Retro Player of the Year Project

[bastillon]

lmao @ mentioning Dr J and Moses and complaining about Bird's poor playoff stats. have you seen what these two posted against Bird ? they both got severely outplayed by Bird in the playoffs. I see no case for either of them over Bird that year based on their h2h meetings in the postseason.

[KUYJ]

I do think we will, and that's why I stated that this format works just fine for the purposes of ranking POY (top 5). It will also work well to rank a few players in an all time setting, but when we get a bit down the list this system won't really work for that IMO. You even stated the reason for why it won't work for those players in your own post TLA when you said people will be surprised at how few players will receive votes each year.

[Not Bias]

Kobe not winning RPOY in 08 just proves how much of a joke this website really is

[Kobe Bean]

First time taking a look at this and some of the threads.

From the 80's-present this is largely a list of the best player on the title team, except for some 80's years and the 09-10 Lakers.

Imo Magic is No.1 in 85, despite playing along with Kareem. I'd say he was more central to LAL's success than Bird was to that of Boston. Magic dominated throughout the playoffs and consistently came up big while his level of play didn't drop, and their defense is basically a wash, both are below average for megastar standards.

Kobe not winning once in 08-10 is a joke also. 09 much less than 08 and 10 because LeBron went apeshi*t on the league in both the playoffs and regular season. It's the LeBron or, should I say LeChoke pick in 2010 that really irks me. Kobe dominated the playoffs after a regular season after which he and the Lakers had lots of doubters coming into the 1st round. He was clutch as hell most of the time, whereas LeBron purposely went fishing against Boston. To me, that's downright inexcusable. Pau's peak coinciding with a rejuvenated Kobe was great timing, though Kobe averaged something like 30+ppg on high 50's TS% after the OKC series and people forget there was talk of him earning FMVP should the Lakers lose pre-G7. G3 and G7 (considering overall performance by both teams not as much) were stinkers in an otherwise amazing series from him.

FWIW check the clutch data on NBA.com's new engine, or rather, stats candyland. For eye-test purposes, G6 vs PHo is all you need to see. He rebounded from a bad shooting performance by destroying the Suns' hopes in the 4th.

[ardee]

Kobe not winning once in 08-10 is a joke also. 09 much less than 08 and 10 because LeBron went apeshi*t on the league in both the playoffs and regular season. It's the LeBron or, should I say LeChoke pick in 2010 that really irks me. Kobe dominated the playoffs after a regular season after which he and the Lakers had lots of doubters coming into the 1st round. He was clutch as hell most of the time, whereas LeBron purposely went fishing against Boston. To me, that's downright inexcusable. Pau's peak coinciding with a rejuvenated Kobe was great timing, though Kobe averaged something like 30+ppg on high 50's TS% after the OKC series and people forget there was talk of him earning FMVP should the Lakers lose pre-G7. G3 and G7 (considering overall performance by both teams not as much) were stinkers in an otherwise amazing series from him.

I've said this time and time again. Of course, on the PC forum being anti-Kobe makes you knowledgeable about the game of basketball.

Here is an article about that debate:

A Tale of Two Game Fives: LeBron Quits, Kobe Fights

Bryant authored a tremendous individual performance in game five--scoring 38 points in 44 minutes while also grabbing five rebounds and leading the Lakers with four assists--but the rest of the Lakers did not show up and the Celtics won 92-86. Gasol (12 points) was the only other Laker to score in double figures but he shot just 5-12 from the field as the Celtics repeatedly bullied him out of the post. The Celtics used screen/roll plays with Pierce to good effect, forcing switches that enabled Pierce to evade Artest's physical defense; Pierce scored 27 points on 12-21 field goal shooting and he also received ample support from Garnett (18 points, 10 rebounds), Rondo (18 points, eight assists, five rebounds) and Ray Allen (12 points).

Even though the Lakers lost, game five demonstrated the gulf that exists between Kobe Bryant and LeBron James in terms of championship character. While James has more raw physical talent than Bryant at this stage of their careers and James has also dramatically narrowed the gap between them from a skill set standpoint, Bryant is still ahead of James in terms of understanding what it takes to be a winner. I am generally reluctant to compare the NBA game to the FIBA game but it is striking to note that the version of Team USA led by James, Dwyane Wade and Carmelo Anthony had no answer in the 2006 FIBA World Championship when things got tough versus Greece; few people probably remember that Team USA took an early lead in that game, prompting James to haughtily declare in reference to Greece, "They don't know what to do." It is easy to be a front runner--James' Cavs did a lot of laughing and dancing as they cruised through the 2010 regular season--but it is not quite so easy to know what to do when your opponent punches you in the mouth; after Greece figured out what to do James had no response as Team USA went down in flames. In marked contrast, the 2008 edition of Team USA won the Olympic gold medal after Bryant took over down the stretch versus Spain in the championship game; in fact, when Team USA Coach Mike Krzyzewski called a timeout during a key segment of the fourth quarter versus Spain he went to Bryant--not James or anyone else--and specifically said that it was time for Bryant to take over.

