RealGM

I put OT because this is just me venting and even though I think it is all true some people clearly disagree with me like the writers who do the voting.


Dirk was the mvp last year and now he won't get 1 vote. Has he declined so much or is it that the league has gotten alot more competitive?

It seems to me that if the Hornets are in first place the MVP award will be Paul's which I think is nuts. I also believe if the Lakers are first the MVP is clearly Kobes. Now the other candidate is KG and if the Hornets and Lakers would have lost a few games more and been 3rd and 4th or 5th the mvp award would have gone to KG. Lebron who is much better then Paul and KG is not even really considered because of his record. If the Celtics would have Pierce, Allen, Lebron they would be just as good if not better. It's possible if they had Howard over KG they would be just as good to but those guys are not considered.
This is not fair at all. Some more examples is if Kobe was traded for Allen last year Kobe would be the one getting the mvp award and the Celtics would have alot more victories.
If you look at the mvp candidates which are Kobe-Paul-KG they all have amazing teams. KG has Allen, Pierce and plays in the East, Paul has West,Chandler,Peja and Kobe has sort of an amazing cast. He had Bynum and Odom in the begining of the year and then Gasol and Odom. Next year when they are all healthy and he has all 3 stars plus himself there gonna win over 60 games and the mvp award will be locked up.
This year it's not fair though. Kobe is clearly the player who deserves it regardless of record. Besides having the win total he is clearly the best player in the league. If your the best player in the league and your winning espially playing with 9 fingers how can it be a question? Just because another team might have a few more wins when it's all said and done? Also why is injury not taking into question? If Paul had West or Chandler out for half the season he wouldn't even be a candidate because he wouldn't have the wins.
I understand in a way not giving it to a guy who's team is not winning team but usually the best player or most valuable player does in fact win.
I could see wins being a deciding factor when you have such a close race of who is the best player like in Kobe vs Lebron but to give a guy like Dirk the mvp or to give it to Paul over Kobe which might happen because of a few victories is pretty crazy to me.
Now in a case like Melo and Iverson were they are great players and have a great cast and are still struggling I understand not giving them the mvp.

Another case were winning is a little overrated is the rookie of the year award. Kevin Durant clearly had a better year then Horford, he is clearly the better player then Horford yet Horford could win the roy award because the Hawks will probably make the playoffs.
Not only is winning overrated in this case even if Durant wins because it shouldn't even be a question and it is but the arguement of this player took a losing team and made them a winning team is flawed. Yes Horford is a big reason why the Hawks are winning (winning more at least) but it is clearly not the main reason or perhaps not even the biggest. All there players have gotten 1 year older 1 year better and they even added Mike Bibby. Horford will make the playoffs and Durant won't but if Durant got the Sonics to the playoffs he would be mvp with that team.

I think if lets say the Spurs lost Duncan for a year and became a lotto team and Manu still came off the bench he wouldn't even be looked at as 6th man when he just might be the best 6th man ever. When we win 65 games next year if Farmar averages 12-14 and 4 he would win 6th man over Manu and that would be so wrong.

There are exceptions to this rule like Stephon Marbury. Marbury might be 100x better then Fisher lets say but I think every team would rather have Fisher as there pg and that is true and when winning is not overrated but in so many aspects the value of a teams record in judging a player just might be overrated.

If we don't go on just wins the MVP should go to Kobe for the next 8-10 years or so until Lebron wins it who then he should get the mvp award (unless the off chance somebody comes along better then him).

Kobe and Lebron are the 2 best players in the league and are the only 2 players who should be up for mvp award ever.
And for the record I love Paul and think he is the best pg in the league and the second best guard in the league and arguably top 3-6 players in the league.

I didnt read all of it.. well even most of it.. but you are saying that the MVP race should just go to Kobe or Lebron automatically?

.....i sure hope not.

Kobe and Lebron are the 2 best players in the league and are the only 2 players who should be up for mvp award ever.

That's preposterous.

Winning is overrated? Damn!

Antoine Walker 4 MVP!

Read the whole thing.
Cliff notes
It seems Paul will win the mvp award if the Hornets end up in first place and Kobe will win if the Lakers end up in 1st or maybe second and I think that is crap because even if the Hornets end up with a few more wins then the Lakers it doesn't mean Paul is more valuable then Kobe.

Instead of saying stupid things like Walker for mvp or try and just point out what you think I said wrong don't you think there is a problem that Paul a clearly inferoir player then Kobe could win over a couple wins?

