Word on the street has Steve Nash winning the NBA MVP award again this season. How is this possible?

What are the credentials to determining an MVP?

Is it most dominating player? Is it the best player? Is it the best player on a good team? Is it the player that makes everyone around him better?

Last year, if you recall, the battle was between Nash and Shaquille O'Neal. The Canadian point guard returned to the team that drafted him out of Santa Clara and proved to be the missing piece in an offense that was comparable to the Lakers, circa Showtime.

Shaq, on the other hand, did everything short of bringing an NBA title to a team more known for running sprints in practice than winning games. At least they weren't tired when they lost, right Vladamir Stepania?

In the end, Nash hoisted the Maurice Podoloff trophy as he stood practically shoulder to shoulder with NBA Commissioner David Stern. Many moaned. Many more groaned. The race card was played, but it was silly to ignore Nash's credentials, even if the Suns didn't win anything. Admit it, it was a great story.

But that was last year. The 2005-2006 season brought us Kobe's 81 points. It made us all witnesses to Lebron James' ability to carry an entire team made up of Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Craig Ehlo... I think. It brought us the dark side of Dwayne Wade - I dare anyone to try to play him straight up. Just be prepared to get a mouth full of cashews.

However, this year the award appears to be going back to Nash.

Sigh... it was cute last year. I bought into the entire underdog, underrated, OC thing he played so well. But that was so last season.

Here's what I think when I look at the Suns: Why do they score 120 points a game? Because they give up 119!

Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to introduce another part of the game. What basketball purists call "defense" involves the arduous task of preventing their opponent from scoring a basket.

I know, I know. The only defense Canadians know has to do with a kick-save or a crosscheck (take a picture, that's the first and last hockey reference I will ever make in one of my blogs).

But, will you ever see Nash steal a ball on an inbounds play, take off just behind the free-throw line and throw it down just as time runs out in the half?

Of course not. Why, you ask? That's not his game. Well, what is his game? Running up and down the court a-la YMCA and playing till everyone quits or their parents pick them up?

Regardless of the reason, I'm not buying it. I need more. I need him to take it to the next level. The same way Michael Corleone took it to the next level in 2. The same way Tribe Called Quest took it to the next level with the Low End Theory. The same way the Family Guy takes it to the next level week after week.

I'm not saying Kobe, D-Wade or Lebron should win the MVP. But I am saying Steve Nash shouldn't.