Shaq only has 1 MVP???!!!

[Pointguard]

He was also on a great defensive team. The Sixers started off 12-2 in the first month with Iverson averaging just 22.1 ppg, 4.6 rpg and 4.9 apg on 37.8% shooting in that month so it's not like he had to go off every night for Philly to win.

As great as Kobe was, and I think he was a top 3 player that year due to his unbelievable playoff run, he hurt the Lakers, IMO early by going for personal goals(teammates claimed he told them he was trying for a scoring title and MVP) and a GM also claimed that he asked to be traded to that team so he could achieve those goals. In fact, early in the 2000-2001 season Phil said about Kobe "If we had a little better defensive speed, quickness, I'd probably bench him."

I hear you but if Iverson averaged 20ppg their record would have been 2-12. They had little margin for era and were able to win because teams didn't have their offensive schemes set. Iverson had the whole weight of offense on him - I never seen an offensive burden as big Iverson's that year. And he didn't shoot high percentage but he kept teams on their heels. Shaq was dominant but I think Kobe was coming into his own and human nature is always going to focus on the wave that is coming in. That, and a small guy doing big work is also another advantage Iverson had.

[DuMa]

shaq never really cared about the regular season all that much. thus why shaq never reached his potential.

[D.J.]

Shaq was the type to coast through the regular season. In his defense, he had cases for MVP in '95, '01, and '05.

[josh99]

They only give one out a year...

[ShaqAttack3234]

I hear you but if Iverson averaged 20ppg their record would have been 2-12. They had little margin for era and were able to win because teams didn't have their offensive schemes set. Iverson had the whole weight of offense on him - I never seen an offensive burden as big Iverson's that year. And he didn't shoot high percentage but he kept teams on their heels. Shaq was dominant but I think Kobe was coming into his own and human nature is always going to focus on the wave that is coming in. That, and a small guy doing big work is also another advantage Iverson had.

I know the factors that caused people to vote for Iverson. He was kind of a real life Rocky Balboa story, the underdog silencing critics.

I also think that Shaq's 2000 season kind of worked against him because it's almost impossible to follow up a season like that, and even though it has very little to do with how valuable he was in '01, stuff like that enters voters minds, just like in '97 when people said Jordan wasn't awarded the MVP because voters were tired of voting for him.

Regarding the first point, well Philly did win by an average of 7.3 ppg that first month.

Nothing against AI, I genuinley like the guy and hope he returns to the NBA and can finish his career on a better note, but 2001 is the one year I take issue with Shaq not winning.

[Sarcastic]

The MVP is more prestigious towards your individual accomplishments, but Finals MVP is better towards your all-time rankings.

Not really. You can fluke your way to a Finals MVP, while the regular season MVP is reserved for only elite players. Guys like Tony Parker, Cedric Maxwell, JoJo White, and Joe Dumars would never have a chance of winning a regular season MVP.

[sh0wtime]

Wow I just learned that Shaq has only won 1 MVP, this is insane BS because he was the best player from 1998-2003, and he's possibly the best center in history of NBA.

Wow.

Once again people need to learn that the MVP is not about who was the best player that year, the MVP is about the player who did fit best for the required MVP requirements and those requirements are:

1. Must have one of 2-3 best team records in the NBA, 4th best team record is an absolute minimum. Nobody in NBA history has won the MVP trophy by being ranked lower than 4 on the team record standings, you could average a 50 point quadruple double for all they care you still wont get the MVP if you dont have one of the best team records.

2. You have to have been the most impactfull/durable/consistant player on your team, have one of the best stats in the NBA. Playing alongside another very good all-star/superstar hurts your MVP chanses that way unless you can prove you still have the best impact when you are playing and that the team takes a huge downfall when you are not playing.

[Lebron23]

Shaq should have won the MVP Award in 1995.

[Artillery]

Shaq should have won the MVP Award in 1995.

Robinson deserved the '95 MVP more than Iverson deserved the '01 MVP.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Once again people need to learn that the MVP is not about who was the best player that year, the MVP is about the player who did fit best for the required MVP requirements and those requirements are:

Shaq fit every single part of your criteria in 2001 so I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.

1. Must have one of 2-3 best team records in the NBA, 4th best team record is an absolute minimum. Nobody in NBA history has won the MVP trophy by being ranked lower than 4 on the team record standings, you could average a 50 point quadruple double for all they care you still wont get the MVP if you dont have one of the best team records.

Shaq's Lakers had the 2nd best record in the NBA.

2. You have to have been the most impactfull/durable/consistant player on your team

Yep, he played 6 more games than his team's second best player and nobody in the game at the time impacted a game like Shaq circa 2001, and it's not particularly close.

have one of the best stats in the NBA.

Shaq crushed everyone else in the league statistically.

29/13/4/3, 57 FG%, 57 TS%. 1st in FG%, 3rd in scoring and rebounding, 4th in blocks, 8th in TS%

And for you advanced stat nerds out there, his PER was 30.2, the next best was Vince Carter(25.0). And I'll even throw in my least favorite advanced stat out there, he led the league in win shares.

Playing alongside another very good all-star/superstar hurts your MVP chanses that way unless you can prove you still have the best impact when you are playing and that the team takes a huge downfall when you are not playing.

Yep, he got a chance to showcase this with Kobe out when he led the Lakers to an 11-3 record.

[crisoner]

Ummmm that's been comon knowledge OP for a long time on these boards.

Any how it is only proof besides the fact Nash has two of them that the MVP is a joke at times.

[COLOR="White"]Waiting for some jackass now to bring up Kobe's one....[/COLOR]

[caliman]

It will be absolutely criminal to look back in 10 years and see that Steve Nash has as many MVP's as Shaq and Kobe combined.

[game385]

No Disrespect to Steve Nash but he has 1 of Shaq's MVPs and 1 of Kobe's.

[catch24]

Should have back to backs in 2000/2001 and finally 2005 - still not sure how he didn't win that year.

[crisoner]

Should have back to backs in 2000/2001 and finally 2005 - still not sure how he didn't win that year.

He should of had three in a row......oh well who cares. The best player on the best team will win the Finals.