# AI vs. Shaq for MVP



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

> You are going to hear a lot of names come up in the NBA Most Valuable Player debate. There is Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash, Tim Duncan, and even LeBron James. Granted, they are all great players, and they are all valuable to their teams. However, this season, they are far from being the most valuable players in the league. This year, that race is only being run by two men: Shaquille O'Neal and Allen Iverson.
> 
> The case for Shaq is the easiest one to make. Not only has he established himself as the most dominant player in the league by posting an average of 23 points per game and by placing first in field goal percentage, fifth in rebounds, and sixth in blocked shots, but he has proven himself to be the primary contributing factor to the success of the teams that he has played for.
> 
> ...


LINK 

Who called it? Me. I hate to say I told you so, but I did. Still want to trade him Philly?


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

sliccat said:


> Who called it? Me. I hate to say I told you so, but I did. Still want to trade him Philly?


What'd you call, exactly?

Also while Iverson is having a great season, the MVP is Shaq's he changed the Heat completely, and also he's been robbed in year's past so this is as good a makeup year as any.

Can't give it to Nash, because a healthy Amare Stoudamire is just as big of a reason for the Suns current surge. Dirk should get some serious looks, but he just doesn't feel like an MVP candidate.


----------



## MVPlaya (Oct 12, 2003)

A make up year should not be a reason as to why Shaq should get MVP.

I agree with you sayin that Nash has Amare, but tell me

Amare and Nash or Dwayne Wade and O'neal?


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

MVPlaya said:


> A make up year should not be a reason as to why Shaq should get MVP.
> 
> I agree with you sayin that Nash has Amare, but tell me
> 
> Amare and Nash or Dwayne Wade and O'neal?


Well the Suns also have Shawn Marion, Joe Johnson, and Quentin Richardson. The Suns were a team that had three all-stars, and Joe Johnson had a very solid argument to be the fourth one. O'Neal has Wade, and then who's the next best player Udonis Haslem, Eddie Jones? If you take Shaq and Nash off their respective teams which is better the Heat or Suns? I say the Suns, and it's not close.

Shaq has changed the entire dynamic in Miami and has made them a title contender, and he's helped make players around him better especially Dwyane Wade. Shaq is the main reason the Heat are the best team (record wise) in the Heat, and for that he deserves to win the MVP.


----------



## mellow-dramatik (Nov 16, 2004)

AI for MVP i wouldnt be surprised if he got it


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 23, 2004)

Even as a diehard fan of Iverson, I don't think it's his year to get the MVP.

I do think, though, that it's his year to finally make it on to the 1st team again. I'd be seriously ticked off if he's put in the 2nd team again, after all he's done.


----------



## Ps!ence_Fiction (Aug 1, 2004)

mellow-dramatik said:


> AI for MVP i wouldnt be surprised if he got it


I would. I do think that AI has had the best individual season (with LeBron coming in a VERY close second), but the wins aren't there, so he won't be voted as MVP.


----------



## Rhubarb (Mar 19, 2005)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Also while Iverson is having a great season, the MVP is Shaq's he changed the Heat completely


Bingo.

AI, Nash, and Dirk have been huge, but if Shaq doesn't win, it's a fallacy.

He is *the* reason the Heat are now legitimate chances to take out the championship. Some may argue Dwayne Wade has been a factor in the Heat's revival, and that has some merit to it, but he has simply benefited from Shaq's arrival. There is no question about it.

I could probably voice a similar argument for Nash, but I think, had the Suns signed any other point guard of reasonable quality that suited their style of play, the likes of Amare and co would still have succeeded to some extent. The same, however, cannot be said of Shaq.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

> Also while Iverson is having a great season, the MVP is Shaq's he changed the Heat completely, and also he's been robbed in year's past so this is as good a makeup year as any.
> 
> Can't give it to Nash, because a healthy Amare Stoudamire is just as big of a reason for the Suns current surge. Dirk should get some serious looks, but he just doesn't feel like an MVP candidate.


Your argument beats itself.
1. As for shaq, that's exactly what the article said.
2. Look up Amare's stats when Nash is out.
3. Nash isn't an MVP(especially over shaq) in my mind, but not for that reason. Jason Williams could have took the suns to a fifty win season(****, AI would've took them to 70). If you put another good center on the heat, they struggle for 40.
4. The heat almost beat the Pacers, and were only getting better. That team was going places before Shaq came, not the finals, but if they only make it to the east finals, they haven't improved much more than they would have anyways.



