Official MVP Talk

Sure as hell sounds familiar, except it's false. You wouldn't have to force-feed the ball to Kobe, as there's actually legitimate offensive threats on that team.

Really? Do you think w/o nash those legitimate offensive threats are still there? The were 2-5 or 2-6 when w/o nash last season and this season. Barbosa is a shoot first PG, so is Eddie House. Wo will run the play and make those player a offense threat.

So true, and without Kobe the Lakers are 0-2
And why bother on "Who makes the teammates better" argument?
As subjective as it is everyone has their own yardstick, a teammate's improvement may or may not be the result of a player's influence. They both contribute amuzing offensive output but Kobe's defense is still better than Nash. the only thing Nash is more favourable is the better PHX record. that being said, Dirk may seem a better choice.

As far as efficiency rating goes.... i have no idea how the hell that stat is calculated. I just use the other stats to rank overall efficiency

Poorly, but since the results of it (Kobe ranking higher than Nash) were the same as the more accurate PER I didn't harrass Jae about it.

How is it calculated? Well, let's see since nba.com says exactly how it is. I'll be darned it "just use the other stats" available:

NBA.com evaluates all players based on the efficiency formula: ((Points + Rebounds + Assists + Steals + Blocks) - ((Field Goals Att. - Field Goals Made) + (Free Throws Att. - Free Throws Made) + Turnovers)).

PER is vastly more accurate (.85 correlation with win % compared to .66) and Kobe ranks third (28.11) with Nash 12th (23.29) to better support Jae's point.

Interesting side-note, I just noticed Dirk skipped ahead of LeBron by a hair to end the season and place first in PER.

Give dirk the mvp then.

Anyway if mvps can be decided so easily, there is no need for arguement.

Hoping Kobe can get it. Don't think 'Bron is quite their, but as is to be expected, that trophy should be his within a year or two.

That so wrong.... in games where Kobe scores around 30 and gets assists rather than scoring above 40, the Lakers are much better..... I dont have an exact stat on that, but in general when I watch their games, when Kobe goes for 40 or more its usually a 50/50 chance they'll win.

I won't buy that until I get a stat on it. I don't really see how you can say "that's so wrong" but have absolutely nothing to support the view.

You're forgetting that the Bulls won 62 games that year. That said though, I probably would have gave it to Gary Payton

The Bulls also had a far far superior team to the Lakers of this year, but for some reason that fact is constantly being overlooked. Didn't you at one stage say the Lakers and Phoenix had "comperable" talent?

Look at all the previous seasons, not just the last two.

Completely and utterly irrelevant. The MVP award is based on this season, and 45% is a respectable shooting percentage, especially when you're taking 27 per game.

when is the MVP award offered? in the 3rd round? if so I think most of the voters will make their mind up based upon the results of the Lakers/Suns series. I'd say whichever win the series will win the MVP award.

when is the MVP award offered? in the 3rd round? if so I think most of the voters will make their mind up based upon the results of the Lakers/Suns series. I'd say whichever win the series will win the MVP award.

Logical, that's why KG never gets his until he pass the first round few years back.

[Andrew]

I don't think the whole "without such-and-such, team x wouldn't be any good" or "if they switched teams, team x wouldn't be nearly as good" concept is fair criteria. You can't give an MVP award based on what-ifs, it has to be about what a player has actually accomplished. But no question, Kobe Bryant has to be a candidate.

That said, I don't think his supporting cast gets enough credit. After all, Kobe's been playing the same way all season but the Lakers have really struggled in patches. Some of their most impressive victories have come where he's only scored around 24 points and a couple of other Lakers have attempted more than 10 field goals.

He's averaging 36.6 ppg in wins, 33.8 ppg in losses so far this year and 35.4 ppg overall. That's a difference of 2.8 ppg between wins and losses, the equivalent of one fewer three pointer (since he also shoots a lower percentage on threes in losses). Basically, he gets around his season average in both wins and losses (a difference of 1.6 each way, so let's call it two points, a single field goal). The average difference between the Lakers' ppg and their opponents ppg this year is 2.5 ppg. The Lakers are also averaging six fewer ppg in losses. Basically what I'm trying to say is that while Kobe's role is huge, his performance in losses doesn't differ too much from his output in wins, on average. His teammate's contributions are somewhat underrated. But to be fair, the numbers are very similar to LeBron.

But getting back to the what-if situations, it goes without saying the Lakers would be in strife without Kobe. Take any star player of their team and they'll drop, some further than others. Kobe is unquestionably the most valuable player on the Lakers but as magius said, that doesn't necessarily translate into being the league MVP because he's far and away the most important player on the Lakers by default. What Kobe has done this year is impressive but not unprecedented. In that regard, I also have to agree with magius' point about the "memorable season" factor not necessarily being suitable criteria either.

