MVP Watch 2008... Part 3.

[eatyourchildren]

No no no, it's one and the same. What's best for Kobe and the Lakers is what's best for Kobe as an MVP candidate.

Why would those be divergent concepts?

Re: the game. You're expecting out of Kobe in the Triangle what you would expect out of LeBron in the Cavs offense. Those are two entirely different things. Kobe was posting and re-posting in his pinch post and wing spots repeatedly. That's him being assertive in the Triangle every bit as much as him demanding the ball at the 3pt line and driving past doubles. Like i said, if you look beyond the scoring, you would have seen Kobe playing a 2-man pick and roll game with Vladrad on at least two occasions as well passing out of the double as soon as the 2ndary defender came over to overload the strongside.

Like I said, ESPN has gotten you and other Cavs fans into thinking that there's only 1 way of taking over a 4th quarter. It's something that I know you all railed against so hard the past few years. And now you've not only surrendered to it, but you've embraced it?

[Kobay]

No one can guard LeBron. Its a matter of time before stern implements another rule preventing someone from dominating.

[NO-KG-AI]

No one can guard LeBron. Its a matter of time before stern implements another rule preventing someone from dominating.

He's pretty much done the opposite in his time.

[Elway=GOAT]

-= original quote snipped =-



Watch the Lakers game this week. Then look at Kobe Bryant's hand. Then notice that he has his 4th and pinky finger taped together. Then go online. Then google "Kobe Bryant finger". Then read about his broken finger with the completely torn ligament. Then read more about how it requires surgery. Then continue to watch him play through it.

For the year of 2008 (the year we're, you know, like, deciding the MVP for), Kobe's been as durable as LeBron and played through all his injuries, minor and major.

Believe me, im well aware of it. The guy has a cold or the stomach flu, we are all reminded of it. But you didnt say this season, you said Kobe and Iverson are ironmen look it up, and I did. I posted the stats, they have both missed significant time due to injuries. You listed Kobe as the only player playing through injuries to suit your argument. All these guys have injuries at this point in the year, all are playing well too. Its a lame argument.

[Big Bird]

your mixing two differernt things. What is best for the lakers and what is best for the case of Kobe as MVP.

The case of Kobe as MVP was far, far better served with the 52 point game where he put on the cape. The case for Kobe as MVP was not helped by the 3 recent games I referred to.

It's certainly better for the lakers as a team when the other guy's do step up, but they can certainly step up while Kobe is a bit more aggressive than he was last night. it wouldn't' take a lot from kobe to hold off the rally - a drive here and a drive there - just enough to maintain a bit of a cushion and not have it come down to the last shot.

I don't understand what you're talking about.

Kobe scored 12 or 14 straight points against New Orleans in the 3rd to help the team, but they just lost at the end. Losing your starting center in the 2nd minute is a shock you know. He scored 24 points in the second helf alone to try to get a win out of New Orleans. Here, I even have a quote for you:"The Hornets scored the first eight points of the third quarter and led 60-53 after Paul's fastbreak layup. Bryant kept it close a while longer by scoring the Lakers' next 13 points, hitting two 3s, making three free throws after being fouled on the perimeter and converting a three-point play on a driving dunk. The spurt helped the Lakers tie it at 65. Unlike the last times these teams met, the Hornets remained on the offensive."

^^Yeah, that was such a shameful effort, clearly not MVP-worthy.

He had a bad performance against Houston, no one can argue that. I wonder how many people rode James after his 7-24 against Boston or his back to back losses against the Nets and Wizards? I for one, didn't. I understand that these players are in the end, humans... bad games will happen. Nothing worth getting your/our panties wet about.

