2011-12 RealGM Player of the Year Discussion Thread

[GrangerDanger]

You serious? Give me a break. They've played the Knicks missing their starting PG for the entire series, backup PG for most the series, and their PF and C for awhile too (crappy 7 seed), then the Pacers (in contention for worst 3 seed ever, coming from a Pacers fan) who were missing their backup C the entire year, now they play the Celtics missing their starting SG and starting C. And this is in an era where the talent is more diluted and rules favor perimeter players. Best this decade? Not even close, so of course it's not best alltime

[StateOfThunder]

I'm really not sure why Dirk is on here. Are you guys seriously going to not punish the guy for playing like complete horse crap in the beginning of the season? Dirk literally had to sit out games just to condition himself into basketball shape and he was just playing awful all season up until the all-star break.

[Boognish]

Best this decade? Not even close, so of course it's not best alltime

He's putting up insane numbers, Bosh is hurt, Wade is a shadow of himself, if Miami takes it and Lebron continues at this clip, I think you'd have to at least consider it.

[mysticbb]

I'm really not sure why Dirk is on here. Are you guys seriously going to not punish the guy for playing like complete horse crap in the beginning of the season? Dirk literally had to sit out games just to condition himself into basketball shape and he was just playing awful all season up until the all-star break.

Nowitzki missed 4 games, others missed more. He had 22 ppg on 58 TS% in the first 7 games, then his knee got sore and he had problems, which forced the missed games. After that he had 25 ppg on 59 TS% in the last 11 games before the All-Star Break. I would hardly call that "awful". In fact over the last 47 games of the season Nowitzki had in average 24.5 points on 58 TS% in 35 minutes of playing time. That is 2/3 of the season.

At the end of the season, Nowitzki was leading all starting players in non-prior informed RAPM, leading all players in prior informed RAPM, had by far the highest 2yr APM value. His Net+/- was +13.3, 4th best among players with 1000+ minutes played. And all that while playing through those knee problems and only missing 4 games. Obviously, Nowitzki gets punished for his missed games and his weaker performance, but his playing level was actually not awful at all in average, it just seems as some people lost a bit perspective due to the incredible performance level he had last season.


DS, why would you pick Nash over Nowitzki? The Mavericks without Nowitzki played worse than the Suns without Nash, while the Mavericks with Nowitzki played better than the Suns with Nash. No idea, but Nash also missed 4 games and played overall less minutes than Nowitzki. And what exactly is Bryant doing in your list?

[ElGee]

Well, my measurement says that James was last season 1 pt per 100 possession better with the ball than Nowitzki, that leaves about 2.5 points Nowitzki added over James per 100 possessions. James used up more possessions with the ball, that means we are at about 3 points per 100 possessions Nowitzki adds over James due to his ability off-the-ball and created spacing. And for those 3pts you are giving a big part of the credit to Nowitzki's teammates.

Can you elaborate on this on vs off method?

[Vinsanity420]

These 3 -

1. LeBron
2. Durant
3. Paul

Amongst the rest, 1 Year Adj+/- this year had Nash as leader( Paul level +/-), followed by Dirk. Howard and KG don't measure up to a guy like Kevin Love in the RS, which matches my eye test. Wade had some great nights and some so so nights, just like the playoffs. Westbrook is higher than Wade/Howard/KG in the RS, and his playoff +/- is dominant. Kobe is nowhere in the Top 25 area.

My top three I am basically 100% on. Paul dominated in the RS and up until he went down with injury... after that, he was playing with injury. That's around 6 playoff games or so, and putting him out of the Top 5 for the other 60 games during the RS and the 5 games or so in the playoffs he was healthy for is going too far. Basically, if you're putting Paul out of the Top 5, you're counting each playoff game as... I don't know, 5 regular season games? Going too far IMO.

Kobe was bad this year, relative to his standards. Seriously, for most of the season he had genuinely horrible nights. Chucking at historic levels was not maximizing the potential of that team. People were re-considering his status of Top 10 until the playoffs roll around. He was good in the playoffs, but it wasn't enough to place him over Paul's overall work. Kobe's not in the discussion for me.

KG came alive after the all star break... the move to full time C helped his floor impact a lot. I would take him over Dwight, definitely. He puts in the heart and effort that you won't see from Dwight at all.

