# Iverson 5th in MVP voting



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

Allen Iverson ended up with 240 points with two first place votes. He was behind Duncan, Nowitzki, O'Neal and Nash in the voting this season. I really disagree with Nash winning the MVP and I feel Allen Iverson even deserved it more than him, but what happened has happened and it's set now.

Here's the full list of the MVP vote getters.
MVP Votes


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 23, 2004)

grumblegrumbleheshouldhavebeenMVPgrumblegrumble

Good for him...I hope this cements him in the 1st Team.


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

Vermillion said:


> Good for him...I hope this cements him in the 1st Team.


This might help a bit, but it shouldn't be this that puts him in the first team. The voters should know by the way Iverson's season has been that he was the best guard in the league.


----------



## Bruno (Sep 15, 2003)

no coments .


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

Realistically I don't think Ivey ever had a chance, but 5th? I would have been happier with second or third. The Sixers' record just wasn't good enough for him to win it.


----------



## jpk (May 4, 2005)

Shaq has a way bigger beef with the results than AI. I mean, Nash is good and all, but Shaq completely turned around his new team and his old team completely collapsed. 

AI puts up un-human individual performances and scores like crazy, but the same could be said about Kobe, Vince Carter, or T-Mac. MVP usually has to lead a team to something extraordinary to get the award.

Note the exception (outside the NBA): Alex Rodriguez in the MLB. That Joker won it when the Texas Rangers were in last place. See if the voters ever make the mistake of making the MVP someone that isn't on a top contender.


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 23, 2004)

Kunlun said:


> This might help a bit, but it shouldn't be this that puts him in the first team. The voters should know by the way Iverson's season has been that he was the best guard in the league.


I know, but some negative part of me still thinks the writers are going to put Lebron/Kobe/McGrady/Wade over him.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

lebron should be listed as a forward, he had a better season than Kobe and was IMO slightly better than Wade so that would leave him and Nash


----------



## Mr. Mojo Risin (Apr 21, 2005)

jpk said:


> Shaq has a way bigger beef with the results than AI. I mean, Nash is good and all, but Shaq completely turned around his new team and his old team completely collapsed.
> 
> AI puts up un-human individual performances and scores like crazy, but the same could be said about Kobe, Vince Carter, or T-Mac. MVP usually has to lead a team to something extraordinary to get the award.
> 
> Note the exception (outside the NBA): Alex Rodriguez in the MLB. That Joker won it when the Texas Rangers were in last place. See if the voters ever make the mistake of making the MVP someone that isn't on a top contender.


The Lakers lost almost all of their team and P.J. in addition to Shaq and Shaq has Wade etc, so the argument that the Lakers collapesed and the Heat are suddenly great cuz of Shaq doesn't bear much weight IMO. The Heat were good last year. Of course they are better with Shaq, but that doesn't mean he deserves MVP. He wasn't up their in stats in multiple categories like AI. AI put up gaudy numbers this year and deserved MVP.


----------



## Mr. Mojo Risin (Apr 21, 2005)

Although I think A.I. deserved MVP, I am not disappointed with Steve Nash winning, he was my # 2 choice and he's always been great and fun to watch. He was stellar this year. I'm just glad Shaq didn't win it, cuz I really don't think he deserved it. He just gets too much credit cuz he's Shaq.


----------



## Ps!ence_Fiction (Aug 1, 2004)

Mr. Mojo Risin said:


> The Lakers lost almost all of their team and P.J. in addition to Shaq and Shaq has Wade etc, so the argument that the Lakers collapesed and the Heat are suddenly great cuz of Shaq doesn't bear much weight IMO. The Heat were good last year. Of course they are better with Shaq, but that doesn't mean he deserves MVP. He wasn't up their in stats in multiple categories like AI. AI put up gaudy numbers this year and deserved MVP.


Well the Shaq situation isn't so simple. The Heat traded 3 of their starters (2 of their best 3 players were involved) to get Shaq. While the Suns got Nash without giving up anything, while also adding Quentin and getting a healthy Amare (he only played 53 games last season). So the Heat improving like they did after giving up such a large chunk of their team is pretty impressive. Everyone says the Heat winning can also be contributed to Wade's growth, which is true (though I do think Shaq helped bring him to this level), but why don't people talk about Amare's growth, or JJ's growth? Both teams had young improving players, and I find what the Heat did more impressive than what the Suns did.


----------



## SixersFan (Dec 19, 2004)

He should have been higher than 5th, but at least he got some recognition.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

He should have been third.

I can't see any legit arguments where he'd not be on the All-NBA first team.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

He should have been higher than 3rd, but I understand. If he doesn't make the All NBA 1st team though, someone's getting sniped.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

sliccat said:


> He should have been higher than 3rd, but I understand. If he doesn't make the All NBA 1st team though, someone's getting sniped.


 NO disrespect to Tim Duncan but he missed alot of time and he shouldnt have been ahead of AI and Dirk tailed off at the end of the season while AI took it up another notch. Oh well tis' the NBA


----------



## jpk (May 4, 2005)

No question that AI deserved more recognition than Dirk or Duncan. AI showed way more skills and character this season compared to those two. Maybe part of the problem is that AI really isn't a classic point guard like Kidd or Stockton, so folks have trouble putting a value on his role.