What does that have to do with game five of the Finals? When the going got tough in game five of the Eastern Conference Finals, LeBron James quit playing aggressively, setting the tone for a monumental collapse by the team with the league's best regular season record; when the going got tough in game five of the NBA Finals, Bryant did whatever he could to keep the Lakers afloat even as his teammates disappeared. Bryant spent the early part of the contest trying to get his teammates involved offensively. During the first quarter, ESPN Radio's Hubie Brown declared, "Kobe is the story. He's making them double team him and he's finding the free people." Brown later called Bryant "the best player in the playoffs" and he criticized the Lakers for not running more offensive actions/sequences to create easier shots for Bryant. Brown also said that on several possessions Artest messed up the offensive flow because he did not pass the ball to an open player in the post (sometimes Bryant, sometimes another player). ABC's Mark Jackson made a similar observation when he said that sometimes Bryant pops open off of screens but the Lakers' passes "are not on point" and that this lack of precision/timing enabled the Celtics' defense to recover.

It is amazing, dumbfounding and infuriating to listen to Mike Wilbon repeatedly act like it is somehow Bryant's fault when the Lakers go through stretches in which none of his teammates can make a shot. When Wilbon talks about Bryant he uses the classic "heads I win, tails you lose" kind of faulty thinking: if Bryant's teammates play well then this "proves" that Bryant has a great supporting cast but if Bryant's teammates play poorly then Bryant is supposedly being selfish. The reality is that the Lakers have a good (not great) starting lineup and a terrible bench; Bryant is responsible for creating a large portion of the Lakers' offense and he is also the eyes/ears of the defense. Bryant's teammates combined to shoot 18-51 from the field in game five even though most of them got wide open shots because Bryant faced double and triple teams. Was it selfish of Bryant to shoot more often in the third quarter or was he just exercising common sense? The truth about game five is that in the first half Bryant repeatedly set up his teammates, as Hubie Brown mentioned, but when it became apparent that his teammates had nothing to offer Bryant took it upon himself to "activate the ball." If LeBron James or Dwyane Wade had scored 19 points in a quarter Wilbon would have fallen over praising them but when Bryant does it this supposedly is a reflection of some kind of character flaw.

It is also odd that Wilbon kept insisting that Boston's strategy was to let Bryant score and shut down everyone else. If that were the case then why did the Celtics send three or four bodies at Bryant if he even got close to the paint? Why did the Celtics trap Bryant with two defenders several feet behind the three point line? No, Boston's strategy was to make Bryant work hard for every shot even if that meant that other Lakers would get wide open shots; the Celtics certainly made every effort to recover to Bryant's teammates when Bryant passed the ball but the Celtics showed that they were quite content to watch any Laker but Bryant shoot wide open shots (as long as those shots were not layups).

Game five did much to destroy the bizarre myth that Gasol has become the best big man in the NBA. Gasol is a solid All-NBA Third Team player but he is not an "elite" player or a "franchise" player if those terms are used in any meaningful way. Gasol played extremely passively throughout game five, getting his shot blocked repeatedly, setting soft screens while failing to roll aggressively to the hoop and committing many defensive gaffes. Gasol does not need to elbow people in the head or get technical fouls; that has nothing to do with being tough and it has nothing to do with why Gasol is often labeled "soft." Gasol does not consistently display the mental and physical toughness to do what his team needs him to do based on his skill set and role. In this series specifically, the Lakers needed for Gasol to establish an aggressive post presence at both ends of the court; he did so at times and he ultimately came up big in game seven but during game five (and at other points during the series) he got bullied far too often when he played defense and he allowed Garnett and especially Boston's starting center Kendrick Perkins--who guarded Gasol whenever Bynum went to the bench and Gasol shifted to center--to push him almost out to the three point line on offense; don't just take my word about that: after game five, Lakers assistant coach Frank Hamblen said, "Pau has to do a better job of holding position."