Dwight absolutely killed our team chemistry this year with his off court antics. Oh, and then there's him missing 12 RS games and the playoffs. By the numbers, his impact wasn't dominant. So really, I don't have a reason to place him up there. He's not a Top 5 candidate for me.

I like Nash this year. As usual he made a big impact with sound decision making. I am extremely impressed by what he did with the Suns. Dirk started off slow but ended the year strong, as +/- shows. Westbrook has played very well in the playoffs.

So I got Nash, Westbrook, KG and Dirk vying for the 4 and 5 spots this year.

[Black Feet]

Lebron
Durant
Kobe
CP3
Westbrook

[bastillon]

Basically, if you're putting Paul out of the Top 5, you're counting each playoff game as... I don't know, 5 regular season games? Going too far IMO.

you think 5 RS games are worth more than 1 playoff game ? amazing. I don't understand why you treat the RS as your starting point. postseason is your starting point and RS can only be a tie-breaker.

[mysticbb]

Can you elaborate on this on vs off method?

Well, under the assumption that RAPM gives an estimate for the player's impact overall (on and off the ball) and SPM gives an estimate of the player's impact with the ball (boxscore entries are all related to stuff with the ball), I see that James had overall +4.1 on offense last season and Nowitzki +5.6. My OSPM says James had +5 with the ball and Nowitzki +4, that leaves -0.9 off for James (4.1-5=0.9) and +1.6 for Nowitzki for an overall difference of 2.5. Now, James has done more with the ball than Nowitzki, thus his overall number (offensive RAPM) has a bigger share of on-ball impact included. That's why I concluded roughly +3 difference off the ball between both. I think that is reasonable and can explain the differences in overall impact very well. Obviously it is an estimation based on a couple of assumptions.


bastillon, you have to take into account that a player with his performance level during the regular season will influence the position his team has in the playoffs. HCA is a big factor (about +3 in the NBA), helping the team to have HCA will improve their chances in the playoffs. Thus, ignoring the regular season performance here seems a bit odd to me.

[bastillon]

obviously HCA is important but it sort of seems like you're looking for an animal and try to find an ant with the elephant standing right next to you. HCA is very often less important than one bad playoff performance. thus, as I said from the beginning, I'm not entirely ignoring RS, I'm saying it matters but as a tie-breaker. if you have 2 players and one of them is clearly superior in the playoffs, then to me there's no question his value is higher in terms of winning a championship. the only problem with looking at playoffs is that sample is small and you have to take an in-depth look at context.

or look at it this way, practice is obviously important becasue that helps you win games but if you're winning games and don't practice at all, I'm still taking that. Bill Russell didn't practice when he was old. does that make him worse as a player ? if there were global stats of how practice helps you win, I'm sure it'd be a lot higher than +3 or whatever, but you can win without that boost as well.

Iverson was right all along
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHJDRgVwcP8[/youtube]

[Doctor MJ]

Basically, if you're putting Paul out of the Top 5, you're counting each playoff game as... I don't know, 5 regular season games? Going too far IMO.

you think 5 RS games are worth more than 1 playoff game ? amazing. I don't understand why you treat the RS as your starting point. postseason is your starting point and RS can only be a tie-breaker.

Well, I'd say this comes down to what I chalk up as "philosophy", which means I don't see there being one right answer.

A key thing when incorporating the playoffs for me is that I just can't get that worked up over stuff that didn't really change things.

With Paul in this case, he was horrendous against the Spurs who no one thought they'd ever be able to beat any way. It would be one thing if during this process he was exposed as a player with a glaring flaw, but the dude was just injured. So am I going to define Paul's season based on an injury at a bad time against a team where it probably didn't even change the end reasult? Nah.

[ElGee]

Can you elaborate on this on vs off method?

Well, under the assumption that RAPM gives an estimate for the player's impact overall (on and off the ball) and SPM gives an estimate of the player's impact with the ball (boxscore entries are all related to stuff with the ball), I see that James had overall +4.1 on offense last season and Nowitzki +5.6. My OSPM says James had +5 with the ball and Nowitzki +4, that leaves -0.9 off for James (4.1-5=0.9) and +1.6 for Nowitzki for an overall difference of 2.5. Now, James has done more with the ball than Nowitzki, thus his overall number (offensive RAPM) has a bigger share of on-ball impact included. That's why I concluded roughly +3 difference off the ball between both. I think that is reasonable and can explain the differences in overall impact very well. Obviously it is an estimation based on a couple of assumptions.


bastillon, you have to take into account that a player with his performance level during the regular season will influence the position his team has in the playoffs. HCA is a big factor (about +3 in the NBA), helping the team to have HCA will improve their chances in the playoffs. Thus, ignoring the regular season performance here seems a bit odd to me.

2 things to consider:

(1) Your box score metrics aren't capturing everything on the ball.
(2) If you add up both metrics based on minute weighting, do you get the proper point differential results for Miami and Dallas?

[mysticbb]

2 things to consider:

(1) Your box score metrics aren't capturing everything on the ball.
(2) If you add up both metrics based on minute weighting, do you get the proper point differential results for Miami and Dallas?

1. True, but it can explain roughly 96% of the variance in overall team performance (wins) and 98% of SOS adjusted team performance. I think that is good enough as a starting point.

2. For SPM I get the overall SOS adjusted difference between ORtg and DRtg for the season. RAPM gets pretty close to that as well. Obviously, the numbers I used are for the whole season, while the 6 game series is also influenced by variance, injuries or matchups for example. I get roughly 4 points difference between the minutes weighted ratings and the point differential for that series. If I would calculate the numbers just for the series, SPM would again be pretty close to the point differential while RAPM likely would be a little bit more off (but for sure <4).


bastillon, sorry, but your statement that "HCA is very often less important than one bad playoff performance" is just wrong or we have a different understand of what "very often" means. HCA is even a bigger thing in the playoffs than in the regular season, because in most cases the better team has the HCA anyway. And playing against the 1st seed without HCA or playing against the 8th seed with HCA is a really HUGE difference.
Regarding Chris Paul and the Clippers: I have Paul with +5.3 per 100 possessions. That makes roughly 3.2 difference per game in terms of SRS, with the SOS staying constant, we would get the Clippers winning 31 games instead of 40 without Paul. That's going from the 5th seed to the 10th seed in the West. It is just way too important to play good during the regular season as well.

[rrravenred]

Any idea of how HCA and SRS play into each other, in terms of winning probability?

[mysticbb]

Any idea of how HCA and SRS play into each other, in terms of winning probability?

Linear combination of both while each is weighted equally. HCA+SRS gives a better predictor for future game results than either of that seperately.

Example: Assume one team with +3 and another team with +5 SRS would play against each other. If the +3 team plays at home, it is expected to win by 1, while the +5 team would be expected to win by 5 at home.

[JordansBulls]

Any idea of how HCA and SRS play into each other, in terms of winning probability?

Chronz came up with this a while ago. I'll post his research on this.
For instance 1990 Bulls had HCA over the Sixers in the Semifinals but the Sixers had the better SRS rating.
Bulls in 2011 had HCA over the Heat in the ECF, but the Heat had the better SRS rating.

I cant tell you how many times Ive told JB to stop pointing at HCA or Superior Win-Loss records as an indicator of talent or predicator of team success. While SRS isnt perfect it is far and away the best single measurement we have for measuring a teams level of play. Personally my preferred method of choice includes a similar stance to SRS only limited to the teams most frequently used lineups (In the playoffs these are the only lineups used) along with a few subjective modifiers (health/performance vs good teams/playoff rep etc..). Unfortunately we only have that data for teams of recent memory so SRS/HCA will be the main prognosticator here.

I found it hilarious that one of the very first playoff series ever in 1947 between the Philly Warriors and St.Louis Bombers was also the first to prove that superior records are meaningless compared to superior efficiency differentials as the lower seeded Warriors "upset" the Bombers. In actuality however the Warriors sported the superior SRS, the overall efficiency marks and should have been favored. This happens so often that I never found it necessary to create this thread, still its an argument that needs to be filtered out of our consciousness, hopefully this will put it to rest for good.

Keep in mind this isnt meant to bash JB, I have nothing but respect for the man, hes a guy who can take everything you dish and not let it effect your relationship personally, hes always been a cool guy regardless of how much I disagree with him.