> What'd you call, exactly?


AI being a top 3 MVP candidate.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

sliccat said:


> 4. The heat almost beat the Pacers, and were only getting better. That team was going places before Shaq came, not the finals, but if they only make it to the east finals, they haven't improved much more than they would have anyways.


The Heat without Shaq weren't title contenders, with him in one season they are. They would've been a fun team that maybe eventually could build to an ECF run ala the Milwaukee Bucks with the Big 3. If the Heat only get to the Eastern Finals, they're still a much better team because look at what they've done over the body of a season.

It's night and day. 

And good job on predicting he'd be a top 3 candidate, I forgot all about that.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> They would've been a fun team that maybe eventually could build to an ECF run ala the Milwaukee Bucks with the Big 3. If the Heat only get to the Eastern Finals, they're still a much better team because look at what they've done over the body of a season.


If they had become the new Milwaukee, they would have been made it to the east finals, which is exactly the same thing. My point is that we can't tell exactly how valuable Shaq has been until the playoffs, because they lost something like they're first 8 last year, and still won over forty, so a 50 win season wouldn't have been impossible with all those players improving, and maybe drafting a big.


----------



## Ps!ence_Fiction (Aug 1, 2004)

sliccat said:


> If you put another good center on the heat, they struggle for 40.


If you put a good point guard on the Sixers, they struggle to win 20 games. Don't get me wrong, Shaq will win MVP, but I don't think Iverson is getting as much consideration as he should just because his supporting cast is as good as the Bobcats. Without Iverson, who would carry the scoring load on that team?


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

As much as I want to see Allen Iverson win another MVP award I believe Shaq is the MVP of this season. Our record just isn't good enough for Iverson to win it and Shaq has the best record in the East and was challenging for the best in the NBA before he got some stomach infection. It's sad too, to watch what I would consider Iverson's best season and not have him win anything for it. At least he got an All Star Game MVP trophy again.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

Ps!ence_Fiction said:


> If you put a good point guard on the Sixers, they struggle to win 20 games. Don't get me wrong, Shaq will win MVP, but I don't think Iverson is getting as much consideration as he should just because his supporting cast is as good as the Bobcats. Without Iverson, who would carry the scoring load on that team?


****, the sixers would struggle for 10 without AI. I think he is the MVP. I just know he won't get it.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

sliccat said:


> If they had become the new Milwaukee, they would have been made it to the east finals, which is exactly the same thing. My point is that we can't tell exactly how valuable Shaq has been until the playoffs, because they lost something like they're first 8 last year, and still won over forty, so a 50 win season wouldn't have been impossible with all those players improving, and maybe drafting a big.


Then at the end, playoffs isn't really relevant since the MVP is a regular season award.

But let's play with the hypothetical, if they don't trade for Shaq they have the option of drafting Pavel Podkolzine, David Harrison or Peter John Ramos to play Center. Two guys who are projects, and one who's a solid contributor now, say they take the best out of them right now (which is Harrison). In that scenario they'd be a midpack team.



Ps!ence Fiction said:


> If you put a good point guard on the Sixers, they struggle to win 20 games. Don't get me wrong, Shaq will win MVP, but I don't think Iverson is getting as much consideration as he should just because his supporting cast is as good as the Bobcats. Without Iverson, who would carry the scoring load on that team?


Come on the Sixers have a way better supporting cast than the Bobcats, the Bobcats have the edge in coaching.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

> Then at the end, playoffs isn't really relevant since the MVP is a regular season award.


Exactly.



> But let's play with the hypothetical, if they don't trade for Shaq they have the option of drafting Pavel Podkolzine, David Harrison or Peter John Ramos to play Center. Two guys who are projects, and one who's a solid contributor now, say they take the best out of them right now (which is Harrison). In that scenario they'd be a midpack team.


Why is that? They weren't a midpack team last year.


----------



## Ps!ence_Fiction (Aug 1, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Come on the Sixers have a way better supporting cast than the Bobcats, the Bobcats have the edge in coaching.


OK, I will agree with you there. The Sixers would be horrid without Iverson though, especially offensively. I'm not really counting Willie Green because in this situation, he isn't playing, so he shouldn't be taken into consideration when talking about Iverson's supporting cast, and how bad it would be without Iverson. It would be really sad because there's a good chance that Marc Jackson could be our leading scorer, maybe Korver.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

sliccat said:


> Exactly.