That said, he's a legitimate candidate and while I prefer candidates from 50+ win teams since that's the historical standard (bar a few exceptions), I wouldn't be too disappointed. He's had a fantastic year, he's led the Lakers to a winning record and they're in the Playoffs. But I don't think he's far and away the MVP as suggested. Let's face it, some people were handing him the award after the 81 point game, suggesting the Lakers could have lost every single game the rest of the way finishing up worse than last year and he'd still be the MVP.

But before I'm accused of being a Kobe hater, let me say that as it stands I don't think anyone is far and away the MVP, just like last year. Perhaps that's why the criteria keeps changing and seems to be all over the place.

EDIT: Added emphasis to anyone and that's in the last sentence so it actually makes sense.

Last edited by Andrew on Fri Apr 21, 2006 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The MVP will go to someone on a winning side; I've accepted it already.

As Andrew said and after thinking about it for a while... I really think the 'what-if' factor has been too overused. Isn't the MVP supposed to be for the best player in the League based on their performance for the season? That means based on what they've done for the team under the circumstances they faced for the 82 games they had just played?

Thus, people relying on building an arguement on a player deserving MVP because if they didn't play the team would lose isn't really the best argument?

I don't think that was quite clear but I hope some you understand what I'm trying to say... sure, the 'what-if this or that happened' should play a part in determining how worthy a player is but now I don't believe it should play that big a part.

What Kobe has done this year is impressive but not unprecedented. In that regard, I also have to agree with magius' point about the "memorable season" factor not necessarily being suitable criteria either.

By that reasoning though, if someoen averaged a triple double for the season would that not be memorable, because it's already been done? Or someone averaging 50ppg again? I think the reason Kobe's season will be memorable is because of single game achievements, not necessarily season averages (which in themselves are still impressive).

No matter how it's spun, only one player in recent NBA history has been offensively dominant as Bryant this season, and that's Michael Jordan. Before people bring up Tracy McGrady in Orlando (which someone inevitably will), the Lakers are a play-off team. They're over .500 and actually have a better record than Denver, who are the 3rd seed in the West I do know the seeding system is retarded, but facts are facts.

But I don't think he's far and away the MVP as suggested. Let's face it, some people were handing him the award after the 81 point game, suggesting the Lakers could have lost every single game the rest of the way finishing up worse than last year and he'd still be the MVP.

That would indeed be retarded. I think alot of people just got caught up in the emotion of the game, but then some are just morons.

Isn't the MVP supposed to be for the best player in the League based on their performance for the season? That means based on what they've done for the team under the circumstances they faced for the 82 games they had just played?

Somewhere along the line the team record took a huge importance. As dadamafia pointed out, Kareem won it twice with a sub .500 record. That would never happen these days, not a chance in hell.

To be honest, taking Kobe out of the mix, there is no way in hell I want Steve Nash's name up there with basketballing God's like Michael Jordan, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird etc... especially in an MVP vote that isn't clear cut. If he was the clear cut winner, fine I'll accept that. But there's other worthy candidates, and personally I think it'd cheapen the award considerably if he won it twice in a row.

By that reasoning though, if someoen averaged a triple double for the season would that not be memorable, because it's already been done? Or someone averaging 50ppg again? I think the reason Kobe's season will be memorable is because of single game achievements, not necessarily season averages (which in themselves are still impressive).

Absolutely. He's had a fantastic year, it's not going to be forgotten and it certainly deserves the "memorable" tag, I don't deny that. I'm just saying that having a memorable year isn't necessarily defining of MVP status or the most important criteria in determining the most worthy candidate.

Somewhere along the line the team record took a huge importance. As dadamafia pointed out, Kareem won it twice with a sub .500 record. That would never happen these days, not a chance in hell.

But that's still twice in the 50 year history of the MVP award, which makes it an exception not a rule. Similarly, the very first Finals MVP in 1969 went to Jerry West who was on the losing squad but every Finals MVP since has come from the winning team. One could argue that Jerry West's award was the only one with the most thought in it since it put aside winners and losers and truly focussed on the individual but we've come to accept winning as criteria for MVP awards. The All-Star game has also displayed similar criteria with only a few players from the losing squad taking home MVP honours (Magic Johnson in 1990 is the only one I can think of offhand).

You yourself pointed out the importance of winning when considering a player's accomplishments with the T-Mac example. Statistically, T-Mac had a year leading the league in scoring that was comparable to Michael Jordan but Kobe's year - aside from the extra couple of points per game - is more willingly compared to Jordan's feats because the Lakers have a winning record.