After Bryant scored 19 straight third quarter points (and 23 straight points overall) he called a play for Gasol, but Gasol failed to hold off Garnett in the post, so Garnett tipped and stole Luke Walton's entry pass, a turnover that resulted in a fastbreak basket for the Celtics. It is a major fallacy to look at Gasol's high shooting percentage and declare that he should get more shot attempts; Gasol's field goal percentage is high precisely because he is primarily shooting dunks, layups and wide open jumpers, shots that are obtainable for the most part only when Bryant creates them. That is not to say that Gasol never makes a good one on one move but many of his high percentage shots are the result of Bryant drawing a double team, whether or not Bryant gets the assist on the play--that is one reason that I call the assist a "semi bogus" stat, because it does not really indicate how an open shot is actually created; the other reason is that scorekeepers do not strictly adhere to the rule book definition of an assist.

Earlier in the third quarter, Garnett scored an easy layup after Gasol messed up a defensive coverage; as ABC's Jeff Van Gundy pointed out, Bryant was correctly playing off of Rondo to cut down his passing angles to shooters coming off of screens but since Bryant was not pressuring the ball and there was no weakside help it was Gasol's responsibility to play behind Garnett--but instead Gasol fronted Garnett and Rondo simply lobbed the ball Gasol's head to an unguarded Garnett.

While we are examining myths and misconceptions that game five helped to debunk, let's return for a moment to a point that I made earlier during the playoffs: it became chic among some media members in Cleveland to assert that former Cavs Coach Mike Brown is a good game planner but that he is not good at making in game adjustments. I explained that this is a nonsensical distinction because the most important aspect of coaching is game planning; most of the so-called "in game adjustments" are in fact simply examples of a team following what was detailed in the game plan relating to the most likely scenarios to happen in a given game (i.e., if the opposing team goes small then we will react a certain way, if the opposing team posts up Player X then we will double team off of Player Y, etc.). If you don't believe me that this whole "in game adjustment" idea is nonsense then take heed of what Van Gundy said during ABC's game five telecast: responding to a question from play by play announcer Mike Breen, Van Gundy stated that playoff series are not decided by in game adjustments because "You are who you are by this time of the year and you have to go with your best stuff and expect them to go with their best stuff."

'10 though, I guess you can still go with Bron over Kobe reasonably. I used to as well.

'08.... Hell, I have no words.

You're wrong, Kobe Bean. The project isn't 'give it to the best player on the title team'. It's 'the best player on the title team except Kobe'.

[nunemouse]

Figure A:

08-10 Regular Season stats

Code: Select all

Kobe: 27.4/5.6/5.1 with 1.6 steals and 0.4 blocks, 3 TOV on 46% shooting
James: 29.4/7.6/7.7 with 1.7 steals and 1.1 blocks, 3.3 TOV on 49% shooting

Code: Select all

Kobe: 24.9 PER, 57.3% TS, .204 WS/48, Average 1yr APM of +9.1, Simple rating of 12.1
Lebron: 30.6 PER, 58.7% TS, .286 WS/48, Average 1yr APM of +15.2, Simple rating of 19.7

Figure B:

08-10 Playoff stats:

Code: Select all

Kobe: 29.8/5.7/5.5 with 1.6  steals and 0.5 blocks, 3.1 TOV on 46% shooting
James: 31.1/8.7/7.5 with 1.7 steals and 1.3 blocks, 3,5 TOV on 47% shooting

Code: Select all

Kobe: 25.5 PER, 56.9% TS, .203 WS/48, Average 1yr APM of +7.1
Lebron: 30.3 PER, 58.3% TS, .280 WS/48, Average 1yr APM of+14.8 

Figure C:

09-10 Clutch stats (Per 48 minutes of Clutch production) [unweighted, 08 wasn't available]

Code: Select all

Kobe: 53/7.9/4.7 with 1.4 steals, 0 blocks, with 3.2 TOV 45.1% FG, +21
James: 56/15.1/10.5 with 3.4 steals and 2.5 blocks, with 4.5 TOV 52.2% FG, +41

But yeah, I guess the fact that James won over Kobe in those years (despite Kobe getting significant portion of votes) means that everyone who participated in the project is a Kobe hater.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Figure A:

08-10 Regular Season stats

Code: Select all

Kobe: 27.4/5.6/5.1 with 1.6 steals and 0.4 blocks, 3 TOV on 46% shooting
James: 29.4/7.6/7.7 with 1.7 steals and 1.1 blocks, 3.3 TOV on 49% shooting