So you're aggreeing now, when you were the one who brought up the playoffs up to begin with?



> Why is that? They weren't a midpack team last year.


Last year they were 42-40 with the 11th best record in the league, that's right around midpack.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

> He won't win the Most Valuable Player award with Shaquille O'Neal and Steve Nash battling it out, and he won't even be thought of for Most Improved Player because you don't give that award to former MVPs.
> 
> But Allen Iverson, in New Jersey tonight for a telling Eastern Conference tilt when the 76ers visit the Nets, has been something different this season. And he's kind of flying under the radar as Philadelphia gets a little closer to securing a playoff spot for the first time in two years.
> 
> ...


LINK


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

Thanks for that read PhillyPhanatic. I'm really glad to see Iverson making efforts at becoming a true team player. This past year Allen Iverson has made great strides in improving his game and I'm happy to have him on this team. Even if he's not MVP of the league, he's the MVP of the team and he has been ever since the day he was drafted.


----------



## thegza (Feb 18, 2003)

Allen Iverson is my MVP.

I don't think many people realize just how much better AI has gotten this year. For much of this season I thought he was a ball-hog, and the same type of selfish player he once was, but I am ashamed of myself as a basketball fan for not watching him more often and just passing in this incredibly ignorant judgement. Iverson has matured both on and off the court, and I think he's become the most valuable player in the NBA. I look at Steve Nash and Shaq Diesel, and I see established teams that would make the playoffs even without their MVP candidates, but in Philly, you've arguably got a worst team then the Atlanta Hawks, C-Webb or not.

Just the way you can have Iverson's mentality changed is amazing. The boy can put up 30+ points and then hand you 15+ assist. That's just sick! Major kudos to AI. And I dare say, the best player in the NBA.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> So you're aggreeing now, when you were the one who brought up the playoffs up to begin with?
> 
> 
> 
> Last year they were 42-40 with the 11th best record in the league, that's right around midpack.


1. What I'm saying is, you can't determine Shaq's value until the playoffs start, and since the playoffs are irrelevent to the REGULAR SEASON MVP, in my opinion, that takes him out of the race, or at least knocks him down a spot.

2. Yes, but that's after losing they're first nine without Wade(or Odom, I can't remember) If not for those, they would have been closer to 47. And with all they're players returning and improving, a 50 win season isn't far out of reach. So while Shaq's improved what they would have done in the regular season by a few games, his real value doesn't come until the playoffs, which, again, is irrelevent to the REGULAR SEASON MVP.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

Yeah, that's your argument, but it's hard to use that when it's obvious that Shaq has made the Heat a much better team in the REGULAR SEASON. They've won 14 more games with Shaq than they did last year, and he helped Dwyane Wade go from being a nice player to being a superstar player.

Now to go back to my argument against Steve Nash, Amare Stoudemire was putting up monster numbers when he came back from injury, same with Joe Johnson (after Starbury was traded). They just needed a point. Shaq took a team that was a nice little team, and made them one of the teams to beat on a nightly basis.

Iverson's having a great year, no doubt, but he wouldn't be the first player having his best year to get snubbed of the MVP.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

> Now to go back to my argument against Steve Nash, Amare Stoudemire was putting up monster numbers when he came back from injury, same with Joe Johnson (after Starbury was traded). They just needed a point.


No, that's MY argument. You ain't slick.



> Yeah, that's your argument, but it's hard to use that when it's obvious that Shaq has made the Heat a much better team in the REGULAR SEASON. They've won 14 more games with Shaq than they did last year, and he helped Dwyane Wade go from being a nice player to being a superstar player.


We're going in circles.



Sliccat said:


> Yes, but that's after losing they're first nine without Wade(or Odom, I can't remember) If not for those, they would have been closer to 47. And with all they're players returning and improving, a 50 win season isn't far out of reach. So while Shaq's improved what they would have done in the regular season by a few games, his real value doesn't come until the playoffs, which, again, is irrelevent to the REGULAR SEASON MVP.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

sliccat said:


> No, that's MY argument. You ain't slick.


No, I'm pointed that out so you wouldn't say "Well the Suns were worse, and Nash made Amare an All-Star".



> We're going in circles.