But okay, Houston and New Orleans in your opinion don't help his case. Fine. But for you to insinuate that yesterday's game against Dallas doesn't help his case is laughable at least. Let me bold what I believe is important:he was the reason the Lakers with a depleted roster missing their entire center line and a defensive stopper in amidst of the toughest roadtrip in the past 35 years (for the franchise) were up by 25 points with 5 minutes to go in the 3rd. He got the 4th foul and sat... the Lakers lost half of their lead and had Odom ran out the clock like you're supposed to do the last three by Terry wouldn't have happened and there wouldn't be so much momentum on their part. Then he came in and made a couple of big baskets (which of course went unnoticed by you, you just like to point out how he scored only 5 in that time). On top of that he got injured with 4 minutes left and grind it out and played and the team won. The Mavs had 4 losses on their home court before, after the Emergency Room also known as the Lakers came, they have 5. If you can't appreciate that, there is something severly wrong with you and you perception of things.

Furthermore... about you adressing the Lakers fan as not happy about this win. What? So they squandered the lead against the second best home team in the entire league without some of their key players (btw, I had this game chalked up as a loss when we still had Gasol) ... I could care less. Bigger leads have been erased. The important thing is that they held on and got the W. You do understand that winning in such games can be a huge character builder for the young players, don't you? And the knowledge that they can run over one of the top teams in their house with two of their starting centers missing also adds to this. Yeah, it wasn't the prettiest of wins, but if anyone honestly believed that the Lakers would keep up the 1st half show and that Kidd, Howard and Nowitzki would let them make fun of them infront of their fans, they are a bit deluded about this team. And it also shows what standard Kobe is held up to. James and the Cavs have beaten the first good team since Orlando in February and it's a big statement all of a sudden. Good for them, for him and for you. I can't wait to read some comments when the Lakers lose tonight in Utah. I bet he as the MVP front-runner is expected to pull out another win out of his ass, right?

A lot of you make really valid and thorough arguments and points and I really enjoy reading your posts. But some of you seriously need to stop sipping that Haterade.

cheers

[G35]

your mixing two differernt things. What is best for the lakers and what is best for the case of Kobe as MVP.

The case of Kobe as MVP was far, far better served with the 52 point game where he put on the cape. The case for Kobe as MVP was not helped by the 3 recent games I referred to.

It's certainly better for the lakers as a team when the other guy's do step up, but they can certainly step up while Kobe is a bit more aggressive than he was last night. it wouldn't' take a lot from kobe to hold off the rally - a drive here and a drive there - just enough to maintain a bit of a cushion and not have it come down to the last shot.

Nope, your wrong here. The case for MVP is strengthened by winning games. All the stats in the world aren't going to help you if your team loses.

MVP's help their team win games. That's the #1 criteria..........

[INKtastic]

I never mentioned the New Orleans game - I talked about the Kings game (1 point 4th quarter), the Rockets game (2 points in the last 6 minutes) and the Dallas game (3 points in the last 11 minutes).

2 of the games were losses, one was a near loss. Those kind of games absolutely are not good for MVP candidacy.

And what's good for Kobe as MVP vs what's good for the lakers long term absolutely can be diverging concepts. If you risk losses to let other players learn how to step up, those losses and near losses hurt the MVP chances when the MVP candidate also doesn't step up when the others falter. If it was strictly about wins, KG would be running away with the award.

And the same thing has happened in cleveland the last couple of weeks. THe cavs are more intersted in getting the team ready for the playoffs with the new players than they are in winning individual games, and that's been hurting LeBron's MVP chances a bit.

The gap between the lakers and celtics is exactly the same as the gap between the cavs and the lakers. More games that finish like those 3 games and it gets harder to justify Kobe over both KG and LeBron. THe arguments that give him the edge over KG are the same ones that give LeBron the edge over Kobe. It's only when Kobe steps up down the stretch of the close games that he starts to establish a case for MVP that work against both KG and LeBron.

Kobe was moving up on my list after the 52 point Dallas game and the big 4th quarter Kings game. He slipped a bit after the more recent rockets, kings and mavs games where he disappeared down the stretch each time.

Paul has moved up a bit lately, although I'm still trying to figure out just what it means that the Celtics and Pistons both have been consistently beating the top teams in the west lately, including the pistons big win over the hornets. The still hornets have the celtics twice, plus the game at cleveland. Those 3 games will go a long way towards deciding if Paul pulls ahead of everyone on my own MVP list.

