[VC_15]

Originally Posted by Sir Patchwork

Kobe is 2nd in PER behind only LeBron. Dirk, Elton and Tim are all top 10. Nash is 20th.

I am talking about individual stats. The players i listed, almost all of them have better all around stats.

Like I said, I was speaking about who actually is the most valuable player, not who the writers will vote for most valuable player. Those are two different things, since the writers create a criteria that really doesn't define the most valuable player, it's the most valuable player on a team with more than 50 wins, which ignores 2/3 of the league.

So your saying that you think Kobe is more valuable than Nash to suns and dirk to Mavs and timmy to spurs? if you take those 3 out of their teams.... I really doubt their teams will be able to win games without them. By far, Nash is the most valuable player to his team... if you take him out of pheonix.. Rest of the players will run around with their head cut-off not knowing what to do... The difference between Nash and Kobe is ... is that Nash makes other people better.. that's why he's so valuable.....

I already showed you that Kobe is only behind LeBron in the numbers. As far as team records, I don't care. I look at individual value, not team record. I know the writers look at team record, but that's them. They will choose their MVP based on their own (twisted) criteria, and I think it's foolish for everyone to have to conform to that criteria to express who they think is the most valuable player.

i don't why you don't care about team records... i think team records reflex to an extent how valuable a player can be...As i said. the lakers don't have that much good of a record.. to count Kobe that Valuable....it's true when kobe got suspended.. the lakers lost both games... They lost only because they had to readjust to the amount of shots kobe used to take....they were not prepared because they barely touched the ball in previous games.. and they were in a situation where they hadve to creat ...I don't know everyone is entitled to their opinions... But i don't see the spurs,suns or mavs winning any games without Nash, Timmy and Dirk. Do you who's dirk playing with? he's playing with a bunch of scound rounders and late first round picks... How do you think they got better?....and now they have one of the best records in the nba....

So if you ask, who is the most valuable player, I'm going to give you Kobe or LeBron. Those two are the most valuable players. If you ask me who I think the writers will pick for MVP, I'll give you Billups or Nash. Those are the two I think the writers will settle on. They are two different questions.

I'll stick with my predictions...

If Cavs get 50+ wins.. Lebron should take it... other than that

1- Nash
2- Dirk
3- Timmy

[Sir Patchwork]

Originally Posted by VC_15

I am talking about individual stats. The players i listed, almost all of them have better all around stats.

I am talking about individual stats too. PER takes into account all stats. Kobe is 2nd.

Originally Posted by VC_15

So your saying that you think Kobe is more valuable than Nash to suns and dirk to Mavs and timmy to spurs? if you take those 3 out of their teams.... I really doubt their teams will be able to win games without them. By far, Nash is the most valuable player to his team... if you take him out of pheonix.. Rest of the players will run around with their head cut-off not knowing what to do... The difference between Nash and Kobe is ... is that Nash makes other people better.. that's why he's so valuable.....

I think the Lakers, even though they're the worst team of the bunch, would suffer the biggest dropoff without their best player, making Kobe the most valuable player, in my opinion. I don't care which team has the best record, when it comes to most valuable player, all that should be taken into account is how big of a dropoff the team would have without that player. There shouldn't be these requirements that will inevitably ignore more than half the league.

As far as making guys better, Kobe does that just by drawing so much attention from the defenses that his teammates have more space. There was an article on 82games showing that all the Lakers players play better with Kobe on the court as opposed to when he is off the court, for that reason. Nash is better at creating for his teammates, but he isn't a third the scorer that Kobe is, so that goes both ways, and Nash isn't near the defender that Kobe is, either.

[VC_15]

Originally Posted by Sir Patchwork

I am talking about individual stats too. PER takes into account all stats. Kobe is 2nd.

PER is unefficient mainly because scoring and shooting count for a lot.. this is one of the mains reasons that puts him ahead of others.... How can Shawn Marion be #17 where he's obvioulsy a stat beast and # 1 ( last time i heared.. he surpassed lebron James for # 1)..in 8 categories in fantasy leagues.

I think the Lakers, even though they're the worst team of the bunch, would suffer the biggest dropoff without their best player, making Kobe the most valuable player, in my opinion. I don't care which team has the best record, when it comes to most valuable player, all that should be taken into account is how big of a dropoff the team would have without that player. There shouldn't be these requirements that will inevitably ignore more than half the league.

I agree that the lakers would suffer a dropoff not primarly because of Kobe not playing... but also of the fact that theres no chemistry whatsoever in that team.

As far as making guys better, Kobe does that just by drawing so much attention from the defenses that his teammates have more space. There was an article on 82games showing that all the Lakers players play better with Kobe on the court as opposed to when he is off the court, for that reason. Nash is better at creating for his teammates, but he isn't a third the scorer that Kobe is, so that goes both ways, and Nash isn't near the defender that Kobe is, either.

How can kobe make his players better by drawing so much attention and not giving up the ball... IF you're drawing so much attention and you're still shooting the ball... You're not getting your teammates better that way....I don't care of Nash being a third scorer that kobe is.. Kobe is also far behind in terms of assits from Nash... Kobe is obviously a better player... But most valuable... Nash

[Pioneer10]

Originally Posted by VC_15

PER is unefficient mainly because scoring and shooting count for a lot.. this is one of the mains reasons that puts him ahead of others.... How can Shawn Marion be #17 where he's obvioulsy a stat beast and # 1 ( last time i heared.. he surpassed lebron James for # 1)..in 8 categories in fantasy leagues.