Duncan is always the darling for some reason. Even though Shaq is better, Duncan always gets all the praise as the great big man in the NBA. What a joke!


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

Duncan gets the praise as the great big man in the league, because all he does on both ends of the court. He wasn't the MVP this season, but he's been the best player in the NBA for a few years now. I think the thing about Tim Duncan is that he has a subtle dominance about him. If someone told me to decide between Shaq and Duncan, I'd go Duncan just about every time.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

> Here's what everyone around the league was supposedly talking about yesterday: the Most Valuable Player race in which Phoenix Suns point guard Steve Nash narrowly edged out the Miami Heat's Shaquille O'Neal.
> 
> It was controversial.
> 
> ...


LINK


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Duncan gets the praise as the great big man in the league, because all he does on both ends of the court. He wasn't the MVP this season, but he's been the best player in the NBA for a few years now. I think the thing about Tim Duncan is that he has a subtle dominance about him. If someone told me to decide between Shaq and Duncan, I'd go Duncan just about every time.


I'd take Duncan over shaq, but only because Shaq's starting to show his age a little.

But AI and KG are the two best. Put Amare there next year. Ditto LeBron(the more the NBA hypes him, the less I can stand him). Tim's more like the best good player in the history of sports


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

My list would go..

1.)Duncan
2.)Shaq
3.)Garnett
4.)McGrady
5.)Iverson


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 23, 2004)

BEEZ said:


> lebron should be listed as a forward, he had a better season than Kobe and was IMO slightly better than Wade so that would leave him and Nash


The NBA will most definitely put Lebron at guard because they want him on an all-nba team, and there's just too much competition at forward (at least for the first two teams).


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

How can people even consider Kevin Garnett as an MVP candidate this year? He didn't even bring his team to the playoffs.


----------



## Sliccat (Oct 16, 2004)

Kunlun said:


> How can people even consider Kevin Garnett as an MVP candidate this year? He didn't even bring his team to the playoffs.


Exactly the same way they consider AI, even though he was only 7th seed.


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

sliccat said:


> Exactly the same way they consider AI, even though he was only 7th seed.


The difference is that Iverson actually made the playoffs while Kevin couldn't bring his team there.


----------



## Ps!ence_Fiction (Aug 1, 2004)

I hate to say it, but Minnesota was one game better than the Sixers, playoffs or not, they did have the better record. Though I do think that Iverson did more with less this season.


----------



## SirCharles34 (Nov 16, 2004)

I knew they weren't going to give AI the MVP, but I do hope they award him with an ALL-NBA 1st team selection.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

Well respected basketball stat guru John Hollinger voiced his opinions on Iverson in a recent chat session:



> Yorkis (Philly): John, as a Sixers fan who watched over 60 games this year, I don't understand why Iverson got so many MVP votes. Do the voters actually watch the games? He was far and away the league leader in turnovers, shot 40 percent, and continued to take his teammates out of the game. Would any other team even want AI right now?
> 
> SportsNation John Hollinger: (4:50 PM ET ) Amen. Here's the other side of the Nash debate that people missed: It wasn't white vs. black as much as it was small vs. big. Iverson got more MVP votes than Garnett or Stoudemire despite being miles worse as a player and winning fewer games. LIke Nash (and nearly Jason Kidd) he also won an outrageous MVP award mainly because people thought it was so cool that a little guy could do all this stuff.
> 
> The funniest thing is that people constantly say the Sixers would be the worst team in the league without Iverson, but their record when he misses games doesn't support that.


LINK


----------



## Ps!ence_Fiction (Aug 1, 2004)

It's funny he says their record was better without him when the Sixers record without Iverson was 2-5, hardly better. That guy is an idiot.


----------



## SixersFan (Dec 19, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Well respected basketball stat guru John Hollinger voiced his opinions on Iverson in a recent chat session:
> 
> 
> 
> LINK


As we've seen first-hand this season, statistics don't show a lot.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

Ps!ence_Fiction said:


> It's funny he says their record was better without him when the Sixers record without Iverson was 2-5, hardly better. That guy is an idiot.


I think he's talking about throughout Iverson's career.

John Hollinger is one of a group of people who believe Iverson's production is overrated and he doesn't really make other players better, while acknowledging his talent.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

You guys still think Nash doesn't deserve MVP?


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

jibikao said:


> You guys still think Nash doesn't deserve MVP?


Yeah, I still don't think he deserved it.

Postseason has no impact on a regular season award, at least in my opinion.


----------



## Ps!ence_Fiction (Aug 1, 2004)

PhillyPhanatic said:


> Yeah, I still don't think he deserved it.
> 
> Postseason has no impact on a regular season award, at least in my opinion.


Agreed, he may be playing like an MVP now, but that doesn't warrant him winning the regular season MVP at all.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

Didn't Nash take his team to the #1 spot during regular season?


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

jibikao said:


> Didn't Nash take his team to the #1 spot during regular season?


Nash did it by himself, man I had no idea. :clown: 

So you go to every forum and cry over people not thinking Nash was MVP? Get over it.


----------



## SirCharles34 (Nov 16, 2004)

jibikao said:


> You guys still think Nash doesn't deserve MVP?


Thanks to everyone who responded to this guy - he is obviously on Nash's jock. Playoffs has no value to a regular season award.


----------