[Big Bird]

^^Who risked a loss man? The Mavs almost made the comeback. Almostis the key word here. The Lakers won. Had they lost and Kobe would not play well I could understand where you're coming from. The Mavs played out of their mind in the last 15 minutes, they were hitting threes at the buzzer over 2 players and from 10 feet at the end. I seriously don't understand your concept. Who faltered? Radman made big shots down the stretch and Odom had some key rebounds and hit his freethrows. They played poorly when Kobe was sitting (14-1 run to close the quarter). This is baffling to me at the very least. They won, and outside of the desperation three pointer I had no doubt in my mind they would win. Dallas didn't lead for over 40 minutes. They were trumped on their home court. But okay, everyone has their own opinon; if you honestly believe the things you wrote in context to that game, neither myself or any other poster here can change your mind. (I guess Bonzi Wells get the credit for NOR's win yesterday not Paul right? 20 points in the last quarter... so much for Paul's supposed "statement game)

p.s.: I thought the term "the 3 recent games" was directed at the last three games. I apologise.

[G35]

I never mentioned the New Orleans game - I talked about the Kings game (1 point 4th quarter), the Rockets game (2 points in the last 6 minutes) and the Dallas game (3 points in the last 11 minutes).

2 of the games were losses, one was a near loss. Those kind of games absolutely are not good for MVP candidacy.

And what's good for Kobe as MVP vs what's good for the lakers long term absolutely can be diverging concepts. If you risk losses to let other players learn how to step up, those losses and near losses hurt the MVP chances when the MVP candidate also doesn't step up when the others falter. If it was strictly about wins, KG would be running away with the award.

And the same thing has happened in cleveland the last couple of weeks. THe cavs are more intersted in getting the team ready for the playoffs with the new players than they are in winning individual games, and that's been hurting LeBron's MVP chances a bit.

The gap between the lakers and celtics is exactly the same as the gap between the cavs and the lakers. More games that finish like those 3 games and it gets harder to justify Kobe over both KG and LeBron. THe arguments that give him the edge over KG are the same ones that give LeBron the edge over Kobe. It's only when Kobe steps up down the stretch of the close games that he starts to establish a case for MVP that work against both KG and LeBron.

Kobe was moving up on my list after the 52 point Dallas game and the big 4th quarter Kings game. He slipped a bit after the more recent rockets, kings and mavs games where he disappeared down the stretch each time.

Paul has moved up a bit lately, although I'm still trying to figure out just what it means that the Celtics and Pistons both have been consistently beating the top teams in the west lately, including the pistons big win over the hornets. The still hornets have the celtics twice, plus the game at cleveland. Those 3 games will go a long way towards deciding if Paul pulls ahead of everyone on my own MVP list.

What is killing Lebrons candidacy for MVP is Cleveland losing to below .500 teams. Teams that are double digit wins below .500. Losing to Chicago and New Jersey is unacceptable for a player that is trying to be an MVP. Maybe one game due to an injury or off night but 2 games within a week. Then losing badly to Orlando and then to not show up against the Wizards in the 4th quarter. That's not what you expect from an MVP.

I have Paul and Kobe tied with Lebron clearly behind them.

With Paul I want to see if he can win a game on the road vs a playoff contending team.

They have gotten smoked recently going into winning teams homecourts

Loss @ DET 84-105
Loss @ HOU 96-106
Loss @ WAS 84-101
Loss @ SA 89-98
Win @ PHX 132-130
Loss @ UTH 88-110

They have won only 1 time vs playoff teams in away games in the last month and a half.......

[dingclancy]

[quote="lj4mvp"][/quote]

You see not everyone is reading the same MVP race as you. And in that kind of thinking you are in a minority. You are like pulling arguments out of nothing.

The truth is maybe the media is dumb to dissect the NBA MVP like you are doing right now. But I'd doubt they will look at that story where "Kobe almost blew a 25 point lead.. so he shouldn't be MVP."

On the other hand, LBJ's MVP chances are shot the moment they almost got 30 losses. Oh wait a minute.

