Thursday, April 27, 2006

The Nash vs Kobe Debate

There are lots of articles complaining about Kobe not winning the MVP award, and an article or two supporting Nash. I go with Nash. Yes, Kobe is the best basketball player on the planet, talent-wise. But, players from teams that squeeze into the playoffs aren't an MVP. Look at the history, the MVP is always from one of the top teams. Arguments like "would you trade Nash for Kobe" are irrelevant - the question is, who is the Most Valuable Player? And it's Nash. I'd even take Lebron over Kobe - a more well-rounded player who plays a great team game. Or Dirk - who's team won 60+ games, with just one all-star.

Who thought Phoenix would be the #2 seed, back in October, with Amare out, and Joe Johnson and Q-Rich gone; replaced by guys like Raja Bell, Boris Diaw, and James Jones?? I didn't like the Dime argument that Marion and Diaw make Nash better - couldn't it be considered to be the reverse? I'd like someone to ask Marion how it was playing with "Starbury"?? And what did Diaw do in Atlanta, when he could have received big minutes? Oh - he was so valuable that he was basically a throw-in in the JJ trade!

The truth is - pass-first guards who push the ball and also shoot for a great percentage (both FT and FG) are very, very rare. Name another one playing in the L right now? The only drawback for Nash is no D, but Phoenix just wants the ball back ASAP anyways..:)

PS - Sam Mitchell has been voted the worst coach in the NBA!

No comments: