MVP Watch 2008... Part 3.

[semi-sentient]

And I would argue strongly that Fisher is a vastly superior perimeter defender to Ariza.

[SA37]

SA37:

I have a semi-hypothetical for you:

Chris Paul this season is averaging 22/11 +3stl give or take, shooting 50fg, 86ft, and 37%3pt. These stats are his best to-date.

Michael Jordan in his 97-98 season averaged 29/6/3 +2stl give or take, shooting 46, 78, and 24%. These stats are his worst to-date.

Kobe Bryant this season is averaging 28/6/5 +2stl give or take, shooting 46, 84, and 35%. These stats are his worst to-date.

Let's say all of them are playing in the same season. According to your stated criteria:

1. Who's the MVP in the group?
2. Who's the best player in the group?

If it is the Bulls winning 62 games like they did that year then there is really nothing to discuss.

The difficult part is, at the time, the East-West disparity wasn't as great as it is now. You could argue that '97-'98 Bulls team, playing in the current Eastern Conference, could win 70 games. I would definitely say that Bulls team would win at least 5 more games.

If New Orleans and the Lakers win out, very unlikely, they'd make it to 61 wins. The more likely scenario is they'll finish closer to 55-57 wins. If the Bulls won 10 more games or so, I think the choice would be simple.

[eatyourchildren]

-= original quote snipped =-



If it is the Bulls winning 62 games like they did that year then there is really nothing to discuss.

The difficult part is, at the time, the East-West disparity wasn't as great as it is now. You could argue that '97-'98 Bulls team, playing in the current Eastern Conference, could win 70 games.

I think you're trying to dodge the question. Assume the Hornets and Lakers both get to 60 wins, and conference disparity has nothing logically relevant to this hypothetical.

Answer the question.

[SA37]

-= original quote snipped =-



I think you're trying to dodge the question. Assume the Hornets and Lakers both get to 60 wins, and conference disparity has nothing logically relevant to this hypothetical.

Answer the question.

I am not dodging anything.

The team records make a difference. If all 3 teams finish with the same record, I'd say Paul was the MVP. But you're asking me to compare a team from a totally different era. If that Bulls team played now I think they win 65-70 games.

When Dirk won his MVP, Nash should have won, IMO. But Nowitzki's team won 6 or 7 more games and that gave him an advantage in the voting.

[eatyourchildren]

-= original quote snipped =-



I am not dodging anything.

The team records make a difference. If all 3 teams finish with the same record, I'd say Paul was the MVP. But you're asking me to compare a team from a totally different era. If that Bulls team played now I think they win 65-70 games.

When Dirk won his MVP, Nash should have won, IMO. But Nowitzki's team won 6 or 7 more games and that gave him an advantage in the voting.

I want you to flesh out your conclusion. Put it definitively. I want this in writing.

Given the scenario above, with all 3 teams finishing with 60 wins, and those players putting up the stats they did.

1. Who is the MVP?
2. Who is the best player in the group?

[dm17415]

SA37:

I have a semi-hypothetical for you:

Chris Paul this season is averaging 22/11 +3stl give or take, shooting 50fg, 86ft, and 37%3pt. These stats are his best to-date.

Michael Jordan in his 97-98 season averaged 29/6/3 +2stl give or take, shooting 46, 78, and 24%. These stats are his worst to-date.

Kobe Bryant this season is averaging 28/6/5 +2stl give or take, shooting 46, 84, and 35%. These stats are his worst to-date.

Let's say all of them are playing in the same season. According to your stated criteria:

1. Who's the MVP in the group?
2. Who's the best player in the group?

CP and Kobe play two different position so its pathetic you are comparing stats of those two. Here is a better comparison, the last time Magic won the MVP in his prime he averaged 22.3/11.5/6.6, 1.6stl on 48%fg. While Paul is averaging 21.6/11.3/4, 2.7stl on 50%fg so its not hard to see Paul is having a similar season to Magic when he won his MVP, but which much less help then Magic or what Kobe has currently.

Lets not even get started on the Lebron.

[Bgil]

I don't understand the argument that because Kobe's stats aren't as good (which is not true btw, because only his scoring is down), that CP or LeBron is a better candidate. Stats don't tell the whole story. Kobe's improvement has been in all the non-statistical categories, and has the media, coaches, and opposing teams raving about it.

That's pretty convenient, isn't it? It's like, 'Ah, well, since Kobe's statistics haven't improved all that much, we'll just say all his improvements have been of the non-statistical kind and that should trump any significant improvement by any other player...'

What kind of absolute bollocks is this? If Bryant had increased his assists this season to 7, there would be no end to Laker fans raving about increasing his assists from 5 a season ago to 7 this season. If Bryant was scoring 35 a game, Laker fans wouldn't be able to shut up about how he has no help and he has to score 35 a night for the team to win. If Bryant was shooting 48% from the field, they wouldn't be able to stop gawking at his efficiency.