[SA37]

-= original quote snipped =-


You admit Gasol's numbers are almost identical as they were in Memphis. Except for minutes played

Gasol's minutes in Memphis 36:42
Gasol's minutes in LA 34:06

And he is taking 2 less shots a game and shooting 8% higher with the Lakers.

Again, the difference is so miniscule it isn't even really worth mentioning. The point still stands that there isn't a shred of evidence to suggest that Kobe Bryant has made Gasol a better player, which was your claim.

The fact is, Gasol is going to play better with L.A. simply because they're an infinitely better team than Memphis. Kobe Bryant is a part of that, but so are guys like Fisher and Odom.

Based on the fact that the Lakers were 16-3 in the previous 19 games, 9 of the last 10 games (including a 109-80 crushing of the Hornets in New Orleans). The Lakers are good with Gasol. Imo they were better with Bynum.

To just assume L.A. would have continued unimpeded is ridiculous because 1) Teams could have traded for players and the Lakers may have not traded for anyone or have gotten as good of a player for pennies on the dollar. (They may have had to make a deal that included Odom, for example.)

Am I supposed to believe the Rockets will continue to put together 10-15-20 game winning streaks the rest of the year, given their recent run?

Tell me what are the minimum statistical requirements for MVP? I've heard the team success requirements 50+ wins, top 3 in conference. But what is this statistical backing you speak of. What's the minimum to be considered for MVP.

I am talking about Paul's significant improvements in his individual game, whether it is his ppg, apg, shooting percentages, double-doubles, steals...etc

Kobe Bryant is having a great year, but by his standards this is just an average year for him, which says something to the level he plays at. However, the point is, his performance hasn't changed all that much, but his team is significantly better, which indicates the improvement in the team has a lot to do with the improvement of guys like Bynum, Farmar, and Vujacic, and the acquisition of guys like Gasol and Fisher.

Obviously, Bryant's commitment to more team play and willingness to be a little more unselfish than in previous year has played a big part in the Lakers' rise. But is it really the main reason? I don't think so. I think the acquisitions and individual improvements of certain players has been just as important, if not more.

It isn't meant to be a knock on Kobe because if you're going to have a top team, you need help. Kobe got help and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. But when you're comparing him to Paul, a guy who has made incredible individual improvements and hasn't quite had the types of acquisitions L.A. has had, then I find it extremely difficult to choose Bryant over Paul.

[SA37]

Yeah I don't think that Kobe is unique in making a talented player better but then neither are any of the other MVP candidates. I see Paul gets a lot of assists because he has the best 3pt shooter in the game on his team. Is it because he is getting Peja easier shots or is it Peja is just that good. Looking at Chandler and all of his alley oop dunks. Is that because of Paul or could Tyson get looks like that with Nash, Deron, AI or Kobe.

Didn't Bynum shoot over 60% and was a league leader in dunks before he got injured?

Any criticism that can be leveled at Kobe can be applied to any other player. Sometimes it seems Kobe can't do anything without criticism. If his teammates have good games then it's because of their own natural improvement or they are just talented players.

You're missing the point: You came in and said Bryant made Gasol a better player. And you did so based on 18 games, which were mostly against very bad teams.

Basically, you took a small sample size (granted it was all you had to work with), took the only significant number improvement (any player, over a small sample of games, can shoot a couple of percentage points better over their season or career average) and decided to turn it into Look What Kobe Did.

It's an absolutely silly argument and conclusion. That isn't a knock on Kobe. It is a knock on some very poor statements.

If people weren't biased it would be clear that there isn't much difference between Paul, Kobe and Lebron. They are all putting up great numbers. Lebron is putting up the best stats imo. Paul is 2nd in statistical output. Defensively I see teams are able to exploit Paul more than Lebron and Kobe. Team success is all Kobe and Paul. That's where Paul and Kobe separate from Lebron.

The race is very close. I don't think LeBron has any business in the discussion because his team is not even close to being elite, and that has been the standard set over the years for the award.