Code: Select all

Kobe: 24.9 PER, 57.3% TS, .204 WS/48, Average 1yr APM of +9.1, Simple rating of 12.1
Lebron: 30.6 PER, 58.7% TS, .286 WS/48, Average 1yr APM of +15.2, Simple rating of 19.7

Figure B:

08-10 Playoff stats:

Code: Select all

Kobe: 29.8/5.7/5.5 with 1.6  steals and 0.5 blocks, 3.1 TOV on 46% shooting
James: 31.1/8.7/7.5 with 1.7 steals and 1.3 blocks, 3,5 TOV on 47% shooting

Code: Select all

Kobe: 25.5 PER, 56.9% TS, .203 WS/48, Average 1yr APM of +7.1
Lebron: 30.3 PER, 58.3% TS, .280 WS/48, Average 1yr APM of+14.8 

Figure C:

09-10 Clutch stats (Per 48 minutes of Clutch production) [unweighted, 08 wasn't available]

Code: Select all

Kobe: 53/7.9/4.7 with 1.4 steals, 0 blocks, with 3.2 TOV 45.1% FG, +21
James: 56/15.1/10.5 with 3.4 steals and 2.5 blocks, with 4.5 TOV 52.2% FG, +41

But yeah, I guess the fact that James won over Kobe in those years (despite Kobe getting significant portion of votes) means that everyone who participated in the project is a Kobe hater.

That's a very cool story and all, but look at Bron's numbers against good defenses(which he hardly faced), and they nosedive in that time period.

[mysticbb]

That's a very cool story and all, but look at Bron's numbers against good defenses(which he hardly faced), and they nosedive in that time period.

That is the SAME for Bryant as well, and James still comes up ahead of Bryant against good defensive teams.


It is a joke that people here accusing others of biases when they showed a huge bias themselves.

[Kobe Bean]

I don't think anyone is beefing with LeBron in 09. At the same time, his overall stats should be taken with a grain of salt since they're greatly inflated by 09 (playoffs especially). Kobe put up a consistent 30/6/5 @ high 50 TS%. And he only had 3 below average series' in total: 08 Finals, 10 1st Round, 10 Finals. He had many more during which he flat out dominated like his entire 08 WC run, 10 PHO, 09 Denver etc

I think Kobe should have at least one of 08/10 and reasonably both of them. He only has somewhat of a case in 09 for the sake of having a discussion, but the only things he has over LeBron are defense in the playoffs and the ring. LeBron went similarly deep, was more central to Cle's success and dominated his competition much more.

[mademan]

It's funny that Lebron played better against the Celtics than did Kobe. But Lebron "choked" and Kobe "carried" the Lakers. Lebron had 1 bad game and lost, Kobe went 6/24 in a win. Lebron went for 27/10/9 in game 6 and lost. Kobe absolutely has no arguments for being over Lebron any year since 09.

2008, I'd personally give it to Kobe, but there are legit arguments for Paul and KG.

[An Unbiased Fan]

It's funny that Lebron played better against the Celtics than did Kobe. But Lebron "choked" and Kobe "carried" the Lakers. Lebron had 1 bad game and lost, Kobe went 6/24 in a win. Lebron went for 27/10/9 in game 6 and lost. Kobe absolutely has no arguments for being over Lebron any year since 09.

2008, I'd personally give it to Kobe, but there are legit arguments for Paul and KG.

Huh? Lebron played better in what way? Kobe had a bad shooting game in game 7, BUT was still able to impact that game by grabbing 15 boards, and still put in 23 points.

[mademan]

It's funny that Lebron played better against the Celtics than did Kobe. But Lebron "choked" and Kobe "carried" the Lakers. Lebron had 1 bad game and lost, Kobe went 6/24 in a win. Lebron went for 27/10/9 in game 6 and lost. Kobe absolutely has no arguments for being over Lebron any year since 09.

2008, I'd personally give it to Kobe, but there are legit arguments for Paul and KG.

Huh? Lebron played better in what way? Kobe had a bad shooting game in game 7, BUT was still able to impact that game by grabbing 15 boards, and still put in 23 points.

And if they lose? Does Kobe now become a "choker"? If Artest misses those shots..if Ray/Pierce hit some more shots...if this happened...if that....?

There are sooo many things that go into winning a title and it often involves a lot of luck (especially when the teams are close in talent like Celt/Lakers). You can rationalize it any way you want, and yes, Kobe did do other things other than scoring, but the fact that the narrative changes with a couple bounces is stupid.

