2014-2015 NBA MVP Discussion

[Doctor MJ]

It's not just the Cavs record without Leabron, you can also look at the heat record this year without LeBron. He was replaced with a former All Star on a team that mostly stayed in tact. Last year they were a finals team. This year their record is barely better than last years Cavs team.

Th Cavs this year with LeBron are clearly championship contenders. They have a top 4 winning percentage in games he's played. The heat last year were clearly contendeders. They quite clearly would still be contenders has he stayed. They are sub .500 without him. Does anyone really think Curry would turn a sub .500 team into a legitimate contender? Harden's record in games he's played is worse than LeBron's record ink games he's played. When Cleveland finishes 2nd in the east, how does harden win over him? Now that he is healthy, LeBron should finish the season with a better PER than either guy.

The Heat will have nothing to do with anything here for the simple reason that no one needs convincing that LeBron at his best is the best player in the game. It's simply a question of whether he's had enough success in Cleveland, and the fact that their record will be disappointing and LeBron probably won't lead the league by any perspective of statistics is going to have voters saying, "Show us what you can do next year."

[Doctor MJ]

Let's be clear: I'm not attributing everything in Atlanta to Korver's improvement. What I"m saying is that there's a synergistic effect going on that makes it very difficult to assign credit based on individual stats, and the stats we have without such issues favor Korver.

I think anyone with even peripheral knowledge of Atlanta realizes that having Korver is better than not having Korver, yes.

I'm then saying that this doesn't seem utterly crazy to me, because the team is certainly relying on Korver as part of their offensive scheme, and the "shape" of Korver as a player - and hence the hole you have to fill when he's gone - is basically unique. Does not make Korver an impactor like this in general, but if a team finds great success with a set of players that no one sees as individually that talented, a major factor might be the most unusual player in the mix.

They certainly leverage him for a given set of possessions over the length of starter's minutes to enable the rest of their offense, yes. This isn't new. Going back to 09-10, this is now the 3rd season where he's leading the league in 3P%, second consecutive (assuming he keeps it up through the remainder of the season) and hasn't shot under 41.5% in that time. He's been basically the best 3pt specialist in league history, really, and his 3P% has actually risen with his increasing volume, which is also somewhat crazy. Keep in mind, this is a guy who took 6.8 3PA/g back in 04-05 (his 2nd NBA season) and shot 40.5%, which is Ray-Ray/Reggie type territory. His insane 3pt shooting has been true of him since his first season, and is only growing more so as his career progresses. Since joining the Hawks in 12-13, he's been 2nd, 1st and now 1st again (so far) in 3P%.

Now, having established that, and knowing that his volume isn't that different from the past two seasons, and that he's been a high-end outlier ITO 3P% anyway, it looks like you're overplaying his efficacy. There were two years of comparable offensive performance with Korver still shooting 45.7 and 47.2% from 3 on 5.6 and 5.5 3PA/g (compared to 53.7 on 5.8 this year).

Their tactics haven't changed all that much compared to the previous two seasons. He's actually shooting less frequently by 1.4 FGA100 than his first season, and 0.4 less than last year. He took 9.5 3PA100 in his first season, then 8.3 and now 9.0.

So again, we're running into some basic markers of the Hawks using him in a fairly similar fashion for two-plus years now. Yes, his specific efficacy is now higher than it's ever been, but his usage has been very steady (14.5, 14.2, 14.4%), his shot distribution very much the same. His AST% rose in his second season, but his current rate is lower than that. Turnover rate is higher than either previous season. His TS% is roughly 9% higher and his ORTG is 9 points higher. So we're seeing similar tactics, similar overall possession results in terms of volume and passing, worse turnovers but that efficiency gap is massive.

Now you watch Atlanta and you see him doing the same things, only he's just murdering it at an historic level. But in tandem with the bounce-back of Millsap, Horford's health and a career season from Teague, and given the proportion of offense which Korver represents, I think you're over-representing the reliance upon Korver.

Reliance is a very strong word. They don't rely specifically on Korver. This is clear. His usage is too low and the team is still staffed with players who are playing at a very high level offensively in terms of their on/off picture. Not quite as high as he, but we're seeing the results of small possession usage projected out over a volume of possessions used. 115 ORTG is really nice until you realize that he's using something like 10.2 possessions per game using a rough formula (FGA +.475 FTA -ORB + TOV, divided by 47 GP). There are 15 minutes per game or so where he's not on the court, and in that time, the team's offensive rating is tanked according to raw on/off, a difference of nearly +15 ORTG in his favor...

But keep in mind which lineups those are. The top lineups without Korver by minutes-played are:

Teague/Sefo/Carroll/Millsap/Antic (50.2 MP)
Schroder/Mack/Sefo/Scott/Horford (39.8 MP)
Schroder/Sefo/Carroll/Millsap/Horford (38.6 MP)
Teague/Bazemore/Carroll/Millsap/Antic (26.2 MP)
Teague/Sefo/Carroll/Millsap/Brand (22.8 MP)
Teague/Bazemore/Carroll/Millsap/Horford (21.1 MP)
Schroder-Mack-Sefolosha-Scott-Antic (20.1 MP)
Schroder-Sefolosha-Carroll-Scott-Horford (18.1 MP)
Schroder-Mack-Carroll-Scott-Horford (17.2 MP)


So now we have an idea of what's going on when Korver's not on the floor, yes? You can see how often Schroder is at the point instead of 113 ORTG Jeff Teague. Obviously, the 82games.com is a game or so behind, but by around a game.

In any case, you see the following:

Schroder: 49 GP in the NBA prior to this season. No 3pt range, 99 ORTG, 18.1% TOV, 51.7% TS...

Basically, he's crap. And a good chunk of Atlanta's minutes without Korver have him on the floor. Many of them include Shelvin Mack and Thabo Sefolosha, with a brief appearance from Kent Bazemore.

So...

Bazmore: Couple of < 70 GP seasons behind him, shooting almost 39% from 3 on 1.1 3PA/g. 49.9% TS, 90 ORTG. 17.2% TOV

Another guy no one is writing home about. He has the range, but he represents with Schroder a backcourt that is wholly ineffectual at this time in terms of producing anywhere near even an average ORTG. That, and the sample size, are contributing a chunk to this outlier on/off you've referenced.

But let's look at Korver's more common replacements, Mack and Sefo.

Mack: 3 years behind him, not hitting the 3 effectively (< 31%), 99 ORTG, 46.6% TS

Sefo: 29.2% 3P, 107 ORTG, 50.8% TS

Not the greatest scorer, but he's got around an average ORTG (actually +1.3).



Now, having noted these things and in conjunction with the aforementioned impact of Millsap's rebound, Horford's health and Teague's career season, it starts to look a lot more like the huge gap is at least somewhat mollified by crap reserves and those other contextual factors I mentioned. Korver is very good, but there is so much situational evidence which suggests that there's a LOT more to Atlanta's offensive success than his presence.

Just going back into history, before I joined RealGM as a Nash proponent my initial reaction to Phoenix' success was skepticism toward Nash. I said things like, "Sure, Nash is a great passer, and he can shoot well, but we've seen the impact he has with that, and it's nothing close to what can be explained in Phoenix. Amare on the other hand is an ultra-dominant 1st option scorer who many thought had superstar potential who now seems to be making it happen."

This is something that has been retroactively proven false as far as healthy Amare without Nash and then of course with the sustained offensive excellence of the Suns without Amare (and even Marion). And of course, while Nash was also a minutes-limited guy, his possession usage and actual time-with-ball was very, very different than Korver.

What I'm saying is that when a team has far more success than anyone anticipated,

Yes, and their defensive improvement is actually the most notable difference between this and any previous season under the current regime. They've had Korver before. They had him last year at over 47% from 3 on similar volume, and it didn't produce the same results... though there were other contextual factors holding them back. It doesn't seem the logical extension that his play is responsible for a significant portion of what's going on this year... without a new coach, but with all of these other things going on and the situation as I described above.

We're more than halfway through the year now, and Korver has a big lead on this front compared to his teammates.

2 points per 100 possessions of raw ON/OFF ORTG, yes. And raw on/off isn't accounting for the obvious dearth of quality beneath him.

Right now, Atlanta's offense is better than its defense for the first time since '09-10 based on where it stands in efficiency relative to the league, and they have the #2 TS% in the entire league behind the utterly loaded Golden State. I have no problem saying that their success is pretty balanced being good on both sides, but the shocking part of their success right now is certainly the offense more than the defense.

I'm inclined to disagree, because the level of offensive production they have right now isn't all that alarming in its efficacy compared to the league environment or to the last decade of NBA basketball.

Second, I mentioned ORtg, and then you mentioned ORtg, but i was using team ORtg and you were using individual ORtg. I need to be clear that these aren't the same things for the sake of others following along here:

I'm mixing both, depending on which component I'm discussing, yes.

I really don't take individual ORtg very seriously

Right, but it's reflective of on-court action just as much as is on/off data... with many of the same stipulations. Controlling for minutes and volume of possessions, for example.

I don't really get why we're still circling over this. Teague's having a career year, Horford's healthy, Millsap's returned to his standard level of performance. These factors alone are enough to justify significant improvement over the previous season... which is something we're seeing. Budenholzer's in his second season, so the team has had time to adjust to him a little more.

We're seeing a radical improvement in their defensive markers compared to basically the same team last season under the same coach. Say what you will of DRTG, but there is a -4.4 difference, and their position relative to league average went from -0.3 to -3.7. Now examine the components.

A year ago, the Hawks' opponent eFG% was 19th in the league, they were 17th in DRB%. Flash forward a year and, ignoring DRTG to focus on these things, they're 10th in opp eFG%, and 6th in opp 3P% (20th last year). They even got better relative to league average in terms of generating turnovers.

So this defensive improvement can't be handwaved away either, because it's coming in tangible areas that don't require you to buy into DRTG as an illustrative statistic.

They play at a pace of 93.8 this year compared to 94.6 last year. Less than a possession per game of difference. Their opp PPG has gone from 101.5 (15th) to 96.1 (2nd). They are currently scoring 103.4 ppg compared to 101.0.

So regardless of your feelings towards DRTG, it's evident that they have improved defensively by basically any available angle of statistical measure. This cannot be ignored; it is a significant component of their team success. You can't look at a team moving from average defense to top-tier defense and ignore that as a component of their change in W/L success.

Yes, the offense has been a lot better, but there are more voluminous reasons for that than a change in 3P% from Korver, who is otherwise identical in his on-court behavior compared to last year. He's giving you a way higher pay off per possession than even last year, but he also uses a very limited number of possessions per game and his impact on the D really isn't that different compared to last season. At 47% on nearly 6 attempts per game while moving off-ball and being able to pop it effectively from 16-23 feet and showcasing more than capable passing, there's a productive limit to what the defense does. They try to stay on him. That's no different from last year. It warps the D, certainly, but the effect is comparable.



Naturally, I'm not arguing that he has a positive impact: I think it's long-since passed that we both realize that each of us values Korver at a borderline AS level, which has its own set of baseline implications about the player. I do feel, though, that either you don't understand my position (which I doubt strongly), that you're overvaluing Korver or that we're basically saying the same thing and are tripping up on semantics. I'm inclined to believe it's one of the latter two, but not sure which at this stage.

He's effecting an impact beyond a conventional spot-up specialist because he's the best in the league at what he does, that much is clear. You can't just pull the usual routines on him as a defense. You mostly sit tight, and fight HARD when he goes around screens, or you're screwed. It's true that the team is better with him on than with him off, that's a given.

