MVP Rankings 1.0

GriffMoney_1984 · Post #1181 » by **GriffMoney_1984** » Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:12 pm

If you read the quote I was referring to he was suggesting that if Cleveland had a close but inferior record to LA Kobe would win it because the award goes to the best player on the best team. No mention of conference seeding so it implies leaguewide.[/quote]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i said best player from one of the 2 #1 seeds

doozyj · Post #1182 » by **doozyj** » Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:36 pm

I would be completely happy for Lebron to win the MVP for his stats only if that means the Lakers repeat and Kobe gets finals MVP. I would take that year after year after year.

YLSKillaCam · Post #1183 » by **YLSKillaCam** » Thu Dec 24, 2009 11:29 pm

Yeah, but Kobe can be (and should be) regular season MVP and Finals MVP.

There's no sense in conceding an award that he deserves just because you're interested in a higher prize. The two are not mutually exclusive.

doozyj · Post #1184 » by **doozyj** » Thu Dec 24, 2009 11:50 pm

YLSKillaCam wrote:Yeah, but Kobe can be (and should be) regular season MVP and Finals MVP.

There's no sense in conceding an award that he deserves just because you're interested in a higher prize. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Of course Kobe will win both this year, I am just saying MY PERSONAL happiness relies more on the bigger prize for our city.

DowJones · Post #1185 » by **DowJones** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 1:15 am

The only argument you can make for Kobe is that his team is what...2 games better than Cleveland? 3? Well they should be better. Kobe has a much better supporting cast---from players to coach.

-LeBron is averaging the same number of points
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from the field
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from 3
-LeBron is averaging more assists
-LeBron is averaging more blocks
-LeBron is averaging more rebounds
-LeBron's PER is better

-Kobe averages more steals
-Kobe shoots a better % from the FT line

There it is. LeBron's season he is having right now is amazing. Truly amazing. LeBron haters can't stand to admit it but the man has a jumper. That and LeBron's clutch-time numbers are the dirty little secret that Kobe hope you continue to ignore. You don't really want to know how much better LeBron is getting as a pure shooter and they don't want you to know how clutch LeBron has been over the years.

Bgil · Post #1186 » by **Bgil** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 2:51 am

There's also the fact that Lebron's team is better, on paper, than it was last season and yet the team is underperforming. By most accounts the team doesn't even look as good to the naked eye.

Kobe's team, despite injuries to it's top three players, is on pace to win 70 games. By all accounts, the Lakers look like a vastly improved team to the naked eye.

Bgil · Post #1187 » by **Bgil** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 2:54 am

DowJones wrote:The only argument you can make for Kobe is that his team is what...2 games better than Cleveland? 3? Well they should be better. Kobe has a much better supporting cast---from players to coach.

-LeBron is averaging the same number of points
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from the field
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from 3
-LeBron is averaging more assists
-LeBron is averaging more blocks
-LeBron is averaging more rebounds
-LeBron's PER is better

-Kobe averages more steals
-Kobe shoots a better % from the FT line

There it is. LeBron's season he is having right now is amazing. Truly amazing. LeBron haters can't stand to admit it but the man has a jumper. That and LeBron's clutch-time numbers are the dirty little secret that Kobe hope you continue to ignore. You don't really want to know how much better LeBron is getting as a pure shooter and they don't want you to know how clutch LeBron has been over the years.

The worst part about your post is that you just went down the box score placing each category into a Kobe column or Lebron column. So instead of saying, "Kobe's playing better defense" you said he averages more steals. There's a fundamental disagreement here and it has nothing to do with the players but the method for judging them.

GriffMoney_1984 · Post #1188 » by **GriffMoney_1984** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 2:59 am

DowJones wrote:The only argument you can make for Kobe is that his team is what...2 games better than Cleveland? 3? Well they should be better. Kobe has a much better supporting cast---from players to coach.