Marion's PER numbers are NOT high because PER does not do a good job of including all around statisitics. On the contrary being and efficient scorer who doesn't miss shots, rebounds, and high assists/TO ratio will always do well in PER. The reason Marion isn't at the top in PER is that it based per possesion. It is not based on minutes and per game numbers: this is so PER can be used to evaluate players who play more minutes and on different styles of teams (fast break vs slow down). So since Phoenix tends to have a lot of possesions becuase of there style of play Marion's PER number is not as good as his per game numbers would indicate

[Diable]

PER adjusts out the way D'Antoni's offenses distorts the stats of PHX's players. Everyone always says that Nash makes everyone better when in fact playing for the Suns gives you more oppurtunities to do the things you are capable of doing.I don't know what Hollingers' PER says,but according to Knickerblogger.net Chris Paul's PER(22.5) is slightly higher than Steve Nash's (22.4).The equalizing factors are that Paul is a better rebounder and he commits fewer turnovers.The idea is that you put players in different systems on an even footing and then you compare them.Don't ask me how the math works I don't care enough to try to understand that part of it.

[VC_15]

Originally Posted by Pioneer10

Marion's PER numbers are NOT high because PER does not do a good job of including all around statisitics. On the contrary being and efficient scorer who doesn't miss shots, rebounds, and high assists/TO ratio will always do well in PER. The reason Marion isn't at the top in PER is that it based per possesion. It is not based on minutes and per game numbers: this is so PER can be used to evaluate players who play more minutes and on different styles of teams (fast break vs slow down). So since Phoenix tends to have a lot of possesions becuase of there style of play Marion's PER number is not as good as his per game numbers would indicate

Thanks for the more info, but yeh, i said PER is not an efficient way of measuring all-around stats.

[Sir Patchwork]

Originally Posted by Diable

PER adjusts out the way D'Antoni's offenses distorts the stats of PHX's players. Everyone always says that Nash makes everyone better when in fact playing for the Suns gives you more oppurtunities to do the things you are capable of doing.I don't know what Hollingers' PER says,but according to Knickerblogger.net Chris Paul's PER(22.5) is slightly higher than Steve Nash's (22.4).The equalizing factors are that Paul is a better rebounder and he commits fewer turnovers.The idea is that you put players in different systems on an even footing and then you compare them.Don't ask me how the math works I don't care enough to try to understand that part of it.

Careful with that talk. You can't give D'Antoni any credit for the Steve Nash show, he is obviously just riding on Nash's shoulders, like everyone else in that organization. (sarcasm)

[futuristxen]

Originally Posted by Sir Patchwork

Careful with that talk. You can't give D'Antoni any credit for the Steve Nash show, he is obviously just riding on Nash's shoulders, like everyone else in that organization. (sarcasm)

Nash is the perfect player to run D'Antoni's show. Don't really understand why that is so hard for people to understand. Why do people always have to denigrate one guy at the expense of the other. Last I knew D'Antoni doesn't play, and Nash doesn't coach...well actually, I've heard Nash does coach, but that's beside the point. The point is, they aren't conflicting powers. One does one job, and the other does the other. And when everything is in sync the one will enhance the other and vice versa. It's a symbiotic relationship. Which is why Nash is better than a lot of players, because he is so intune with his coach, he can make his coach better and his coach he.

It's very similiar to what Larry Brown did with Chauncy Billups. Brown kind of made Billups, but now Billups is better without Brown. One doesn't take away from the other.

[Sir Patchwork]

Originally Posted by futuristxen

Nash is the perfect player to run D'Antoni's show. Don't really understand why that is so hard for people to understand. Why do people always have to denigrate one guy at the expense of the other. Last I knew D'Antoni doesn't play, and Nash doesn't coach...well actually, I've heard Nash does coach, but that's beside the point. The point is, they aren't conflicting powers. One does one job, and the other does the other. And when everything is in sync the one will enhance the other and vice versa. It's a symbiotic relationship. Which is why Nash is better than a lot of players, because he is so intune with his coach, he can make his coach better and his coach he.

It's very similiar to what Larry Brown did with Chauncy Billups. Brown kind of made Billups, but now Billups is better without Brown. One doesn't take away from the other.

Yeah, I agree brother, I just don't like how D'Antoni is considered some overrated coach riding Nash's shoulders, when there isn't another coach in the league that Nash could be playing for, where he would be considered anything near a top 10 player. Not one coach. Without D'Antoni, Nash would be the same guy in Dallas, who was good, a top 5 point guard for certain, but clearly not the player he is made out to be today.

But yeah, their relationship works well, their styles bounce off each other perfect. It's kind of like Jerry Sloan and John Stockton, except different philosophies, but Stockton was in tune with Sloan and what Sloan wanted. Nash is doing great things, but he just isn't the MVP calibur player that folks try to make him out ot be. Saying he is, is without a doubt saying basketball is at an all-time low from a talent standpoint, which I refuse to believe. Stockton in his prime was never even top 10 in MVP voting, and Stockton was clearly better than Steve Nash is now.

Stockton was also one of my favorite players of all-time. And trust me, I love watching Nash play basketball, it's a thing of beauty, but I just can't go to the kind of lengths that ot