The following is a list of EVERY series where HCA/W-L Records and SRS/EFF disagreed on who to favor and who won out, as you will see this is a one sided argument. BOLD = When HCA/WIN-LOSS% actually won out

5/9
PRE-60'S ERA

Code: Select all

      1947
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Philly vs St.Louis    PHILLY

      1950
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Nationals   Lakers

[B]    1951
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Nationals vs Knicks   Knicks[/B]

      1951
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Knicks vs Celtics    Knicks Win

      1952
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Royals      Lakers

[B]      1954
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Nationals   Nationals[/B]

[B]      1957
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Warriors vs Nationals  Nationals[/B]

[B]      1959
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Pistons vs Lakers      Lakers[/B]

      1959
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Nationals vs Knicks   Nationals


5/6
The 60's

Code: Select all

      1961
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Nationals vs Warriors Nationals

      1966
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Hawks vs Bullets       Hawks

[B]      1968
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Celtics      Celtics[/B]

      1969
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Knicks vs Bullets      Knicks

      1969
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Celtics vs 76'ers       Celtics

      1969
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Celtics vs Lakers      Celtics


8/16
The 70's

Code: Select all

      1970
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Hawks       Lakers

[B]      1974
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Bulls vs Pistons       Pistons[/B]

      1976
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Bucks vs Pistons      Bucks

      1976
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Suns vs Sonics         Suns

[B]      1976
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Cavs vs Celtics         Celtics[/B]

[B]      1977
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Cavs vs Bullets       Bullets[/B]

      1977
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Blazers vs Nuggets   Blazers

[B]      1977
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Warriors vs Lakers    Lakers[/B]

      1977
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Blazers vs Lakers     Blazers

      1977
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Blazers vs 76'ers      Blazers

[B]      1978
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Sonics      Sonics[/B]

      1978
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Sonics vs Nuggets    Sonics

      1979
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Hawks vs Rockets     Hawks

[B]      1979
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Sonics       Lakers[/B]

[B]      1979
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Suns vs Sonics         Sonics[/B]

[B]      1979
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Spurs vs Wizards     Wizards[/B]

6/8
The 80's

Code: Select all

      1981
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Bulls vs Knicks         Bulls

      1982
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Bullets vs Nets        Bullets

      1984
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Knicks vs Pistons     Knicks

      1985
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Blazers vs Mavs        Blazers

      1985
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Celtics      Lakers

      1988
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Mavs vs Nuggets      Mavs

[B]      1988
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Pistons vs Lakers     Lakers[/B]

[B]      1989
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Pistons      Pistons[/B]


The 90's

7/16

Code: Select all

      1990
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Suns vs Jazz            Suns

      1990
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Suns vs Lakers         Suns

[B]      1990
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
76'ers vs Bulls          Bulls[/B]

[B]      1990
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Suns vs Blazers        Blazers[/B]

[B]      1993
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Cavs vs Bulls           Bulls[/B]

[B]      1993
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Sonics vs Suns         Suns[/B]

      1993
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Bulls vs Knicks         Bulls

[B]      1994
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Knicks vs Bulls         Bulls[/B]

[B]      1994
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Suns vs Rockets       Rockets[/B]

[B]      1994
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Knicks vs Rockets     Rockets[/B]

      1995
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Bulls vs Hornets       Bulls

      1997
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Jazz vs Spurs           Jazz

[B]      1998
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Hornets vs Hawks     Hawks[/B]

[B]      1998
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Jazz          Jazz[/B]

[B]      1999
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Pistons vs Hawks     Hawks[/B]

       1999
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Blazers vs Jazz        Blazers


10/16
The 2000's

Code: Select all

[B]       2001
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Blazers vs Lakers     Lakers[/B]

[B]       2001
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Kings vs Lakers        Lakers[/B]

[B]       2002
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Magic vs Hornets      Hornets[/B]

       2002
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Celtics vs Pistons     Celtics

       2003
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Lakers vs Twolves     Lakers

       2003
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Nets vs Pistons        Nets

       2004
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Pistons vs Pacers      Pistons

       2004
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Pistons vs Lakers      Pistons

       2005
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Pacers vs Celtics      Pacers

       2005
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Spurs vs Suns          Spurs

       2007
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Spurs vs Suns          Spurs

[B]       2007
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Bulls vs Pistons        Pistons[/B]

       2008
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Jazz vs Rockets        Jazz

[B]       2008
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Suns vs Spurs          Spurs[/B]

       2010
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Spurs vs Mavs         Spurs

[B]       2010
(SRS)      (W-L)        RESULT
Spurs vs Suns           Suns[/B]


17/28
Teams with Identical Records

1954
Celtics vs Nationals = SRS Prevails
1955
Nationals vs Pistons = SRS Fails
1956
Lakers vs Hawks = SRS Fails
1957
Lakers vs Pistons = SRS Prevails
1957
Lakers vs Hawks = SRS Prevails
1958
Royals vs Pistons = SRS Fails
1975
Celtics vs Bullets = SRS Prevails
1976
Braves vs 76'ers = SRS Prevails
1977
Spurs vs Celtics = SRS Fails
1978
Cavs vs Knicks = SRS Fails
1979
Lakers vs Nuggets = SRS Prevails
1980
Rockets vs Spurs = SRS Prevails
1981
Kings vs Rockets = SRS Prevails
1981
Celtics vs 76'ers = SRS Fails
1982
Suns vs Nuggets = SRS Prevails
1990
Blazers vs Pistons = SRS Fails
1993
Rockets vs Sonics = SRS Prevails
1996
Knicks vs Cavs = SRS Fails
1998
Spurs vs Suns = SRS Fails
1998
Lakers vs Sonics = SRS Prevails
1998
Jazz vs Bulls = SRS Prevails
1999
Lakers vs Rockets = SRS Prevails
2000
76'ers vs Hornets = SRS Fails
2001
Mavs vs Jazz = SRS Fails
2002
Lakers vs Spurs = SRS Prevails
2003
Spurs vs Mavs = SRS Fails
2008
Spurs vs Hornets = SRS Fails
2010
Jazz vs Nuggets = SRS Prevails



Summary
Out of 99 Playoff Series the team with the higher SRS won 58 times, considering HCA is suppose to be a heavy advantage this is a drastic figure. And we're not done yet, part2 of this installment will be to contextualize those scores by recognizing player availability and any other factors you guys feel will skew the results in one way or another. For example Ive excluded the Spurs vs Suns series of 2000 because Duncan was unavailable, to prevent bias this was the only series I excluded. Looking at the results however I found many such instances.

So what say you, if you were going to Vegas what system would you trust?

[rrravenred]

Niiiiice... pity he didn't post the differences in margin (both W/L and SRS) which might have been instructive. Those figures are also a bit context blind ITO personnel changes and injury, but they're an interesting starting point.

[ElGee]

2 things to consider:

(1) Your box score metrics aren't capturing everything on the ball.
(2) If you add up both metrics based on minute weighting, do you get the proper point differential results for Miami and Dallas?

1. True, but it can explain roughly 96% of the variance in overall team performance (wins) and 98% of SOS adjusted team performance. I think that is good enough as a starting point.

2. For SPM I get the overall SOS adjusted difference between ORtg and DRtg for the season. RAPM gets pretty close to that as well. Obviously, the numbers I used are for the whole season, while the 6 game series is also influenced by variance, injuries or matchups for example. I get roughly 4 points difference between the minutes weighted ratings and the point differential for that series. If I would calculate the numbers just for the series, SPM would again be pretty close to the point differential while RAPM likely would be a little bit more off (but for sure <4).

OK, and so per the original point, I'd say it's not the greatest assumption, despite the overall averages being so good. You can't just assume Dirk's a constant +2.1 off the ball while in the game, because what if he's on the court with Terry (+2.7 by this measurement) and Peja (+1.7)? I actually think this is an interesting way to try to measure off-ball impact, but it's obviously missing a little ITO of on-ball activities, the variance/accuracy of RAPM, and the interactive combinations of lineups.

The last one might not be a huge issue, except in small samples...which of course is what we are talking about when we analyze the Finals and you make the blanket starting assumption that James has to measure out 3 points better in "on-ball" measurements just to equal Dirk Nowitzki's impact. I mean hell, Dirk may just have that impact because of his situational VALUE on the Mavs and not on all other teams, and I would in no way shape or form say that means he played better than an opponent who had a backup as a clone in a single game. Know what I'm sayin?

