It's time to hate on another undersized white guy

Well now that the NBA regular season is over, I’m sure two NBA-less days are just driving everyone crazy. So it’s time to go back to one of the earlier discussions that kicked off YCS a year ago: the NBA Steve Nash Award.

Last year, we all argued that Nash did not deserve the award, but he won it anyway. Of course, most of our bitching was after the fact…and most of our bitching was just that: disorganized, whiny bitching. This year, I’m jumping on the topic in time for all the voters to read YCS and be convinced.

First off, forget that he’s won the last two MVPs. Forget that John Stockton put up similar (except better) numbers and never sniffed an MVP. Forget that most of the YCS staff (I say “staff” like we’re paid) has an unnatural hatred for “scrappy” players in general, especially when they’re Canadian. Throw all of that out, because it’s unnecessary noise in what should be a straight comparison between Nash and the other candidates.

Here are eight reasons that Steve Nash is an overrated punk bitch, and NONE of them are “He’s already won two” or “Scrappiness is overrated.”

8. He plays no defense.

Personally, I could end the post right here and be satisfied that I had provided enough evidence to give the MVP to someone else…anyone else. When Sports Illustrated polled the NBA players on who plays the worst defense in the NBA, you know who won? Mr. Team-First himself. This really upsets me, because Nash gets all the glory for being an unselfish player who doesn’t seek out glory. And yet when it comes to the most unselfish, team-oriented aspect of the game, Nash takes a breather. Let Shawn Marion worry about playing D. Let Leandro Barbosa get deflections. Then Nash, who never stepped inside the three-point arc, can lead the fast break and pick up another assist. And that leads perfectly into my next quibble.

7. Steve Nash’s stats are the benefit of D’Antoni’s European-style offense.

The Suns have built a team to win without defense. The plan is to outscore their opponent every time, and it usually works. A lot of people credit Nash with re-inventing the Suns, but it wasn’t as much him as it was the new offensive system. If you take out any of the key parts (Nash, Amare Stoudemire, Marion, Barbosa, or Raja Bell) the system will suffer greatly. Given a full off-season together with another good point guard like Deron Williams or Chancy Billups, the Suns could be just as good, if not better, than they are with Nash. If you put Nash in a lineup with a different system, or take away the best transition players in the game, I promise you he would not put up the same numbers that he is putting up now. In fact, let’s take a look at those numbers, because they're not as impressive as they initially seem.

6. Turnovers.

Just to repeat myself, Nash’s stats are inflated by the system. More assist opportunities mean more assists. Likewise, more risky passes mean more SportsCenter highlights. They also mean more turnovers.

Here are a few names for you: Chauncey Billups, Chris Paul, Jose Calderon, Jason Kidd, Jason Williams, Steve Blake, Brevin Knight.

See any MVP candidates in there? Me neither. But all of these players had a better assist/turnover ratio than Nash while averaging at least five assists per game.

Everyone loves Nash’s assists, but everyone seems to forget that only Dwight Howard and Eddie Curry had more turnovers than Steve Nash.

5. More inflated stats

I realize that I’m stretching this into three separate reasons, but it’s a big point that affects a lot of misguided perceptions of Nash’s year. A big part of why he won the MVP last year, and is up for it again this year, is that he’s not just dishing the ball; he’s scoring (18.8 pts/game last year and 18.6 this year). Buuuuuuuut, he’s still playing in a run-and-gun system, and that affects his numbers. Nash scores, sure, but it is not a substantial percentage of the Suns scoring. Nash’s 18.6 points per game made up 16.9% of the Suns total scoring this year. Compare:

Dirk Nowitzki: 24.6%
Lebron James: 28.2%
Kobe Bryant: 30.6%
Chauncey Billups: 17.7%
Chris Paul: 18.1%

For the record, that means that Billups and Paul both have better assist-to-turnover ratios AND score a higher percentage of their teams’ points. And I’m not even making an MVP case for either of them (although I think they’re more qualified than Nash).

4. Steve Nash cannot single-handedly take over a game.

…No matter how many times an NBA commentator says, “Nash is just taking over this game.” Nash can take over a game, but he can’t do it single-handedly. Usually when Nash is said to “take over” he is throwing ally-oops to Stoudamire and drive-and-kicking to Raja Bell. He makes great plays, but without Stoudamire to throw it down, or without Bell to stroke the three, there is no basket. Of course, like any shooter, he can hit a couple big threes in a row, and I guess that’s sort of taking over. But it’s “taking over” the way that Steve Kerr took over. The way that Kobe, Dirk, Wade or Lebron can take over a game is a superhuman, individual feat. The “selfishness” of such a take-over can turn some people off, but there is nothing more frustrating to an opposing team than “just give it to Kobe/Dwyane/Lebron/Dirk and clear the lane.”

3. Bill Walton picked Nash for MVP

And you have to be an insider to see all of his season-award picks! No explanation for why anyone wins any of them. Just the awards and the names. By Bill Walton. For an annual fee. That’s a reason, kids. That’s a legitimate reason to vote against Nash.

2. Kobe Bryant

Of course, the best reason to not give someone an MVP is that another player is more deserving. Most people see it as a two-horse race, and once again Kobe is getting screwed by being left out of the discussion. After all, most years the MVP race includes the scoring leader, especially when that player’s name is in the same sentence as Wilt Chamberlain. I’m not going to go into it too much, but Kobe is more qualified than Nash. The reason I’m not going to go into it is…

1. Dirk Nowitzki

Finally, you’re 2006-07 MVP. I am optimistic about his chances, but I think he’s going to win for all the wrong reasons. Some people vote for “the best player on the best team” and some people refuse to put Nash in the company of Chamberlain, Bill Russell and Larry Bird by giving him a third MVP. While I will support anyone who does not vote for Nash, these are some pretty dumb reasons.

The real reason is that Dirk does much more for the Mavs than Nash does for the Suns (like rebound and play defense). Dirk also passes the “Who would you start your team with?” test, as well as the “Where would his team be without him?” test with better results than Nash. That’s why Dirk should win the MVP instead of Nash.

Plus all the reasons above.