In 2005, of course, if you take Nash away then Shaq wins by a mile. And to be honest, Shaq probably deserved a second MVP, though not necessarily that year.
NBA.com - Steve Nash Named<BR>2004-05 NBA MVP
People forget that the Suns added Nash and went from a 29-win team to a 62-win team.
The 2004 squad had Shawn Marion, Joe Johnson, Amare, Barbosa, Starbury, and Penny, though Amare missed 25 games and they shipped Starbury and Penny off to the Knicks halfway through the season. That squad only won 29 times.
In 2005 they picked up Nash and Q in free agency and D'Antoni started coaching the team. That squad won 33 more games and went to the WCF before getting beat by the Spurs.
The next year they lost Amare and still went back to the WCF and took the Mavs to 6 with a team that started Tim Thomas, Boris Diaw, Shawn Marion and Raja Bell.
There were only two choices about what suddenly made the Suns go from a terrible 29-win team to a repeat contender. Either it was Nash or it was D'Antoni. I don't actually think that Nash was the best player in the NBA, if you're going by that then Shaq and LeBron should have won those two years, but there was a real argument in that particular situation for him being the most valuable.
Hell, I can think of at least 4 worse MVP votes just since I started watching:
Malone over Duncan in 1999 (Malone had fallen just a step off his peak and Duncan was so much better than him on defense this should not have been a question)
Rose over LeBron in 2011 (solely due to Thibs' defense making the Bulls good and everyone hating LeBron's decision)
Westbrook over Kawhi in 2017 (Kawhi was more efficient on offense and FAR better on defense and actually made the Spurs contenders while Westbrook chased stats)
Harden over LeBron in 2018 (I understand why he won, but no one whose game is built around goading referees into bad calls should ever win MVP, plus the Rockets were built to be a fantastic team that complimented Harden perfectly at every position while the Cavs were built as a train wreck that LeBron would still drag to 50 wins and yet another Finals)
NBA.com - Steve Nash Named<BR>2004-05 NBA MVP
People forget that the Suns added Nash and went from a 29-win team to a 62-win team.
The 2004 squad had Shawn Marion, Joe Johnson, Amare, Barbosa, Starbury, and Penny, though Amare missed 25 games and they shipped Starbury and Penny off to the Knicks halfway through the season. That squad only won 29 times.
In 2005 they picked up Nash and Q in free agency and D'Antoni started coaching the team. That squad won 33 more games and went to the WCF before getting beat by the Spurs.
The next year they lost Amare and still went back to the WCF and took the Mavs to 6 with a team that started Tim Thomas, Boris Diaw, Shawn Marion and Raja Bell.
There were only two choices about what suddenly made the Suns go from a terrible 29-win team to a repeat contender. Either it was Nash or it was D'Antoni. I don't actually think that Nash was the best player in the NBA, if you're going by that then Shaq and LeBron should have won those two years, but there was a real argument in that particular situation for him being the most valuable.
Hell, I can think of at least 4 worse MVP votes just since I started watching:
Malone over Duncan in 1999 (Malone had fallen just a step off his peak and Duncan was so much better than him on defense this should not have been a question)
Rose over LeBron in 2011 (solely due to Thibs' defense making the Bulls good and everyone hating LeBron's decision)
Westbrook over Kawhi in 2017 (Kawhi was more efficient on offense and FAR better on defense and actually made the Spurs contenders while Westbrook chased stats)
Harden over LeBron in 2018 (I understand why he won, but no one whose game is built around goading referees into bad calls should ever win MVP, plus the Rockets were built to be a fantastic team that complimented Harden perfectly at every position while the Cavs were built as a train wreck that LeBron would still drag to 50 wins and yet another Finals)