Paul and Bryant are equal, in terms of team success. So where do you find a deciding factor?

Laker fans argue that Kobe has been the best player in the league for 4-5 years and finally has help, so he deserves the award. They also point to his being 1st team all-defense, his ability to play through injuries to himself, his ability to deal with injuries to teammates...etc

My argument for Paul is his incredible statistical improvement across the board, which has coincided with his team's rise.

I think it is quite clear who has the better, more firmly-based argument.

(Disclaimer: I am not saying you need to agree that Paul is the MVP. I am just saying the argument for Kobe, when looking for separation, is quite weak.)

[Jules Winnfield]

You can make a valid and credible case for either of CP, Kobe or LeBron. All 3 are deserving of the award.

And for those who are using the fact/case that Kobe should get it because he hasn't gotten one in the past; that's laughable, at best.

What's laughable is your logic.

If voters have 3 equally meritorious candidates, then the tie-breaker ought to go to the player who has been playing at a MVP level for the longest throughout his career.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that and the fact that you would call it laughable is, well, laughable.

[Big Bird]

-= original quote snipped =-

I am talking about Paul's significant improvements in his individual game, whether it is his ppg, apg, shooting percentages, double-doubles, steals...etc

Kobe Bryant is having a great year, but by his standards this is just an average year for him, which says something to the level he plays at. However, the point is, his performance hasn't changed all that much, but his team is significantly better, which indicates the improvement in the team has a lot to do with the improvement of guys like Bynum, Farmar, and Vujacic, and the acquisition of guys like Gasol and Fisher.

Okay, this is the 3rd time I've seen you post this. You do know this is wrong, don't you? Aside from scoring Bryant is having some of the best numbers in his career (or after a long time).

He's shooting one of the best FG and 3PT % of his career; his defense is on a level comparable to 02/03 (you also have the steals to back it up if you're a stat fan). He's also rebounding the most since 02/03 and has one of the best seasons assist-wise (although he's not the sole ball-handler anymore). Of course these are not improvements in numbers like Paul's had, but you can argue that this is one of, if not the best versions of Bryant we've seen. It's also a bit unfair to not attribute Fisher's season to Bryant's help... a guy who is a 40% career shooter, was at +47 until he got into a slump and is still at his best at 43%. Did you happen to ask yourself why? Because he gets almost only open looks. So does Sasha (okay here, I'll give you the natural improvement thesis).

I'll repeat:this is not an average year by Kobe's standards. I've watched over 50 Lakers games this year and this I've not seen him this relaxed in a long time and he's showing it with the way he plays. I won't even go into the debate of how Paul has made West an All-Star, Peja into the 3-pt threat he once was and Chandler into a legit center and how Kobe seemingly has done nothing, because his teammates simply improved on their own, while he's taking a seat back. That is absurd, good sir .

cheers

[tkb]

Some arguments you could use pro Kobe when comparing his MVP bid against Paul.

1. Schedule.
Lakers have had the 4th toughest schedule up to date, while Hornets are sitting in 26th.

2. Supporting cast.
This might sound weird, because the Lakers have the more talent at full strength. Sure playing with Bynum, Odom and Gasol is a nice thing. Only problem is that Kobe has never played a game with all 3. Hornets have been relatively injury free all season long, and that's a big issue. Counting injuries I'd say Paul has had more help this season.

3. Injuries.
Not talking about injuries to supporting cast here. Kobe could have thrown in the towel a long time ago to rest his injuries. He's playing with a fractured finger after all and performing great.

4. Clutch play.
Paul is having a terrific season, but Kobe has been better in clutch situations (LeBron is the only player that can make a great case against Kobe this year as far as clutch play goes).

5. +/- seperation from teammates.
This might also seem like a weird statement as Gasol's +/- stats are better than anyone on the Hornets. Issue is that Gasol has played as much for the Lakers as Ryan Bowen has for the Hornets. No one on the Lakers except Kobe has a +5.0 or better while playing over 40% of team minutes. 3 other players than Paul do on the Hornets.