The fact is Lebron played better against those same Celtics than did Kobe. Lebron lost, he's seen as a choker. Kobe won, he's seen as a winner. How does that make sense? Because Kobe had better teammates/had teammates step up/better coaching?

[An Unbiased Fan]

It's funny that Lebron played better against the Celtics than did Kobe. But Lebron "choked" and Kobe "carried" the Lakers. Lebron had 1 bad game and lost, Kobe went 6/24 in a win. Lebron went for 27/10/9 in game 6 and lost. Kobe absolutely has no arguments for being over Lebron any year since 09.

2008, I'd personally give it to Kobe, but there are legit arguments for Paul and KG.

Huh? Lebron played better in what way? Kobe had a bad shooting game in game 7, BUT was still able to impact that game by grabbing 15 boards, and still put in 23 points.

And if they lose? Does Kobe now become a "choker"? If Artest misses those shots..if Ray/Pierce hit some more shots...if this happened...if that....?

There are sooo many things that go into winning a title and it often involves a lot of luck (especially when the teams are close in talent like Celt/Lakers). You can rationalize it any way you want, and yes, Kobe did do other things other than scoring, but the fact that the narrative changes with a couple bounces is stupid.

The fact is Lebron played better against those same Celtics than did Kobe. Lebron lost, he's seen as a choker. Kobe won, he's seen as a winner. How does that make sense? Because Kobe had better teammates/had teammates step up/better coaching?

First, the Lakers were in the NBA Finals. They went through a much tougher Western Conference just to get there. Kobe put them into position to play the Celtics. Kobe led them to a game 7. Kobe impacted the game even when his shot wasn't falling, but still dropped 23/15 in game 7. There is no choke in doing all of that. Lebron however, checked out of that series, and had the "elbow" issues. Posting raw series averages, doesn't excuse that Game 5 where he didn't even show up. His own teammates were looking at him funny.

This is the problem, too often people want to look at raw averages instead of looking at the context of the situation.

[Kobe Bean]

The only arguments for LeBron in 10 are completely and I mean COMPLETELY based off statistics. He also clearly played worse against the celtics than Kobe and his averages for the entire playoffs are hilariously skewed because of the CHI series - mainly his efficiency. His FG% and 3P% dropped from 56/50 to 44/27 from round 1 to round 2.

No way on earth a second round exit player would ever be POY on these forums, except if it's at the expense of Kobe, right? Against the Celtics, he was, relative to the series, awful. He cheked out and choked. Kobe was clearly the best player in the finals, Pau second and then Pierce/KG.

[nunemouse]

Statistics are just a way of measuring what the player has done. Basketball is statistics. This isn't some crazy thing where math is being applied to solve a problem, and people are making up the equations to suit their needs. Numbers are just data, based on what happened (past tense) when a person played the game. So to write off a data gap as Lebron had over Kobe in 2010 as being "completely based off statistics" is asinine. Whatever points anyone makes, if they don't cite data, are moot.

Also I find it funny that people are so quick to defend Kobe in 2013 as having a bad team, thereby giving more weight to his accomplishments than say players who are playing as well/better than him on a team with more wins. At the same time, the very same people cite Kobe's playoff success in 08-10 as being a reason why he deserved POY more than Lebron, despite the fact that Lebron didn't have close to as good a team as Kobe (and thus didnt have the same opportunity to succeed). Lebron is literally on a different level than everyone else in the league since 2009 (and has been consistently). In 2008 there was some contention between him, KG and Paul being best in the league. But since 2009, it hasn't really been close that close. One could argue that 2009 Wade had greater impact using APM, but idk about that either (And I'm saying this as a huge Wade fan. Note that my personal favoritism of Wade doesn't cloud judgement). The only gap came in the 2011 playoffs where several players outshined Lebron (and Lebron had no excuse for playing the way he did).

[Kobe Bean]

Okay. I think your approach to basketball is fundementally wrong, judging by your first three sentences so I'm not going to bother delving into your argument.

One thing though: This is a PLAYER OF THE YEAR project not the BEST PLAYER OF THE YEAR project. LeBron was very arguably a better ball player than Kobe in 2010 but did he have a better year, with performance and success and their correlation taken into account? Hell fckn no

[nunemouse]

Okay. I think your approach to basketball is fundementally wrong, judging by your first three sentences so I'm not going to bother delving into your argument.

One thing though: This is a PLAYER OF THE YEAR project not the BEST PLAYER OF THE YEAR project. LeBron was very arguably a better ball player than Kobe in 2010 but did he have a better year, with performance and success and their correlation taken into account? Hell fckn no

Ok. So replace "player" with "SG". How does your arguments for Kobe being the SG of the Year stand (in the Wade vs Kobe vs Harden thread), given what you think about Lebron vs Kobe in 2010?

