Granted, he had a better shot that year than he would have most seasons because there was no fantastic MVP candidate. But it would have been hugely inconsistent of voters to give it to him. It was not inconsistent, as Mark and Rick are implying, for them not to do so.

Yes, Billups definitely qualified on the point of being on one of the best records in the league–the best in fact. But clearly the best player? He put up 18.5-3.1-8.6. Rip was at 20.1-3.2-3.4, Sheed had 15.1-6.8-2.3, Ben had 7.3-11.3-1.9. And all of that is before blocks and steals and FG% where basically all the other starters were significantly beating Billups. Yeah, if you had to choose a best Piston that year, it probably would have been Chauncey, but he was not clearly their best guy. As I said, that makes it really hard to be MVP. It’s not about meeting one of the 4 standards I threw out. It’s all 4. And yeah, when I said Kobe, I was probably mixing up which season we were talking about. Because he didn’t have the Lakers in contender status. So I probably should have said Dirk or Duncan. Oh well.

Also, it is irrelevant how far Isiah carried the team in the playoffs. Again, that is not information the voters have at the time. And even if it were, it is purely a regular season award. The point is that the 85 Pistons didn’t look like a contender at the time of voting.

Finally, no, Nash didn’t win because he was the more “pure PG.” He won in part because his impact on Phoenix was so visible and in part because he was statistically dominant. You say Billups and Nash put up similar numbers. 18.8-4.2-10.5 significantly beats 18.5-3.1-8.6. Furthermore, efficiency really does count. Nash was shooting 51%! As a PG! Compared to Billups’ 42%, which is actually quite a bad number. He was also beating Billups on FT% and 3pt% although not by as much. Today, I doubt Nash would win MVP for that season and Billups would be more in the running. but that is because of expanded use of advanced stats. You can’t claim inconsistency there, though. Pace just wasn’t considered much back then. We continue to develop tools to better analyze basketball. But even with out present better tools, it would have been really hard for Chauncey to win just because the relative rankings of the Pistons’ starting lineup were so close.

It is a little bit ridiculous to compare this to Wall because that was a ROY race. This was an MVP race. Also, Wall didn’t win ROY. And not because Griffin played an extra rookie year, because Griffin played a postponed rookie year. That’s a really big difference. Also, the competition amongst rookies is not nearly so stiff so you can get by on a low shooting percentage. And you were making a big deal about Wall nearly getting ROY shooting 41%. If that seems crazy, how preposterous would it be for an MVP to shoot under 42%? Granted, Iverson proved that you can win MVP shooting 42%. But he was also carrying an otherwise terrible squad to the east’s best record and scoring over 30/game. Billups can’t claim either of those.

I never said that normally the best player on the best team wins MVP. No, normally all the players who meet the 4 criteria I laid out above are basically the MVP candidates. How they are sifted from there can be inconsistent. I recognize that. But neither of the Piston examples you gave me fit those 4 criteria. And not every MVP will meet all of them either. But the exception is very rare and usually an MVP has to go way beyond on one in order to make up for a shortcoming in another.

Also, I didn’t really respond to head-to-head matchup comparisons because I don’t know of hardly any times when that has been considered a significant factor in MVP voting. but if it were, it would have to be when there are clearly two MVP candidates and then everyone else. In 06, it was not a case of clearly Billups and Nash and then everyone else.

But your second comment of if not Zeke, then not Kobe was dead on. And that is probably why Kobe didn’t win that year in spite of going crazy for 35-5-5. If he had been on a 50 win team, that would normally make him a near lock for MVP. And that was a case of being so statistically dominant that it almost made up for not being on a great team. Similarly, Zeke should have finished higher in the 85 voting. But finishing lower than deserved in a year he probably shouldn’t have gotten MVP anyway is hardly cause for a huge a grudge or implications of a trend of Pistons being sold short.