To be honest, taking Kobe out of the mix, there is no way in hell I want Steve Nash's name up there with basketballing God's like Michael Jordan, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird etc... especially in an MVP vote that isn't clear cut. If he was the clear cut winner, fine I'll accept that. But there's other worthy candidates, and personally I think it'd cheapen the award considerably if he won it twice in a row.

I'd be lying if I said I didn't have similar feelings about it. I do feel his bid this year is actually stronger and I did pick him a couple of weeks ago, though I've since cooled on him as others have made stronger bids recently while he hasn't been quite as impressive.

[J@3]

But that's still twice in the 50 year history of the MVP award, which makes it an exception not a rule.

Has it only been twice though? I just used that as an example, I haven't been through the entire list... personally I'd be more interested as to how many times it's been won with a record of .550 or less.

You yourself pointed out the importance of winning when considering a player's accomplishments with the T-Mac example. Statistically, T-Mac had a year leading the league in scoring that was comparable to Michael Jordan but Kobe's year - aside from the extra couple of points per game - is more willingly compared to Jordan's feats because the Lakers have a winning record.

I don't think it's just the extra points per game, it's because of the things he achieved... the amount of records he broke, the Raptors/Dallas games etc... McGrady scored alot for a shit team, but he still didn't get near what Kobe has done. I don't remember him breaking many scoring records, consecutive games of 40 points, averaging over 40 for large periods of time etc.

That's where the difference lies between guys like Kobe, Iverson, McGrady etc... they all score alot, but Kobe this season has taken scoring to a new level... averages over the entire season aren't vastly different, but the things he managed to do as far as streaks, individual games etc is more than anything any other scorer has done this season and in all seasons for a fair while.

I'd be lying if I said I didn't have similar feelings about it. I do feel his bid this year is actually stronger and I did pick him a couple of weeks ago, though I've since cooled on him as others have made stronger bids recently while he hasn't been quite as impressive.

Yeah same here, like I said I was willing to give it to him mid season. He does deserve it more than last season, and it kinda confirms what alot of us thought that people may have jumped the gun giving it to him then, but it would be strange to have his name up there with those guys.

Last edited by J@3 on Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I honestly think Dirk Nowitzki should win the MVP, he's got the record and the stats to get it. Second is Kobe because of his 'better than sliced bread' type play

Has it only been twice though? I just used that as an example, I haven't been through the entire list... personally I'd be more interested as to how many times it's been won with a record of .550 or less.

50-60 wins has been the standard for the last 20 years plus. Moses Malone was the MVP in 1979 playing for Houston, with a record of 47-35 (.573). Kareem of course did it with a 40-42 record in 1976 (.488), Bob McAdoo's Braves were 49-33 (.598) in 1975 when he was MVP and funnily enough Bob Pettit (the first regular season MVP) in 1956 with a 33-39 record (.458).

That's twice under .500 and twice under .600 but above .550. There's a couple of other MVP winners with less than 50 wins but they're all in the 50s/60s where 40+ wins was still over .600 in a shorter schedule. In all, four times in 50 years it's gone to a player on a team under .550 (and just twice under .500, to two different players) which would make it the exception, not the rule. 92% of the time, it's gone to a player on a team with one of the top five records in the league, so it's safe to say winning has been part of the criteria throughout the years.

I don't think it's just the extra points per game, it's because of the things he achieved... the amount of records he broke, the Raptors/Dallas games etc... McGrady scored alot for a shit team, but he still didn't get near what Kobe has done. I don't remember him breaking many scoring records, consecutive games of 40 points, averaging over 40 for large periods of time etc.

That's where the difference lies between guys like Kobe, Iverson, McGrady etc... they all score alot, but Kobe this season has taken scoring to a new level... averages over the entire season aren't vastly different, but the things he managed to do as far as streaks, individual games etc is more than anything any other scorer has done this season and in all seasons for a fair while.

I agree with you. I'm just pointing out that once again, putting up numbers on a better team garners more respect and acclaim than 32 ppg on a lottery bound club, suggesting once again that winning is still an important factor when it comes to judging a player as an individual.

Yeah same here, like I said I was willing to give it to him mid season. He does deserve it more than last season, and it kinda confirms what alot of us thought that people may have jumped the gun giving it to him then, but it would be strange to have his name up there with those guys.

I suppose one could argue if last year he was MVP material, then this year he's surely got it in the bag, which is probably how a lot of people see it.

50-60 wins has been the standard for the last 20 years plus. Moses Malone was the MVP in 1979 playing for Houston, with a record of 47-35 (.573). Kareem of course did it with a 40-42 record in 1976 (.488), Bob McAdoo's Braves were 49-33 (.598) in 1975 when he was MVP and funnily enough Bob Pettit (the first regular season MVP) in 1956 with a 33-39 record (.458).