6. Defense.
Again, Paul is having a great defensive season. I think he deserves to make the 2nd team, but Kobe has been better.


Adding them up, I don't think Kobe's argument against Paul is weak at all.

[Jules Winnfield]

I just think there's a contingent that doesn't want to give it to Kobe no matter what. When Lebron had the best argument, they wanted him. Now Paul has the best argument against Kobe, so it's him. If Paul flounders when the schedule picks up, people will swear up and down KG Is the MVP.

[G35]

-= original quote snipped =-



You're missing the point: You came in and said Bryant made Gasol a better player. And you did so based on 18 games, which were mostly against very bad teams.

Basically, you took a small sample size (granted it was all you had to work with), took the only significant number improvement (any player, over a small sample of games, can shoot a couple of percentage points better over their season or career average) and decided to turn it into Look What Kobe Did.

It's an absolutely silly argument and conclusion. That isn't a knock on Kobe. It is a knock on some very poor statements.
.

What your missing is that I didn't make an argument that Kobe should be MVP based on Pau's improvement. I was making the point that Pau improved since coming to Lakers.

This is the problem with these long ass threads and people jumping in and out of the arguments without reading all the pages. Which is a knock on you for not taking the time and not just making ass-u-mptions. Read it....

I'm curious how anyone can consider Kobe, given that the team didn't start to play well until Bynum started to break out and then again when Gasol arrived.

-= original quote snipped =-

I'm not denying that, but we're talking about "Most Valuable Player" .....not "player who benefits most from having another all-star on the team" .................

-= original quote snipped =-



Again, we're talking about both Bynum and Gasol.

Put it this way, the Lakers were 25-11 w/Bynum
20 -10 w/o Bynum
13 - 2 with Gasol (with a 10 game win streak)

............ I'm not attacking Kobe by any means........... but after watching the team take off once Bynum developed and when Gasol arrived, in my eyes it took away from Kobe's MVP credibility.

I think a lot will get decided within the next couple of games as you continue to play without Gasol..........but you've dropped a couple of games in a row now and it shows you the value of a guy like Gasol in terms of the team's success.

[shobe_81]

There is clearly a double standard when Talking about Kobe!!!!

When he Passes, People want him to shoot (ala Mavs ex. even when he was doubled a lot).

When he shoots, people want him to pass (ala Rockets ex. even though they had NO INSIDE presence).

When he balances it out ("Ahh ummm, Kobe isn't having a good statistical game/season)!

Sigh.... and actually I don't see anyone else other than LBJ4mpv, supporting the argument of Kobe blowing a lead against Dallas and thus hurting his MVP chances!

[djuandemarco]

To me it's very logic:

Western conference >>>> Eastern conference this year.

Lebron has amazing stats but you're not an MVP being 4th in the east.

Then it's all about Kobe and CP3...

You can make a lot of arguments for both cases (and all of them pretty nice) but I think that if LAL finish over NOH at the end of this season => Kobe = MVP.
And If NOH > LAL => CP3 = MVP.

In a tight race just make it simple and logic.

[Andrew Bynasty]

He slipped a bit after the more recent mavs games where he disappeared down the stretch each time.

I find it unbelievable that Kobe's MVP candidacy is hurt after a win agaisnt one of the best home teams in the league.

1. The Lakers were without their #2 and #3 best players.

2. The Mavs have the 2nd BEST record at home. Their loss to the Lakers was only their 5th all season long.

3. The Lakers blew a huge 21 point lead with Kobe sitting.
All momentum had shifted by the time Kobe got back in the game.

4. The Lakers managed to score just 1 point with Kobe on the bench.

5. Kobe had 24pts and 7assts when he sat. He dismantled the Mavs thru 3 quarters on both offense and defense. The Mavs practically doubled Kobe even when he didnt have the ball. Even close to halfcourt Kobe would get doubled. He had no choice but to pass the ball out.

6. THE UNDERMANED LAKERS STILL WON...

All of this should only help Kobe's MVP case. And the fact that you think this game (in which they won) hurts Kobe's MVP case is just absurd.