That said, this whole conversation began with you saying that you thought that if anyone on the Hawks should be discussed, it should be Korver. I take great issue with that, because he's very clearly not the core of their attack on either end of the floor. He has nothing to do with their defensive improvement, which is a demonstrable truth of their team performance this season... and since you don't believe he's worth a +5 ORTG improvement by your own earlier admission (unless I misread), then it's very clear that the core is much more relevant to their team success.

In fact, you said:

Let's be clear: I'm not attributing everything in Atlanta to Korver's improvement. What I"m saying is that there's a synergistic effect going on that makes it very difficult to assign credit based on individual stats, and the stats we have without such issues favor Korver.

This, of course, makes a very basic kind of sense given the contextual factors I'm thrashing like a dead horse, because of their obvious significance.

Then you said this:

team is certainly relying on Korver as part of their offensive scheme, and the "shape" of Korver as a player - and hence the hole you have to fill when he's gone - is basically unique

With this, I passionately disagree. The level of effect is unique, certainly, but the shape of it is an off-ball shooter... which is basically the oldest style of player in this sport... and we've seen something like 35 years of 3pt shooting now, so we've seen guys moving for that kind of shot as well. We've seen specialists and even stars who base their offense around the same, so there's really not a ton different in root concept about what Korver does. The hole you have to fill when he's gone is a high-efficiency catch-and-shoot guy who can play the 2 and the 3.

The efficiency is ridiculously high, of course, and that's a gap no one else in the league is going to fill, that's true. But to say that they "rely" on him is not really accurate. They rely on spacing, dribble penetration and the PnR. Atlanta's PnX play is facilitated by Teague and their very effective bigs, Millsap and Horford. There is a baseline level of efficacy on offense as it stands, and Korver is far more replaceable than those guys, most especially given Teague's current level of performance. That action is the baseline of their performance.

Budenholzer has employed Korver precisely as he should, of course. He's maximizing the effectiveness by using him as a decoy, using him to stretch the floor, and otherwise milking his efficacy from 3 without asking him to do more than he should.


Maybe I'm taking issue with your semantics. Words like "rely" resonate with me, since he's clearly not the platform upon which they build their basic strategy, but rather a component thereof. Now, if you twist that to mean "to reach this specific level of offensive efficacy," it gets a little more accurate, but even then, it's still not wholly accurate given all that has changed over the past two seasons and the minimal number of possessions that Korver actually uses.

See where I'm coming from? At this point, I'm trying to sort out where the conceptual gap is. You don't believe he's a huge impactor, but you're dismissing the other guys in favor of Korver in terms of discussion, which to me is dissonant with the way the team actually plays the game. And then the portion of your post I've now quoted twice now, where you say you don't attribute the whole of their success to Korver. I'm wondering how much of that success you do attribute to him.

Korver shouldn't be mentioned here either, but of the Hawks ensemble cast, when we write about them, the one to be writing about is Korver.

And this right here is what I'm talking about.

This doesn't seem to make sense in my mind. His impact can only be extended so far, particularly given volume of possessions and the actual tactics the Hawks employ. Yes, they use Korver in off-ball situations to draw D, expend energy, have them chase him around screens, and for him to provide basically the best single-possession pay out it the league when he does bother to get involved in a recordable possession. But he's a complement to the system, a component there of, not its foundation. They don't build everything they do off of Kyle Korver. They do that with their PG-PF/C dynamic. Shooters are the thing which they use to enable that dynamic.

So as you've said, we go back & forth not quite connecting. For the most part I just want to acknowledge that I've always respected your viewpoint and you bring plenty of good points up even when I disagree.

To some specifics (EDIT - which again turned out to be quite a few I guess)

-You're going in to details and making the case that what we're seeing right now is that the composition of the Hawks' lineups is imbalanced, which makes Korver look like a bigger deal than he really is. Okay, fine, but even if that's the explanation, if he's the guy you really can't do without, then why wouldn't he be your team's MVP?