-LeBron is averaging the same number of points
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from the field
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from 3
-LeBron is averaging more assists
-LeBron is averaging more blocks
-LeBron is averaging more rebounds
-LeBron's PER is better

-Kobe averages more steals
-Kobe shoots a better % from the FT line

There it is. LeBron's season he is having right now is amazing. Truly amazing. LeBron haters can't stand to admit it but the man has a jumper. That and LeBron's clutch-time numbers are the dirty little secret that Kobe hope you continue to ignore. You don't really want to know how much better LeBron is getting as a pure shooter and they don't want you to know how clutch LeBron has been over the years.

im sorry. but the mvp has never and will never be a statistical award

stats dont tell the whole storey. each team is different. each coach asks different things from different players. and each position requires different kinds of production

what your trying to argue is whether or not lebron is the most productive stat stuffer ( aka - best fantasy league player )

this however is the most valuable player award.

it has been won and always will be won by simply putting up the best numbers out of the east and west #1 seeds.

PER doesnt = mvps
PER doesnt = finals mvps
PER doesnt = rings
PER means = 0, ZERO, ZIP, NOTHING, SPIT

there isnt even a PER trophy ( as far as i know )

kobe could just as easly not run an offensive system or not listen to his coach and just hold the ball for 20 seconds of the shot clock and either drive, shoot or pass for a possible assist.

but kobes too busy winning championships

and the mvp is his to lose.... but who really cares anyway... its a joke of an award that got tarnished by steve nash

NYK 455 · Post #1189 » by **NYK 455** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:21 am

GriffMoney_1984 wrote:
DowJones wrote:The only argument you can make for Kobe is that his team is what...2 games better than Cleveland? 3? Well they should be better. Kobe has a much better supporting cast---from players to coach.

-LeBron is averaging the same number of points
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from the field
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from 3
-LeBron is averaging more assists
-LeBron is averaging more blocks
-LeBron is averaging more rebounds
-LeBron's PER is better

-Kobe averages more steals
-Kobe shoots a better % from the FT line

There it is. LeBron's season he is having right now is amazing. Truly amazing. LeBron haters can't stand to admit it but the man has a jumper. That and LeBron's clutch-time numbers are the dirty little secret that Kobe hope you continue to ignore. You don't really want to know how much better LeBron is getting as a pure shooter and they don't want you to know how clutch LeBron has been over the years.

im sorry. but the mvp has never and will never be a statistical award

stats dont tell the whole storey. each team is different. each coach asks different things from different players. and each position requires different kinds of production

what your trying to argue is whether or not lebron is the most productive stat stuffer ( aka - best fantasy league player )

this however is the most valuable player award.

it has been won and always will be won by simply putting up the best numbers out of the east and west #1 seeds.

PER doesnt = mvps
PER doesnt = finals mvps
PER doesnt = rings
PER means = 0, ZERO, ZIP, NOTHING, SPIT

there isnt even a PER trophy ( as far as i know )

kobe could just as easly not run an offensive system or not listen to his coach and just hold the ball for 20 seconds of the shot clock and either drive, shoot or pass for a possible assist.

but kobes too busy winning championships

and the mvp is his to lose.... but who really cares anyway... its a joke of an award that got tarnished by steve nash

Steve Nash deserved his 06 MVP just as much if not more than Kobe. He didn't tarnish anything.

GriffMoney_1984 · Post #1190 » by **GriffMoney_1984** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 4:17 am

NYK 455 wrote:
GriffMoney_1984 wrote:
DowJones wrote:The only argument you can make for Kobe is that his team is what...2 games better than Cleveland? 3? Well they should be better. Kobe has a much better supporting cast---from players to coach.

-LeBron is averaging the same number of points
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from the field
-LeBron is shooting the ball better from 3
-LeBron is averaging more assists
-LeBron is averaging more blocks
-LeBron is averaging more rebounds
-LeBron's PER is better

-Kobe averages more steals
-Kobe shoots a better % from the FT line

There it is. LeBron's season he is having right now is amazing. Truly amazing. LeBron haters can't stand to admit it but the man has a jumper. That and LeBron's clutch-time numbers are the dirty little secret that Kobe hope you continue to ignore. You don't really want to know how much better LeBron is getting as a pure shooter and they don't want you to know how clutch LeBron has been over the years.

im sorry. but the mvp has never and will never be a statistical award

stats dont tell the whole storey. each team is different. each coach asks different things from different players. and each position requires different kinds of production

what your trying to argue is whether or not lebron is the most productive stat stuffer ( aka - best fantasy league player )

this however is the most valuable player award.

it has been won and always will be won by simply putting up the best numbers out of the east and west #1 seeds.

