MVP Watch 2008... Part 5

[SA37]

-= original quote snipped =-


But, don't you see, when it comes to stats/wins/offense/defense/intangibles ... list goes on; Kobe Bryant has the best combination of any candidate.

I'd say Bryant wins the stats and offense categories, but I would strongly argue that Garnett wins the other 3 you listed.

Again, Kobe has a good case, but Laker fans/Kobe backers love to pick and choose when to apply certain criteria, like when stats matter and when intangibles matter and then which ones matter more, accordingly.

Of course, they want to talk about playing against the west, but no one will mention Boston is 25-5 against the West, which over 52 games would be 43-9, by far the best of any Western team. You count in the record vs the East (over 30 games that would be 23-7) and Boston's season would have ended at 66-16, which is right about where it is going to end now if they beat NJ.

[yaya banana]

If you're Phil Jackson, you played the Cavs once on December 20th, in Cleveland, two days after you played the Bulls in Chicago with a game in Philly the next night, followed by a game in New York the night after that. Four games in six days, all on the road. I doubt he was spending hours upon hours breaking down James gameplay. Even less time comparing that to his superstars game.

On January 23rd the Spurs came to town. The Lakers had been without Bynum for just four games and Gasol had just recently been added to the mix. On the 25th the Mavs played them in LA. On the 27th the Cavs came in. Somehow, I doubt Jackson was busy pouring over footage of LeBron and, again, comparing his strong points and weak points to Kobe. I think he was more busy dealing with the Bynum situation, getting Gasol integrated, and focusing on conference rivals.

Jackson hasn't seen LeBron since and has no reason to prepare for him until June and even then he should and probably will be focused on preparing his own team instead of comparing how LeBron stacks up against the other individual players this season. I don't think he sits around watching Sportscenter and reading ESPN articles online. In fact, I find it hard to believe he reads much about the NBA aside from scouting the entire team he's about to play and keeping up with the Lakers closest competitors W-L record.

So yes, I believe there are many, many, many people more qualified to compare Kobe Bryant and LeBron James this season than Phil Jackson or any other coach. Quite a few of them probably post on this messageboard.

My last word on the matter - since it's evident I'll make no inroads on my aim to getting the conversation back on track of good old-fashioned trolling.

I can't believe that you really believe that. The amount of preparation that goes into preparing for each individual on the other team is immense - every nuance of every player (even the scrubs) and their tendencies and weaknesses is exhaustively analyzed. Each coach has an army of people and tech doing this for them. Even if it's just two games a year, each coach has access to information and analysis far exceeding what we can muster. They don't watch sportscenter - more likely they've looked at a significant fraction of the plays that the player has been involved in throughout the season, with attendant expert analysis. If you're making the point that their information may be slightly out of date, then fair enough - but to me, that's not much of an argument.

[eatyourchildren]

So if it's your contention that coaches don't follow the players closely enough to determine who is the better one...then scouts would, right?

The only one I've read of is Thorpe at ESPN. What does he say? I've read his free Kobe breakdown, but I never read his LeBron breakdown, if he has one.

Also, you assertion that there's posters here who are better at breaking down player v. player than an NBA coach--LOL.

[tracey_nice]

[quote="SA37"][/quote]
At least you were able to understand what I wrote and capable of rebutting it, but, I'd give Kobe the intangibles; playing through injuries, complete defensive attention drawn to him by opposing team,
being a constant among variables etc.

[Big Bird]

-= original quote snipped =-
This has absolutely nothing to do with Kobe not believing in his teammates and ripping his owner and GM to shreds for giving him insufficient talent to compete.

I don't care what kool-aid you want to drink or how much you want to spin things, the fact of the matter is Kobe said himself, via his actions, that he didn't feel his squad was good enough to compete and it was his GM and owners fault.

Come on, SA37, re-read my first post. My futher explanation to your replies have everything to do with this:"and the first half of the season, when he was still feeling out whether he wanted to get with the program or not, still sits on his record."

This is Hollinger's reasoning for placing Kobe 4th. This reasoning is false. That's what I was saying. I never said Kobe was right in his off season actions and that he felt his squad was good enough to compete. Hollinger doesn't mention that in his 5 sentence explanation. He simply comes up with the quoted. He's also the only person I've heard/read mention some crap like that (pardon my French, but I don't know what to call the quoted part).

cheers

[eatyourchildren]

-= original quote snipped =-



I'd say Bryant wins the stats and offense categories, but I would strongly argue that Garnett wins the other 3 you listed.

Again, Kobe has a good case, but Laker fans/Kobe backers love to pick and choose when to apply certain criteria, like when stats matter and when intangibles matter and then which ones matter more, accordingly.

Of course, they want to talk about playing against the west, but no one will mention Boston is 25-5 against the West, which over 52 games would be 43-9, by far the best of any Western team. You count in the record vs the East (over 30 games that would be 23-7) and Boston's season would have ended at 66-16, which is right about where it is going to end now if they beat NJ.

