshot
Logo

My NBA awards ballot arrived the other day. As in recent years, it came by e-mail. No more need to cut down trees for commisionerv David Stern's annual postseason honors.

But while the mode of delivery might be new, the NBA's MVP criteria remain as vague as ever. Is the award supposed to go to the league's best player? Or the player who makes the biggest difference for his team?

The NBA offers no guidance to its media voters. Unlike some of the other awards on the ballot, which feature a brief description of the purpose, the MVP ballot simply instructs the voter to list five players in order. The NBA no doubt likes it this way, since it leads to greater debate and controversy.

The vague nature of the MVP is particularly relevant this year. Shaquille O'Neal and Steve Nash are clearly the two top candidates, ahead of LeBron James, Allen Iverson and Dirk Nowitzki. How one interprets the award (i.e, best player overall versus biggest difference-maker) is likely to determine how one votes.

For me, I've got to go with the best player. It just seems to make more sense. The NBA gives a championship trophy to the best team. It ought to give an award for the best player. This stuff about which player is most valuable to his team is too nebulous. By that measure, Andrei Kirilenko of the Jazz would be a top candidate. Take any star player off his team and chances are the team would go in the tank.

How then does one determine the best player? One rule of thumb is that it's the player most GMs and coaches would select first if they were drafting a team to win a playoff series right now. By that standard, Shaq is the MVP.

He is averaging 23.0 points and 10.6 rebounds in just 34.4 minutes per game. He leads the NBA in field-goal percentage (.599) and is sixth in blocks (2.4). Just as important, he has helped the Heat to the league's second-best record (56-19), just a tick behind Nash's Suns.

Shaq, by his very presence, changes the game at both ends. Every opposing coach starts his game plan by trying to figure out how to deal with the 7-foot-1, 330-pound monster. As Bulls coach Scott Skiles said earlier this season: "I'm of the school of thought that says Shaq should be MVP every year."

Nash has been terrific as well. His NBA-leading 11.5 assists per game is eye-popping. There is no doubt he's the engine driving the Suns and the main reason they have been the surprise story of the season.

But half the game is played on defense, and the 6-2 Nash just doesn't have the same impact at that end as Shaq. He works hard on D, harder than Shaq most nights, but he often has trouble staying in front of his man. Shaq, by virtue of his immense size, changes and alters what foes can do. Even on those nights when the Diesel doesn't move his feet, he's still a factor.

Shaq's impact on the game can be seen in the effect it has had on his Heat teammates. Damon Jones, Udonis Haslem and Rasual Butler suddenly look like world-beaters this season while feeding off of Shaq's double-teams. Even Christian Laettner has been rejuvenated. Nash has certainly made his teammates better too, but he had more to work with from the start in Amare Stoudemire, Shawn Marion, Quentin Richardson and Joe Johnson.

Both Shaq and Nash have led their teams to dramatic improvements (the Suns were 29-53 last season; the Heat were 42-40). Both players benefit from playing alongside All-Stars (Nash has Marion and Stoudemire; Shaq has Dwyane Wade). Both players have seen their teams struggle when they were out of the lineup (the Suns went 0-4 during a stretch without Nash; the Heat lost their first two games after the All-Star break without O'Neal).

But Shaq simply has been the bigger force in the NBA this year. He might not have put up the numbers he did in his one previous MVP year back in 2000, but he has taken the Heat to the top of the East. He'll most likely take them to the Finals, too.

Nash winning the MVP would make for a better story; no pure point guard has won it since Oscar Robertson in '63-64. And for the little floppy-haired Canadian to be considered among the likes of Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett and Shaq while leading his team to the best record in the NBA is truly remarkable. For those of us who enjoy a little drama with our sports, it doesn't get any better than that.

But as brilliant as Nash's meteor has been, Shaq's presence has towered over the NBA landscape all year. From his unceremonious trade out of L.A. to his All-Star hijinks, he has left his size-22 footprints all over the '04-05 season. He made it his mission this year to lead the Heat to the top, and he delivered. He's still the biggest and the best in the game, and he deserves the MVP.

[theveed]

But McCallum has a rebuttal...