-But, is that really what you're hanging your hat on? It's not the impression I got before, and it's also something said very easily, so it's hard for me to think you really buy that that's the reason for the +/- edge. I feel like you think it's basically a fluke that won't continue. Am I wrong?

-You're still insisting that defense is the notable improvement, and I don't get this. You brought up numbers on this, I came back with numbers that seem to definitively say you're wrong. Atlanta has a better team ORtg than DRtg this year, and this wasn't the case for the past few years. That's literally stating that offense has improved more than defense. I don't see what the wiggle room is here unless you wanted to make a case that come playoff time you had more confidence in their defense than offense - which I would totally get. But this year so far, offense is the bigger improvement as to what has caused the competitive advantage against the other teams in the league.

I'm not saying you can't talk abut the defense too, and I'm certainly not saying you can't talk about balance, but when you talk as if offense is a minor change compared to the defense it literally makes me think one of us is just confused, and I keep going back to look at the stats and check myself, but I keep seeing the same stuff.

-On individual ORtg. My meh attitude toward it, in this context, is that stat isn't really designed to be used on its own to say something about particular player's abilities, and as such I'm just not in the habit of looking at it outside of the Advanced section of a team where I see everything else. I do look at it, but I don't use it to try to say "well he's not that valuable, look at how good his teammates look with ORtg".

-On Korver being unique. He's the best there is at something very important. None of the other guys can anything like that. That's why I say his "shape" is unique. Fine to point out there are others who play the same role as he does, but like I say, others play that role because it's such a winner for teams, and if you're the best at such a "winner" of a role, that's no small thing.

Put another way: The nature of specialists is that in some contexts they sometimes can't fit in and contribute value. This doesn't mean that in the right context they can't add tremendous value. Atlanta right now is clearly the right context for a guy hitting off-ball 3's on a level we've never seen before.

-On Coach Bud, well he's clearly the one deserving praise beyond all others here. I don't really have any doubt that in the hands of some coaches, this Hawk team is going through another mediocre year.

-On "they rely on spacing", well yeah, that's the point. It's clearly a coaching scheme that's doing all it can to max out the spacing, and any coach doing that is going to love having possibly the GOAT off-ball 3-point shooter at his disposal, right? Again, people seem to look at that role like it's dime-a-dozen, and it is if you're talking about more normal guys, but why wouldn't you expect some additional scaled spacing impact once a shooter has a scary enough reputation?

-In terms of me saying Korver's the one to talk about, and you taking issue because you see a core that sets that up. As I've said, the one to really talk about is Coach Bud, who is setting all this up. I also don't mean to say that you absolutely can't talk about the other Hawks, but if you're asking me about a specific noteworthy salient talent that the Hawks have that others don't on the floor, it's Korver's shooting. We've never seen numbers like it before, and his team is doing amazing, until he leaves the floor. I don't feel comfortable saying that this is a coincidence.

[Coxy]

Can you guys just phone each other and talk it out. Those posts are ridiculously long.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Can you guys just phone each other and talk it out. Those posts are ridiculously long.

Haha i read through a bunch of tsherkin's post and scrolled down to see how much was left and i was like screw this

[tsherkin]

So as you've said, we go back & forth not quite connecting. For the most part I just want to acknowledge that I've always respected your viewpoint and you bring plenty of good points up even when I disagree.

I reply in kind. It's a stirring conversation.

-You're going in to details and making the case that what we're seeing right now is that the composition of the Hawks' lineups is imbalanced, which makes Korver look like a bigger deal than he really is. Okay, fine, but even if that's the explanation, if he's the guy you really can't do without, then why wouldn't he be your team's MVP?

Because I think this year, they'd be fine with a conventional 3pt shooting specialist in his stead and would be harmed more by getting undercut in their frontcourt or if Teague was performing at a lower level. I do not believe Korver to be the keystone piece to their efficacy on offense, and since D has been a big part of their shift, I think that he's even less a key component of their total team success than is being implied.