PER doesnt = mvps
PER doesnt = finals mvps
PER doesnt = rings
PER means = 0, ZERO, ZIP, NOTHING, SPIT

there isnt even a PER trophy ( as far as i know )

kobe could just as easly not run an offensive system or not listen to his coach and just hold the ball for 20 seconds of the shot clock and either drive, shoot or pass for a possible assist.

but kobes too busy winning championships

and the mvp is his to lose.... but who really cares anyway... its a joke of an award that got tarnished by steve nash

Steve Nash deserved his 06 MVP just as much if not more than Kobe. He didn't tarnish anything.

theres 2 sides to the game of basketball

Offense and Defense

steve nash can only play 1 of them

he is the only mvp in nba history to never even make it to the nba finals, and yet he has 2 of them

he has more mvps than kobe bryant and shaquille oneal ( 2 of the top 10 players in nba history )

and nash is nowhere near top 50 IMO

he is a product of a system. his career stats are garbage. he won mvp because hes a short white canadian and 80% of the people who vote for the award are short and white, and half of those are canadian

in 2006... duncan should have won mvp.... in 2005 shaq should have won mvp

( oh and FYI,,, im a 6 foot white canadian )

Post #1191 » by **INKtastic** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 5:45 am

GriffMoney_1984 wrote:it has been won and always will be won by simply putting up the best numbers out of the east and west #1 seeds.

PER doesnt = mvps
PER doesnt = finals mvps
PER doesnt = rings
PER means = 0, ZERO, ZIP, NOTHING, SPIT

there isnt even a PER trophy ( as far as i know )

(clip)

and the mvp is his to lose.... but who really cares anyway... its a joke of an award that got tarnished by steve nash

great - you want to toss out Nash when he's the biggest exception to having a top PER being correlated with MVPs. Here are the last 20 MVPs

09 - LeBron: Led the league in PER, #1 seed in conference
08 - Kobe: 8th in PER, #1 seed in conference
07 - Dirk: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
06 - Nash: not in top 10 in PER, #3 seed in conference
05 - Nash: not in top 10 in PER, #1 seed in conference
04 - KG: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
03 - Duncan: #3 in PER, #1 seed in conference
02 - Duncan: #2 in PER, #2 seed in conference
01 - Iverson: #7 in PER, #1 seed in conference
00 - Shaq: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
99 - Malone: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
98 - Jordan: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
97 - Malone: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
96 - Jordan: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
95 - Robinson: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
94 - Hakeem: #3 in PER, #2 seed in conference
93 - Barkley: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
92 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
91 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
90 - Magic: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
89 - Magic: #3 in PER, #1 seed in conference
88 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #3 seed in conference
87 - Magic: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
86 - Bird: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
85 - Bird: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
84 - Bird: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
83 - Moses: #1 PER, #1 seed in conference
82 - Moses: #1 PER, #3 seed in conference
81 - Erving: #4 PER, #1 seed in conference
80 - Kareem: #2 PER, #1 seed in conference

So in the last 30 years, having a top 4 PER is more common (4 exceptions) than having the #1 seed in your conference (5 exceptions). And a couple of the MPVs given to players not in the top 4 in PER are some of the more controversial MVP awards that have been given out. Iverson's MPV and Nash's second MVP.

Greatness · Post #1192 » by **Greatness** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 5:54 am

lj4mvp wrote:
GriffMoney_1984 wrote:it has been won and always will be won by simply putting up the best numbers out of the east and west #1 seeds.