Changing the game
Jack McCallum, SI.com

Headshot
Logo

I've heard it said -- by people wiser than I -- that a Shaquille O'Neal playing at, say, 80 percent, could be named most valuable player every year. That's how dominant a mobile 7-foot-1, 330-pound (340 pounds?) leviathan can be.

It makes sense, I suppose. But I'm going to differ with my esteemed colleague Marty Burns and offer up the antithesis to The Big Game-Changer. For this year's MVP, I'm going for the Little Game-Changer, Steve Nash of the Phoenix Suns.

Here is my five-pack of reasons for picking Nash. They should in no way be construed as a vote against Shaq, who came to Miami and did exactly what he said he was going to do.

1. Nash improved his team more than Shaq improved his.

ADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Rencontres
Je suis : recherchant :
Lieu : Âge : à
!!France!!
The Heat was on its way up before Shaq came, having won 42 games last year and before giving Indiana all it could handle in the Eastern Conference semifinals. Phoenix, despite being quarterbacked over the first part of last season by Stephon Marbury, the self-proclaimed "best point guard in the NBA," won 29 games.

2. Miami can win without Shaq

It's a simple formula: Give Dwyane Wade the ball and let him run the show. The Heat did it earlier this week when, with Shaq sidelined by a stomach virus, they beat the Chicago Bulls 104-86 behind Wade's 39 points. (This is not to suggest that Miami would go far in the playoffs without Shaq.)

Phoenix? Not to denigrate Nash's supporting cast, which is quite strong, but this is a team that simply cannot play with its quarterback. Ask Amare Stoudemire, Shawn Marion, Joe Johnson and Quentin Richardson -- they know who is dishing out the candy.

3. Nash has changed the game

Nash engineered a turnaround that fired up not only the Suns but the entire NBA. Hallelujah! We're talking about the fast break. We're talking about transition. We're talking about fun coming back into the game. The up-tempo game that Nash brought to Phoenix is the primary reason.

4. Nash can beat you in numerous ways

We tend to think of Nash in one-dimensional terms, i.e., a madcap whirling dervish of a point guard who's as much track sprinter as basketball player. But he is a much better all-around player than he's given credit for, particularly in the halfcourt. He has a deadly jumper, he's able to get to the basket, he's able to create his own shot, he gets to the foul line and, when he's there, he's an 89 percent shooter. You can't foul him at the end of games and you can bet he's going to have the ball.

5. Nash is fun

I looked back at the five-decade history of the award, which was first given in 1955-56 (to St. Louis Hawks forward Bob Pettit), and it's difficult to find anyone who's not an immortal or an immortal-to-be. That includes Shaq, who won the award in '00. Nash would be a delicious exception. I don't think his election could be considered a shocker since Phoenix's turnaround was so dramatic, and we've been talking about him as a viable candidate since December. But when the season began, he was certainly not mentioned among MVP candidates such as O'Neal, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, maybe Kobe Bryant and maybe Tracy McGrady. And what is sports worth if it can't give us great surprises once in a while?

[ILuvDetailing]

Steve Nash for me should be the MVP. One more criteria they forgot to mention... effort. Steve Nash brings it every night, Shaq doesn't. If Shaq had stayed in shaped in LA then he wouldn't have been traded in the first place.

[theveed]

ILD: Matratrade padin yan as long as Kobe is there. :D

[mantoy]

my money is on shaq. i want him to win the mvp to add insult to Kobe and LA.

[empy]

how about this:

mvp - shaquille o'neal
nba champion - miami heat def. san antonio spurs
finals mvp - dwyane wade

[ILuvDetailing]

Anyway I'm still picking the Spurs to win it all... if TD comes back in time.

Theveed: :lol: Good point. Di talaga sila magkasundo, but do you think they'd break up that core if they continue winning?

Shaq of 1999-2000 - Quick, Athletic, Mobile, Hungry, Highly Motivated, Dominant, MVP

Shaq or 2004-2005 - Lost a Step, Still Dominant, not so Mobile, Lost some of his Athleticism, Motivated, Hungry?, MVP?

[theveed]

Yes I do think they will Kupchak firmly believes that Kobe is LA's future, not Shaq... Besides, there really wasn't a "core" with the past Lakers, lakas sobra 2-5 position nila that the rest doesn't really matter (except Fisher, I guess)... The rest are expendable unlike sa Chicago dati na may clear roles bawat isa.