That's twice under .500 and twice under .600 but above .550. There's a couple of MVP winners with less than 50 wins but they're all in the 50s/60s where 40+ wins was still over .600 in a shorter schedule. In all, four times in 50 years it's gone to a player on a team under .550 (and just twice under .500, to two different players) which would make it the exception, not the rule. 92% of the time, it's gone to a player on a team with one of the top five records in the league, so it's safe to say winning has been part of the criteria throughout the years.

Thanks for the info, I wasn't sure on it.

I agree with you. I'm just pointing out that once again, putting up numbers on a better team garners more respect and acclaim than 32 ppg on a lottery bound club, suggesting once again that winning is still an important factor when it comes to judging a player as an individual.

It is an important factor, I think sometimes TOO much importance is placed on it but I'm getting the feeling had the Lakers won 50-55 games Kobe would have this completely wrapped up. The only real argument against him would be the team record and partially his shot selection at times.

I suppose one could argue if last year he was MVP material, then this year he's surely got it in the bag, which is probably how a lot of people see it.

Most likely, in my view it shows inconsistancy and people buying into hype. As long as the Suns are winning he'll always be an MVP candidate because people are in love with the idea that he "makes everybody better"... I guess we'll see, but if he wins this year, Amare comes back and they win 65 games or something next year I don't think any basketball fan will feel good about having Steve Nash, 3 time MVP.

It is an important factor, I think sometimes TOO much importance is placed on it but I'm getting the feeling had the Lakers won 50-55 games Kobe would have this completely wrapped up. The only real argument against him would be the team record and partially his shot selection at times.

Hard to argue with that. He'd easily be the front runner, perhaps the runaway MVP if the Lakers had 55 wins.

Most likely, in my view it shows inconsistancy and people buying into hype. As long as the Suns are winning he'll always be an MVP candidate because people are in love with the idea that he "makes everybody better"... I guess we'll see, but if he wins this year, Amare comes back and they win 65 games or something next year I don't think any basketball fan will feel good about having Steve Nash, 3 time MVP.

Probably not. It comes back to the John Stockton example that was brought up last year. But since that's been pushed aside with Nash being the MVP last year, who knows. We might see him join that elite club of three-in-a-row MVP winners.

I was going with Nash as my pick for MVP, but now'd go with LeBron. With the guys he's winning with. And the fact that they had such a strong finish this year instead of collapsing like they had the previous two years.

i cant really decide on the MVP, but anyone think melo has even the slightestchance of MVP

about melo? I wouldnt think so, although rightfully so he earned a player of the month sometime this year right?

Oh, and Steve Nash could never do to the Lakers what Kobe did. Take away Kobe, put George at the SG, and Nash at PG, have them play up-tempo basketball, and they'd be worse. The pieces aren't there.

I'm not too sure about that, if you think about it all Nash needs is Marion and he has that in Odom. Jim Jackson does great with steve nash, Luke Walton could shine in a Nash System, and even Kwame brown might do well.. 8/8 is not out of the question, that was about Kurt thomas numbers


but this should be a good MVP race. LeBron's chances increased when he got his team to 50 wins ( keep in mind larry hughes was out a good portion of the year)
Kobe.. what can I say. We all know how the lakers strive off of his performance. For him to keep playing like that throughout the WHOLE regular season with no slumps or anything in between was simply incredible. Sure he shot a lot, but damn, eventually you'd expect him to get tired but he just kept shooting and making it. They didn't even just get 8th seed, they did better and got to 7th. Dont forget he has Kwame who still is no good..

Nash, as with last year anther great performance. Dirk has great talent around him still ( even minus finley and nash) and he is approaching his prime, but i don't think it's good enough to beat out nash and kobe. Lebron i doubt will get it since no one is really talking about him as much as Nash/Kobe in terms of MVP talks ( we all knew what lebron could do what he did...maybe next year)

i think it'll come down to Nash and Kobe.

when is the MVP award offered? in the 3rd round? if so I think most of the voters will make their mind up based upon the results of the Lakers/Suns series. I'd say whichever win the series will win the MVP award.

Logical, that's why KG never gets his until he pass the first round few years back.

Illogical. Ballots were required to be turned in on Thursday, April 20th.

1ST 2ND 3RD
Steve Nash
14 17 4
Dirk Nowitzki
13 6 9
LeBron James
8 8 11
Chauncey Billups
6 4 9
Kobe Bryant
3 7 8
Elton Brand
0 1 2
Dwyane Wade
0 1 0
Tim Duncan
0 0 1

early MVP voting returns

Is that official or from some random fan site?

God I hope that's not official.