Well Caron Butler was inconsistent throughout this season, and Lamar Odom wasn't as good this year as last so who's to say in a hypothetical breakdown that they both don't have the same seasons they had this year. If they do the Heat clearly suffer for it.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

> No, I'm pointed that out so you wouldn't say "Well the Suns were worse, and Nash made Amare an All-Star".


No, you made the point that Amare was as big of a reason as Nash for they're success. I made the point that the Suns only needed a PG to succeed with:



Sliccat said:


> Nash isn't an MVP(especially over shaq or AI) in my mind, but not for that reason. Jason Williams could have took the suns to a fifty win season(****, AI would've took them to 70). If you put another good center on the heat, they struggle for 40.


Besides, I've never even commented on Nash being an MVP candidate. Where did you get that idea?



> Well Caron Butler was inconsistent throughout this season, and Lamar Odom wasn't as good this year as last so who's to say in a hypothetical breakdown that they both don't have the same seasons they had this year. If they do the Heat clearly suffer for it.


There is a huge difference between playing with with Wade and Kobe, besides Lamar can't play PF in the west, and Kobe made them both struggle because he dominates the ball so much. 

Besides, there's also something to be said for team chemistry.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

sliccat said:


> No, you made the point that Amare was as big of a reason as Nash for they're success. I made the point that the Suns only needed a PG to succeed with:
> 
> Besides, I've never even commented on Nash being an MVP candidate. Where did you get that idea?


No, I said that to differentiate from Shaq making Wade and the Heat better is different than Nash making the Suns better. Guys were putting up numbers last season while Wade went from a solid scorer to a 24+ a game scorer.



> There is a huge difference between playing with with Wade and Kobe, besides Lamar can't play PF in the west, and Kobe made them both struggle because he dominates the ball so much.
> 
> Besides, there's also something to be said for team chemistry.


So we're dealing with a hypothetical situation where we must assume that the team gets better and throw away the evidence that Lamar Odom regressed and Butler struggled still after an injury prone season? So we adjust their record last year so they don't start off 0-7 because of Odom's injury, when Odom's been injured just about every season of his career.

I'm just trying to get all of this straight.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

> No, I said that to differentiate from Shaq making Wade and the Heat better is different than Nash making the Suns better. Guys were putting up numbers last season while Wade went from a solid scorer to a 24+ a game scorer.


Okay, fine. We both made the point.



> So we're dealing with a hypothetical situation where we must assume that the team gets better and throw away the evidence that Lamar Odom regressed and Butler struggled still after an injury prone season?


Geez, you nag like a wife. You're going to win just because I'll get tired.

Anyways, Odom struggled this season for two reasons:

1. He didn't have the ball enough with Kobe dominating it.

2. He had to adapt to Kobe and his other teamates, plus he was in a tougher PF conference.

Neither of those questions exist on the Heat, and as for Caron, that is completely hypothetical. We'll never know. So the answer to your question is yes.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

Ah good, I wasn't going to let you out last me two times in a row. 

It's funny though, I don't think we'd even agree on what the color of the Sixers home jerseys are.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

EDIT: Never mind.


----------



## SirCharles34 (Nov 16, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Shaq has changed the entire dynamic in Miami and has made them a title contender, and he's helped make players around him better especially Dwyane Wade. Shaq is the main reason the Heat are the best team (record wise) in the Heat, and for that he deserves to win the MVP.


Well, if that's the basis of your argument, then Shaq should win MVP every yr because he would change any team's entire dynamic. I won't complain if he won, I'm just saying if I had a vote, it would go to AI, b/c he did the most with the least this yr.


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

alleninsf said:


> Well, if that's the basis of your argument, then Shaq should win MVP every yr because he would change any team's entire dynamic. I won't complain if he won, I'm just saying if I had a vote, it would go to AI, b/c he did the most with the least this yr.


Shaq is an MVP candidate every year. If Shaq won it every year it wouldn't be wrong either because you can make a good argument for it every single year. But, we choose Duncans and Garnetts and Iversons because they are different they have done just that much more for that season to win the award.


----------



## SirCharles34 (Nov 16, 2004)

Kunlun said:


> Shaq is an MVP candidate every year. If Shaq won it every year it wouldn't be wrong either because you can make a good argument for it every single year. But, we choose Duncans and Garnetts and Iversons because they are different they have done just that much more for that season to win the award.


Precisely. That was my argument when Barkley won the MVP. Everyone kept saying how Jordan should've gotten it again because he was the best player but Barkley did to the Suns what Shaq is doing for the Heat.


----------