I feel like you think it's basically a fluke that won't continue. Am I wrong?

I don't think Atlanta's success this season, nor Korver's, is a fluke, no. I think it a combination of excellent performances and coaching leading to marked success.

-You're still insisting that defense is the notable improvement, and I don't get this. You brought up numbers on this, I came back with numbers that seem to definitively say you're wrong. Atlanta has a better team ORtg than DRtg this year, and this wasn't the case for the past few years. That's literally stating that offense has improved more than defense. I don't see what the wiggle room is here unless you wanted to make a case that come playoff time you had more confidence in their defense than offense - which I would totally get. But this year so far, offense is the bigger improvement as to what has caused the competitive advantage against the other teams in the league.

I showed more than the ORTG/DRTG angle, though. Anyway, that discussion was to show that given that Korver only produced a SHARE of the ORTG boost by your own admission, the fact that others composed the remaining share AND the defensive improvement sort of makes my point along that angle, yes?

Also FWIW...

ORTG: +3.9 over 13-14
DRTG: -4.4 compared to 13-14

So no, the defense by that measure has improved more than the offense.

-On individual ORtg. My meh attitude toward it, in this context, is that stat isn't really designed to be used on its own to say something about particular player's abilities, and as such I'm just not in the habit of looking at it outside of the Advanced section of a team where I see everything else. I do look at it, but I don't use it to try to say "well he's not that valuable, look at how good his teammates look with ORtg".

It's certainly a stat where you have to control for minutes and usage, I agree. Of course, the same is true of something like 3P% or TS%. That's basically just a truth of basketball, where real information drawn from stats still requires context.

Put another way: The nature of specialists is that in some contexts they sometimes can't fit in and contribute value. This doesn't mean that in the right context they can't add tremendous value. Atlanta right now is clearly the right context for a guy hitting off-ball 3's on a level we've never seen before.

I still don't agree with this entirely, because I think at some point, you're gaining the efficiency but not an improvement in impact on the D, which has been an angle you've played through this conversation. I don't think his "shape" as a player changes as a result. It gives him impact, and it is the root of our agreement that he should likely have been a late AS reserve or injury replacement or something, but I do not agree that he's unique to an extent worth mentioning.

-On "they rely on spacing", well yeah, that's the point. It's clearly a coaching scheme that's doing all it can to max out the spacing, and any coach doing that is going to love having possibly the GOAT off-ball 3-point shooter at his disposal, right? Again, people seem to look at that role like it's dime-a-dozen, and it is if you're talking about more normal guys, but why wouldn't you expect some additional scaled spacing impact once a shooter has a scary enough reputation?

See above, re: diminishing returns on spacing. He's certainly the best floor-spacing piece in the league right now, and that's got more value than your conventional 40%, 2 3PA/g specialist at the 1 or wherever, of course. He's also more versatile than just "stand in the pocket, catch and shoot" as well, which is worthwhile./

-In terms of me saying Korver's the one to talk about, and you taking issue because you see a core that sets that up. As I've said, the one to really talk about is Coach Bud, who is setting all this up. I also don't mean to say that you absolutely can't talk about the other Hawks, but if you're asking me about a specific noteworthy salient talent that the Hawks have that others don't on the floor, it's Korver's shooting. We've never seen numbers like it before, and his team is doing amazing, until he leaves the floor. I don't feel comfortable saying that this is a coincidence.

And I still think that you're looking at this team and really not giving proper the other factors their proper due. We've been talking about this for a while now and you really haven't acknowledged the career level of performance from Jeff Teague at all, nor the difference in their frontcourt with Horford healthy and Millsap playing very well. I also think you're forgetting about 09-10, when the team was even better on O than they are now, and leaning so very heavily on a guy who played less than half a season last year in Horford, which sort of puts into context the relative merits of this offensive style. So let's run that: for 2+ seasons, this team has been worse than they were WITHOUT Korver in that season, but with the contributions of one guy who was notably absent last year.