Also, you don't know my approach to basketball. I haven't really told you as much yet. Data isn't an approach to something, it's a tool, a mechanism. 95% of the points that people make can be either proven wrong or right with data. People who use the same arguments for Kobe over and over again hardly ever reference data in their argument, it's usually anecdotal or just broad points.

Data is just the truth. That doesn't have to change how much you like/dislike a player. The algorithm almost always trumps other approaches (see Daniel Kahneman's book: Thinking Fast and Slow). When I was doing research for the SG of 2013 thread, I had no idea what I was going to find. If I did not do research, I would just go along with what everyone was saying and from memory. Both are consistently pretty faulty. (Many responses in the thread made it obvious that people did not read the op, they just stated plainly "1.Kobe 2/3 Harden/Wade" or something like that).

I also consider myself a fan of Kobe. He and AI were the main persons that got me initially interested in basketball (I later learned that I viewed AI as a far better player than he really was. You know what helped me correct that? Data (or statistics if you'd like to call it)). But what I don't understand is why people consistently give him so much benefit of the doubt. They apply different handicaps for him then they do for other players. And that approach is simply just wrong, regardless of whether it's grounded in data or not.

[acrossthecourt]

Maybe someone's done this, but I broke it down by who didn't win a title yet carried the RPYP anyway:

'09-10 (LeBron James - 0.816)
'08-09 (LeBron James - 0.967)
'03-04 (Kevin Garnett - 1.000)
'89-90 (Michael Jordan - 0.918)
'88-89 (Michael Jordan - 1.000)
'87-88 (Michael Jordan - 0.886)
'84-85 (Larry Bird - 0.900)
'81-82 (Moses Malone - 0.971)
'78-79 (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 0.914)
'77-78 (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 0.738)
'76-77 (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 0.872)
'73-74 (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 0.981)
'72-73 (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 0.871)
'71-72 (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 0.981)
'69-70 (Jerry West - 0.968)
'67-68 (Wilt Chamberlain - 0.856)
'65-66 (Wilt Chamberlain - 0.857)
'63-64 (Wilt Chamberlain - 0.865)
'57-58 (Bob Pettit - 0.864)

6: Kareem
3: Jordan
3: Wilt
2: James
1: Bird
1: Garnett
1: Moses Malone
1: Petit
1: West

If you vote for the best guy on the title-winning team, you're probably right, especially if you ignore the dominant seasons from Kareem and Jordan. Other than that, you have only 10 out of 49 seasons where the Retro Player didn't coincide with the best player on the best team. (19 out of 58 total.)

The four guys with multiple awards without a title are also the four statistical freaks of the game. Since this counts the playoffs, if you're going to win this without a title you'd better put up some seriously crazy numbers.

Also, I don't like including the playoffs because it limits the scope of the guys. Guys with better teams go further into the playoffs, and it's hard to argue someone's had a better season if he lost in the second round because he didn't even play half the playoffs, even if it's through no fault of his own.

[Kobe Bean]

Since this counts the playoffs, if you're going to win this without a title you'd better put up some seriously crazy numbers.

Guys with better teams go further into the playoffs, and it's hard to argue someone's had a better season if he lost in the second round because he didn't even play half the playoffs, even if it's through no fault of his own.

This is basically the TL;DR of why LeBron does not deserve the 10 award

His numbers were excellent. Not crazy or insane like in 2009. His team lost in the second round mainly because he choked.

[nunemouse]

"he choked"

Lebron's numbers conference semis 2010:

27/7/9 on 55.6% TS, L

Kobes numbers in various playoff series:

26/6/5 on 48% TS (2002 First round), W
24/6/6 on 41% TS (2004 First round), W
24/4/4 on 51% TS (2010 First round), W
21/4/3 on 52% TS (2000 CSF), W
26/5/5 on 51% TS (2002 CSF), W
20/5/6 on 55% TS (2000 CF), W
27/6/4 on 49% TS (2002 CF), W
24/6/4 on 52% TS (2004 CF), W
16/5/4 on 41% TS (2000 Finals), W
25/8/6 on 50% TS (2001 Finals), W

For Lebron to win games in Cleveland, he had to play out of this world basketball. Whenever he had "ok" games (by his standard), his team would lose. Lebron never had the good fortune of having someone to carry his slack when he was in Cleveland.