[Doctor MJ]

Alright so some thoughts post CF:

1. LeBron, pretty easily at #1. I won't say he's clinched it, and I have no qualms about weighting the finals more, but it is going to take something huge to swing it.

2. Durant, yeah I'd say he's earned the right to move up here. He looks incredible.

3. Paul, he drops below Durant but I doubt I'll be swayed to drop him further. As mentioned, when an injury only causes you to look bad in a series you were going to lose anyway, it's hard for me to take it that seriously.

4. Garnett, a very, very impressive year. I do see him as clearly below the Big 3, but I really can't think of anyone else I'd debate over him.

5. ....

Some thoughts on some players listed so far, and thus are logical candidates for the 5th slot:

Kobe: This is one of those times that makes me question whether I really do have an irrational bias against the guy. When people praised him especially early on, all I could focus on was the negative. That being: When a volume scorer all of a sudden becomes more ball dominant, and his teammates all look more passive than they have in years, then to the extent the offense isn't working, I blame everyone involved. Blaming the supporting cast is easy and correct, but the scorer needs to recognize his part in the problem.

The Lakers of course in that time period were really quite weak in their offense, and whenever any one questioned Kobe about it, he bristled and hogged the ball more. How is that not an issue? Of course the Laker offense did improve with time...as Kobe got tired, shot worse, and dominated the ball less.

Still, I'm not going to argue that another Laker shoot be getting arguments here, and the team still was good even if a far cry from last year with Phil Jackson.

Westbrook: I've got a tough time here with Russ. Basically, even though the Thunder now look like title favorites, and a potential dynasy, with him at the helm, I still see problems with him that I wonder would be better if they moved him into a more tertiary role relative to Harden. I'm not willing to champion Harden over Westbrook either btw, and so I'm pretty unlikely to pick either of them for this list, despite the fact that I feel like Durant might be the most fortunate superstar in history for getting those two and Ibaka drafted right after him.

Wade: Actually can't remember whether anyone's listed him or not. His relative weakness as a candidate this year are clear, but if he finishes the season strong, I have a feeling he's going to be all over people's list again, and perhaps mind.

Dirk & Nash: One of these two is probably who'd I'd side with at this point in time. Super good decision makers whose teams are absolutely dependent on them, and hence, valuable, right?

Now, Nash has the rather obvious issue that his team didn't even make the playoffs. One can ask, how valuable can he be if the result of his presence only means a worse draft pick? I don't agree with that, but I will also ask:

If a team is only middling good when based around one star, and that star has an unusual game which might contribute to the team struggling when he goes off the floor, then perhaps in the big picture, he's not actually helping the team as much as he appears?

Alright, now as I say that, and acknowledge it's a reasonable question to ask about Nash, keep in mind that the Suns still have a good overall offense (9th in ORtg, and climbing as the year went on). The Mavs this year had their offense tumble to 22nd in the league while basing their offense around perhaps the most unorthodox star in the game. They still made the playoffs due to their defense, which Dirk is part of, but does it concern anyone that we're talking about a primarily offensive star here who is requiring a large amount of unusual design, and it's not even getting the team a good offense any more?

So I welcome your thoughts. Obviously, I'm critical of the candidacies of all these guys, but there are hundreds of other NBA players not even on my radar right now.

[MisterWestside]

]If Miami wins the series, you don't say "it's obvious." No one does. This, despite Dirk playing exactly the same. This is nothing I haven't said before. It's Winning Bias.

Bolded for emphasis. Another issue with bias involves posters who define LeBron's 2011 playoffs by his Finals. Um, I know recency bias is common in sports, but ask yourself this: how did LeBron get there? Especially when the 2nd best player on the team (Wade) went relatively ghost in the Bulls series? LeBron was so dominant in the earlier rounds that he didnt play a great Finals but still finished with a well above-average playoff run anyway. It's similar to Garnett in this postseason; he played a subpar game 6 and 7 in the ECF, but his performance in the earlier games helped to get his team there in the first place. Take the bad AND the good together.

Just for this playoffs, I would rank 1. LBJ 2. Durant 3. Harden 4. Garnett 5. Duncan. Harder to rank the guys after 2.