You keep circling back to Korver as this impressive talent, and he is, but you have to realize that the bulk of their offense is shouldered by other players. At 10 possessions per game, I think his impact can be stretched only so far, regardless of how efficient, and regardless of his spacing effect. Again, spacing is all about the defense's tactics in handling a player without the ball. It's the effect they have on making the D reluctant to leave them and careful in how they choose to rotate. Past a given point, you can't make them that much more concerned, and I'm fairly certain Korver was at that peak last season. This year, his production is even better in terms of efficiency, but his total possessions, still about the same, the warping effect visibly similar when watching the games. You look at the team, you see him doing better: that's clearly a part of the team's improvement, but adding Millsap's improvement together with Teague's career season and 16/7 on 117 ORTG / 58% TS from Al Horford is pretty significant as well. It's been 3 years since Horford was this healthy / effective (after rocking 110 and 109 in between, his turnovers are way down and his passing way up in efficacy).

These are significant factors. Those are big, BIG differences in their team disposition on offense compared to the past two seasons and more. They've had Korver for 2 previous seasons and not even approached this level of offensive efficacy. Obviously, he wasn't quite this efficient either, but we've talked about the deviation in his efficiency and his value. He's been one of the two highest-percentage shooters in the league at nearly identical volume his entire time in Atlanta. The major differences, then, are the performances of players who've got a couple of full seasons next to Korver's spacing effect already.

Based on that, I can't look at Korver this year and say that he's the lynchpin of offensive efficacy. It defies logic. There are THREE different players who are operating at levels well above what they've managed in two previous seasons alongside Korver, so you have to really, REALLY stretch belief over a 10 POSS/g guy to suggest his impact is good enough for that... and then you dismiss that anyway, because both Horford and Millsap have played at this level WITHOUT Korver already on more than one occasion. It's more of a "return to form" than anything else and in Horford's case, a return to health.

I keep circling back to that point, it's the biggest hump I have here: there are multiple factors which would seem to be larger in their impact on the team offense, so I'm having trouble making a conceptual leap to "it's gotta be Korver." If this were his first season in Atlanta, or even his first season as an outlier performer from 3 in volume, then I'd be happier to hop along with what you're saying, but everything I see points in a totally different direction along multiple avenues. He looks like a component, not the major reason, at least IMHO.

[Optms]

Green font? If you guys can't be bothered reading something solely because its too long, just skip over it. This isn't Twitter.

[ufsports]

Green font? If you guys can't be bothered reading something solely because its too long, just skip over it. This isn't Twitter.

They're talking about Kyle Korver in an MVP thread.
Anyway, I feel like Curry is above everyone but James Harden and LeBron are just a step behind

[tsherkin]

If you're too lazy to read a post, skip it instead of making derailing comments. Korver is on topic re: MVP candidates on the Hawks and outlier performances. If you don't like it, take advantage of the 'Page Down' button on your keyboard.

[KazuoOda]

Lebron nor Curry should win MVP this year.
Lebron for obvious reasons and GSW has the bass god that is KT.

Harden all day.

[olive_triangurl]

I agree, Harden is carrying the most load of the superstars, and his stat line is the most impressive too, so I'd give him my vote.
But there is a pattern in MVP voting whereby the team with the best win/loss record will most likely have the MVP (if they have a high-profile star at least), so I'm resigned to Curry winning MVP.
But its not impossible for Golden State to slip behind Houston, and Curry would absolutely lose the MVP if that happened.

[jangles86]

Don't have a page down button on an iPhone. Nearly get RSI scrolling so far. Kyle Korver does not belong in an mvp thread.

[inquisitive]

Lebron nor Curry should win MVP this year.
Lebron for obvious reasons and GSW has the bass god that is KT.

Harden all day.