No winning is not overrated and Paul is just as deserving as Kobe is for the MVP.


/thread

the mvp doesn't always go to the best player, it goes to the most valuable, and to a lesser extent who the media likes the best

I know you guys don't like me here but I kinda agree with Dex when you look at as a "Best player" award- which I think it should be because...well, the NBA doesn't have one and I think if it had to have one it should be "Best Player".

It's just like he said: Dirk's not a great example, because his season this year hasn't been great but the point is correct. Players will play the exact same game, with the same skill, with the same execution and general production and one year they're runaway favorites and the next no one gives them any thought. What changed? Their teammates.

I think that's dumb.

well i for one think the award is overated. i mean for shaq to only have one is crazy. it is also a popularity contest among the media,meaning you have to basically be a media darling to win it. to be honest i kind of hope kobe doesn't win it,and hopefully he will be that much hungrier for a ring. i mean having a regualr season mvp is cool,but it's not even an award where there is a basic criteria. i think we have a team that can compete for atleast 5 or 6 years. i am pretty sure kobe would rather hoist a couple more championship trophies,than regualr season awards.

wait star your dexmor now?

Dexmor wrote:Read the whole thing.
Cliff notes
It seems Paul will win the mvp award if the Hornets end up in first place and Kobe will win if the Lakers end up in 1st or maybe second and I think that is crap because even if the Hornets end up with a few more wins then the Lakers it doesn't mean Paul is more valuable then Kobe.

Instead of saying stupid things like Walker for mvp or try and just point out what you think I said wrong don't you think there is a problem that Paul a clearly inferoir player then Kobe could win over a couple wins?

So, why does Paul not deserve the MVP? His team is the 1st seed in probably the toughest Western Conference of all time and the only argument I have been making is that Kobe has faced more tough situations to wade through with teammates injuries etc. but if we keep faltering to non playoff teams while CP3 leads the Hornets to the best record in the West, he is the MVP. I don't have any hard feelings for anyone just because Kobe is not awarded the MVP.

Chris Paul is the best PG in the league and he has carried he's been carrying his team as a 22 year old future superstar. IMO he's as valuable as Lebron/D12/Wade or Kobe Bryant at this moment and he has the record to prove it.

Dexmor wrote: don't you think there is a problem that Paul a clearly inferoir player then Kobe

Paul is not clearly an inferior player to Kobe. Quit with the kool-aid.

I rather not have Kobe win. He'll get pissed and ready for the playoffs.

Although that hasn't worked out in previous years. So maybe winning will get the Lakers pass the first round.

"A new thread a day, keeps the doctor away" -- Starlel24

starel24


Nothing like being a fan of a team that holds that trophy up in the air after a grueling season and post season. There's nothing like it.

I didn't read any of it, and I AGREE.

The MVP award is a rubbish, non consistent and unlogical award given. It is a biased award given to the most liked, a popularity contest. The voting process needs to be completely scrapped and overhauled. It should include actual stats that carry a weight as well as opinion of the "most valuable".

I be very honest Chris Paul has been outstanding for his team but by no means should he get the MVP this year. He means a lot to his team but you must also look at the fact that none on their starters never missed games together. It was one here and one there. Kobe on the other hand has had Odom, Bynum, and Gasol out, not all at the same time but two or more players missed games at one time. I didn't even talk about the players off the bench, Ariza, Walton, and Radmanovic. Kobe has done more for his team as well. He has kept them in the top 3 and holding on for a Pacific divison title. The only reason everybody in on Paul's jock strap is because they didn't think that they would make the playoffs. Kobe should and will get this MVP of 2007-2008

Plus if you guys read all of it it's not just the mvp award. Horford has a shot to beat out Durant of roy just because he is on a better team in a weaker conference because it can't be Horford has outplayed Durant.

KG would be a decent example because this year he is not more valuable then KG of last year the only difference is he is winning now but it's not because his game has changed is because he is on a winning better team in a weaker conference.
It can't just go to the best player on the top team because that is not what most valuable player stands for.
There is also a thinking that Paul has taken a weak or average team and carried them to first. If he did that then yeah he should get it but the Hornets are a very talented team. Chandler,Peja,West now that is a squad.

When I think of choosing an MVP there are several things you have to factor in. 1) stats 2) team record 3) crunch time performance.

If these are the attributes for MVP its gotta be Kobe. MVP is half performance and half popularity contest.