PER doesnt = mvps
PER doesnt = finals mvps
PER doesnt = rings
PER means = 0, ZERO, ZIP, NOTHING, SPIT

there isnt even a PER trophy ( as far as i know )

(clip)

and the mvp is his to lose.... but who really cares anyway... its a joke of an award that got tarnished by steve nash

great - you want to toss out Nash when he's the biggest exception to having a top PER being correlated with MVPs. Here are the last 20 MVPs

09 - LeBron: Led the league in PER, #1 seed in conference
08 - Kobe: 8th in PER, #1 seed in conference
07 - Dirk: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
06 - Nash: not in top 10 in PER, #3 seed in conference
05 - Nash: not in top 10 in PER, #1 seed in conference
04 - KG: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
03 - Duncan: #3 in PER, #1 seed in conference
02 - Duncan: #2 in PER, #2 seed in conference
01 - Iverson: #7 in PER, #1 seed in conference
00 - Shaq: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
99 - Malone: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
98 - Jordan: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
97 - Malone: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
96 - Jordan: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
95 - Robinson: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
94 - Hakeem: #3 in PER, #2 seed in conference
93 - Barkley: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
92 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
91 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
90 - Magic: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
89 - Magic: #3 in PER, #1 seed in conference
88 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #3 seed in conference
87 - Magic: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
86 - Bird: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
85 - Bird: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
84 - Bird: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
83 - Moses: #1 PER, #1 seed in conference
82 - Moses: #1 PER, #3 seed in conference
81 - Erving: #4 PER, #1 seed in conference
80 - Kareem: #2 PER, #1 seed in conference

So in the last 30 years, having a top 4 PER is more common (4 exceptions) than having the #1 seed in your conference (5 exceptions). And a couple of the MPVs given to players not in the top 4 in PER are some of the more controversial MVP awards that have been given out. Iverson's MPV and Nash's second MVP.

Don't forget when Kobe won MVP. Many people (myself included) believed that Paul should have won.

Benedict_Boozer · Post #1193 » by **Benedict_Boozer** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:05 am

lj4mvp wrote:
great - you want to toss out Nash when he's the biggest exception to having a top PER being correlated with MVPs. Here are the last 20 MVPs

09 - LeBron: Led the league in PER, #1 seed in conference
08 - Kobe: 8th in PER, #1 seed in conference
07 - Dirk: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
06 - Nash: not in top 10 in PER, #3 seed in conference
05 - Nash: not in top 10 in PER, #1 seed in conference
04 - KG: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
03 - Duncan: #3 in PER, #1 seed in conference
02 - Duncan: #2 in PER, #2 seed in conference
01 - Iverson: #7 in PER, #1 seed in conference
00 - Shaq: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
99 - Malone: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
98 - Jordan: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
97 - Malone: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
96 - Jordan: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
95 - Robinson: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
94 - Hakeem: #3 in PER, #2 seed in conference
93 - Barkley: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
92 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
91 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
90 - Magic: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
89 - Magic: #3 in PER, #1 seed in conference
88 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #3 seed in conference
87 - Magic: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
86 - Bird: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
85 - Bird: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
84 - Bird: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
83 - Moses: #1 PER, #1 seed in conference
82 - Moses: #1 PER, #3 seed in conference
81 - Erving: #4 PER, #1 seed in conference
80 - Kareem: #2 PER, #1 seed in conference

So in the last 30 years, having a top 4 PER is more common (4 exceptions) than having the #1 seed in your conference (5 exceptions). And a couple of the MPVs given to players not in the top 4 in PER are some of the more controversial MVP awards that have been given out. Iverson's MPV and Nash's second MVP.

Damn LJ - I imagine that took some time to compile. Impressive statistics though, definitely a strong correlation. Also shows you how good some of the greats were posting those numbers.

GriffMoney_1984 · Post #1194 » by **GriffMoney_1984** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:24 am

Benedict_Boozer wrote:
lj4mvp wrote:
great - you want to toss out Nash when he's the biggest exception to having a top PER being correlated with MVPs. Here are the last 20 MVPs