Agree...Harden all day....hey, just like letting AOA and Apink battle it out while Nine Muses just sneaks in for the win!! haha

[Ballerhogger]

Lebron nor Curry should win MVP this year.
Lebron for obvious reasons and GSW has the bass god that is KT.

Harden all day.

Agree...Harden all day....hey, just like letting AOA and Apink battle it out while Nine Muses just sneaks in for the win!! haha

i don't see how unless GSW has worst record by the end of the day. Which i don't see happening. With no Dwight for a month.

[Bondman]

LOL, Jordan's stats were always amazing, but he only won 5 MVPS

In most cases if the superstar of a team is absent then that team will not win a lot (except for the teams with great defense like Chicago), so you can't really give MVP votes to LeBron based purely on that. I've never seen the MVP awarded that way

Heh, I know the point you're trying to make re: Jordan's MVPs, it's just funny to hear it said that way. That's more MVPs than anyone not named Jabbar, Russell, and probably Mikan (if the BAA/NBA had an MVP award at that time).

I totally agree that voters have never crowned an MVP for value based on absence. I just need a single logical argument or good evidence to change my mind about this (or any subject, for that matter). I've seen nothing in this thread to convince me otherwise, despite reading many posts about how well a team performs with or without its MVP candidate. That argument is better suited for determining the "best player".

However, the MVP is historically a "best winner" award, not a "best player" award.

[olive_triangurl]

However, the MVP is historically a "best winner" award, not a "best player" award.

Yep, or best winner in the regular season anyway, because sometimes the MVP turns out to be a real loser in the playoffs.

[dautjazz]

Kind of depends where the records end up. I think Cleveland can and will catch up to Houston, record wise, and Lebron's production is not far behind Harden's. Curry's production is somewhere in the middle between the two, and his team's record is far better. I think Curry has by far the most help, but it's not easy to keep those numbers up when you got tons of options on the team either. If Curry can stay in the stratosphere of Harden and Lebron, and have a few more wins by season's end, I think Curry may deserve it. It's a 3 horse race, but I think Davis could get into the picture if his team ends up in the playoffs too.

[olive_triangurl]

As far as MVP is concerned LeBron can't even sniff Curry's jockstrap.
Its more lopsided than when Rose won it, because Golden State is extremely superior to Cleveland.
If Cleveland's horrible defense met Golden State in the NBA Finals, it'd be an absolute blow-out.
And because Golden State is such a machine (like Nash's Phoenix was but GS is clearly winning a lot more games) I wouldn't be surprised if Curry wins the next couple of MVPs.
This season was the big opportunity for LeBron to win MVP (because the media could use the logic of "look how much Cleveland improved compared to last year") but Golden State's absolute domination makes it impossible to give the MVP to anyone but Curry.
And Curry is the player I dislike more than anyone else in the NBA btw.

[stayeduptolate]

As far as MVP is concerned LeBron can't even sniff Curry's jockstrap.
Its more lopsided than when Rose won it, because Golden State is extremely superior to Cleveland.
If Cleveland's horrible defense met Golden State in the NBA Finals, it'd be an absolute blow-out.
And because Golden State is such a machine (like Nash's Phoenix was but GS is clearly winning a lot more games) I wouldn't be surprised if Curry wins the next couple of MVPs.
This season was the big opportunity for LeBron to win MVP (because the media could use the logic of "look how much Cleveland improved compared to last year") but Golden State's absolute domination makes it impossible to give the MVP to anyone but Curry.
And Curry is the player I dislike more than anyone else in the NBA btw.

just curious why do you hate curry so much?

[olive_triangurl]

just curious why do you hate curry so much?

His mouth-guard, his personality and the way he falls over after attempting almost wide-open threes.....

[stayeduptolate]

just curious why do you hate curry so much?

His mouth-guard, his personality and the way he falls over after attempting almost wide-open threes.....

fair enough so I am guessing you do not want him to be a Hornet?