The issue Laker fans have is that Bryant has not improved his statistics all that much. So what happens? We get the argument that his improvements don't show up in the stat sheet.

false. The difference between Laker fans and some other fans is that we understand that Kobe averaging 35ppg means something much worse than Kobe averaging 25ppg. ALL OF US would rather see the latter than the former. We'd rather have 2004 than 2003, we rather have 2008 than 2005 or 2006.
Cavs fans haven't matured to that point yet. They don't get that Lebron's 2008 isn't going to be defined by the massive stats he put up but by the fact that the Cavs have one of the worst offenses in the league because of it.

I also don't understand the argument that Kobe hasn't made his teammates better, they've gotten better. But CP has made his teammates better? From where do you get that? CP and his teammates were injured last year. How can you assess the impact of CP when you dont have a prior healthy season to compare to?

Paul has made or assisted on just under 50% of his team's baskets this season and accounts for over 50% of the team's total assists. I am not saying stats are the whole story, but that is damn good indicator of what is going on...

Yeah, it means he has the ball all the time and he's their main assist guy. The Hornets are relatively average in terms of assists per game. They just run an offense that forces the majority of those assists through one guy. One guy getting two assists is no better than 5 guys with 4 assists each... from a team perspective.

I am not sure who you're directing your comments to, but I have never sat here and made the claim Paul makes his teammates better and Kobe Bryant doesn't. What I have said is that I think the Lakers' rise to the top of the West has more to do with individual improvements of players and acquisitions than anything Kobe has done.

I think the biggest improvement is actually in the coaching. The triangle is now more uptempo and free flowing now that nearly everyone on the team has been in the offense for years.

A lot of the individual improvements are directly due to Kobe though. His ability (and Lamar's) to play multiple positions and roles on the floor lets us use most of our players in the roles which they are most comfortable. Kobe lets Fish and Farmar handle the ball more than Smush did. For the most part we give them a lot of freedom to find their own shots and that works well for them.

If you watch the 2005-2006 season highlights you'll see a ton of Kobe isolating on the baseline (you'll see a lot of that up-and-under dunk he likes to do too). That's one of his favorite positions and he vacated it so our shooters like Vlad, Sasha, and Fish can hang out there and launch threes. How many other star players do you know that sacrafice their favorite play/position so their role players can flourish? Definitely not Lebron.

If you watch the other seasons you see Kobe at the elbow using the turn and fade. Another one of his favorites. You won't see that this year either because we have Ronny, Bynum, and Gasol down there. sure we could force them out to the perimeter so Kobe could post but we don't.
Once again, Kobe adjusted his game so other players could fit right in. It's not a surprise nor an isolated incident that Laker role players are playing great.
Eamples of the post-wing fade from a previous season:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSDzaSVn ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h8p1hL6 ... re=related
Unlike some other players, Kobe has shown the ability to be constantly adjusting his game/role in the offense to allow roll players to thrive, while still being equally effective.

No other player has done that as well this season and that's why the Laker role players are playing so well and have played so well (when healthy) in the post-Shaq era.

Lebron's simply not doing that and it's hurting his team.

---- For a while Kobe was even playing SF fulltime and kicking ass because that's the position were we were lacking-----

This load of bollocks people like to spew on these boards about all of Bryant's merits not showing up in the stat sheet is pathetic.

It is showing up in the stat sheet:
The Lakers with Mr. Inefficient ballhog chucker Bryant are:
At 47 wins/.691 win pct, 3rd in fg%, 4th in apg, 6-7 guys are shooting career-highs or near career highs and several of them had astronomical rises (Fisher, Vlad, Odom, Bynum, Gasol etc).
The Lakers are also the 5th best defensive team despite losing Bynum, Ariza (Mo Evans), and pretty much every good defender they have outside of Kobe and Turiaf.
Hell, every single game we start defensive liabilities like Radman/Walton, Fisher, Odom, and Gasol (who's defense is much worse that I originally expected) and we're still one of the best defensive teams in the league.
Give props to Kobe for the ferocious D this year.

[eatyourchildren]

-= original quote snipped =-



CP and Kobe play two different position so its pathetic you are comparing stats of those two. Here is a better comparison, the last time Magic won the MVP in his prime he averaged 22.3/11.5/6.6, 1.6stl on 48%fg. While Paul is averaging 21.6/11.3/4, 2.7stl on 50%fg so its not hard to see Paul is having a similar season to Magic when he won his MVP, but which much less help then Magic or what Kobe has currently.

Lets not even get started on the Lebron.

Wait a minute. So before you/he/they wanted to compare stats of CP and Kobe (something I never liked to begin with), and now you dont? I'm confused. It was CP fans who wanted to compare individual statistics.

[SA37]

Assuming that the Bulls played in the weak East of today and won 60 games --while taking into account they won 69 the season before -- my vote would go to Paul.

Jordan's numbers would be down and his team would have won less games in a conference that got weaker. Bryant would have a solid claim, as he does now, but I think Paul is the MVP for the reasons I have stated in this thread.

It would be very close between Bryant and Jordan for the best player.

[INKtastic]

The lakers shoot an eFG% of 51.3% when Kobe is off the floor this season. Why is he getting the credit for their good shooting?

[Blame Rasho]

Someone make a new MVP thread that links the last ones...