09 - LeBron: Led the league in PER, #1 seed in conference
08 - Kobe: 8th in PER, #1 seed in conference
07 - Dirk: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
06 - Nash: not in top 10 in PER, #3 seed in conference
05 - Nash: not in top 10 in PER, #1 seed in conference
04 - KG: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
03 - Duncan: #3 in PER, #1 seed in conference
02 - Duncan: #2 in PER, #2 seed in conference
01 - Iverson: #7 in PER, #1 seed in conference
00 - Shaq: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
99 - Malone: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
98 - Jordan: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
97 - Malone: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
96 - Jordan: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
95 - Robinson: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
94 - Hakeem: #3 in PER, #2 seed in conference
93 - Barkley: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
92 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
91 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
90 - Magic: #4 in PER, #1 seed in conference
89 - Magic: #3 in PER, #1 seed in conference
88 - Jordan: #1 in PER, #3 seed in conference
87 - Magic: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
86 - Bird: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
85 - Bird: #1 in PER, #1 seed in conference
84 - Bird: #2 in PER, #1 seed in conference
83 - Moses: #1 PER, #1 seed in conference
82 - Moses: #1 PER, #3 seed in conference
81 - Erving: #4 PER, #1 seed in conference
80 - Kareem: #2 PER, #1 seed in conference

So in the last 30 years, having a top 4 PER is more common (4 exceptions) than having the #1 seed in your conference (5 exceptions). And a couple of the MPVs given to players not in the top 4 in PER are some of the more controversial MVP awards that have been given out. Iverson's MPV and Nash's second MVP.

Damn LJ - I imagine that took some time to compile. Impressive statistics though, definitely a strong correlation. Also shows you how good some of the greats were posting those numbers.

its actually not that impressive at all

he cherry picked his own PER minimum as ( top 4 )

wtf is that? lol

TOP 4???????????????????????????

how about #1 in PER to match up with my #1 in seeding

LOL@ degrading your own stat by lessoning its significance to TOP FOUR

you just proved my point for me... only 13 times in 30 years did PER win the MVP

while 25 times in 30 years a #1 seed won the MVP

if anything it shows that im right... thanks for doing my work for me

/thread

GriffMoney_1984 · Post #1195 » by **GriffMoney_1984** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:33 am

lol@ LJ4MVP

what a tool

he went to all that trouble and ruined himself in the process

would be like me trying to say #1 seeds win mvps

but using #2, #3, and #4 seeds to back up my argument

Post #1196 » by **INKtastic** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:28 am

your top seed is actually "top seed in either conference", which is no more is always the #1 overall team than top 4 in PER is the overall nubmer 1 PER. For example, Kobe's lakers were the overall #3 seed the year he won it, Nash's suns were the overall #3 seed the first year he won it. Minnesota was overall #2 seed the year KG won it, etc. I don't have time to go through it all right now, but only twice in teh past 5 years did the MVP have the overall best record in the league while 3 of the last 5 had overall best PER.

I didn't bother to show the distinction since I figured you were smart enough to see top 4 PER is roughly the same thing as best record in conference.

Nobody is debating that you need a very good team record to win MVP, but apparently some want to overlook that it just as often takes elite stats to go with it.

ROballer · Post #1197 » by **ROballer** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:42 am

LOL Lj4mvp,you sure you are not hollinger in fact?

I can't imagine someone besides Hollinger so into PER and those other ****.I'm pretty sure that you would still have your boy front runner for MVP even if he had let's say,a 17-12 record based only on the fact that he leads the league in PER :lol:

Post #1198 » by **INKtastic** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:53 am

I clearly just said it's a combination of team success and individual success and showed that PER is a pretty reliable measure of the latter. And it's not too surprising that the exceptions to having a top PER are generally some of the more controversial MVPs. The least controversial of the 4 is Kobe's, and several voters then called voting him MVP was sort of a lifetime achievement award.

Bgil · Post #1199 » by **Bgil** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 2:45 pm

lj4mvp wrote:I clearly just said it's a combination of team success and individual success and showed that PER is a pretty reliable measure of the latter. And it's not too surprising that the exceptions to having a top PER are generally some of the more controversial MVPs. The least controversial of the 4 is Kobe's, and several voters then called voting him MVP was sort of a lifetime achievement award.

If Kobe, Nash, or Dirk had won a championship that season those awards would be much less controversial.

YLSKillaCam · Post #1200 » by **YLSKillaCam** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:07 pm

Kobe is so far ahead that this thread should be locked until further notice