Which Kobe backers are you referring to? I use the same set of criteria against all

Garnett certainly is an MVP candidate. The things that go against him are the lack of +/- separation from his teammates, lack of being a primary offensive threat on his team (I'd put PP and RayRay ahead of him), and playing hotpotato in the 4th when the game's going through the blender. Things going against him are intangibles (especially defensive acumen) and wins (slightly blunted by his team doing super well without him). Is this somehow inconsistent of me?

[LakerFanMan]

I love these 80 + page threads. Does anyone even know what they're arguing about any more?

[G35]

I love these 80 + page threads. Does anyone even know what they're arguing about any more?

It does get repetitious doesn't it.....

[GreenWithEnvy]

What are KG's intagibles? Im asking you because i don't remember what he brought in Minnesota. Give me a list that are not related to things that show up on box score.

thats officially the most asinine thing ive ever heard. congrats. he completely changes defenses. he makes his teammates more confident. he makes his teammates more intense. he sells tickets. hes a good locker room guy. he doesn't air out his dirty laundry in public (ala kobe). and hes a class act.

[ILikeTheGrizz]

I can't believe that you really believe that. The amount of preparation that goes into preparing for each individual on the other team is immense - every nuance of every player (even the scrubs) and their tendencies and weaknesses is exhaustively analyzed.

But not by one person.

Each coach has an army of people and tech doing this for them. Even if it's just two games a year, each coach has access to information and analysis far exceeding what we can muster. They don't watch sportscenter - more likely they've looked at a significant fraction of the plays that the player has been involved in throughout the season, with attendant expert analysis.

Really? If Jackson dedicated the entire two days before the Cavs game not to just Lakers vs. Cavs, but just Kobe vs. LeBron, without sleeping, he'd have dedicated less time to it than if you spent 10 minutes a day for two months looking into it. Coaches aren't concerned with comparing players entire seasons. I think it's a joke that someone would think they would. That's not their job, it's not what wins them games. But more on that later.

So if it's your contention that coaches don't follow the players closely enough to determine who is the better one...then scouts would, right?

Maybe. But they're more concerned about how their players can stop a guy on offense or how their guy on offense can break down a guy on defense. Not scanning the league for great players and comparing them against each other. A scout for the Suns will be concerned with Duncan and he'll be concerned with Garnett, but only as to how it pertains to Amare's strengths and weaknesses, not in general.

The only one I've read of is Thorpe at ESPN. What does he say? I've read his free Kobe breakdown, but I never read his LeBron breakdown, if he has one.

Dunno.

Also, you assertion that there's posters here who are better at breaking down player v. player than an NBA coach--LOL.

Well, Kelly Dwyer is quite active on this site if I recall correctly. Do NBA coaches watch games and try to figure out who the best player is? Or do they look to see how their team can matchup with players? Coaches are there for X's and O's and leadership and motivation. If they were fantastic and judging players abilities they'd be GMs. And I'm sure we can all look to decisions that GMs have made- multitudes of them- and tell you when we knew one wasn't gonna work out.

You're telling me that tsherkin or TrueLAfan can't break down one player versus another better than Jim Boylan? Do you think these guys are supermen? Again, they know the X's and O's, they're not out there making personnel decisions, and we've seen enough poor personnel decisions that lots of people knew wouldn't work out to know that the people that do that are nowhere near ominpotent.

To bring baseball into again, Theo Epstein was the PR director for the Padres while working on getting his JD. He was swiped up to be the Red Sox GM and lo and behold. That you think there's some esoteric knowledge locked within the brains of people who happen to work for NBA franchises that we simple folk can't possibly unravel says alot about you and why you want to continue just appealing to someone else's authority instead of actually making an argument of your own.

Anyway I just found out I gotta go out of town for a couple days starting tomorrow so have at me while I can't defend myself. Maybe I'll be back Sunday or later next week or something, I don't know.

[schneiderjazz]

What are KG's intagibles? Im asking you because i don't remember what he brought in Minnesota. Give me a list that are not related to things that show up on box score.

Are you serious? The guy gives you at the very least amazing defense and great leadership. Are you blaming him for Minnesota being a bad team? I wonder how far would Kobe go having Wally as his 2nd option. The only year KG had help, he took his team to the WCF and could have gone even further hadn't Cassell gotten injured.

[eatyourchildren]

So...pretty much everyone who had the season standings as your Kobe/CP tiebreaker...Kobe should now be your MVP.

[RobertGlory]

how do you figure??????

if we win tomorrow night in a game that doesn't matter for us in terms of seeding, we'll have the same record at 57-25

season series is 2-2

all the #1 seed for yall indicates is that yall just beat different opponents than we did

[BigAkers]

how do you figure??????

if we win tomorrow night in a game that doesn't matter for us in terms of seeding, we'll have the same record at 57-25

season series is 2-2

all the #1 seed for yall indicates is that yall just beat different opponents than we did

Don't you mean we beat the opponents that you couldn't beat?

[RobertGlory]

well we beat some you couldn't beat

you know, like boston, cleveland

no tacos for you

[Bgil]

don't understand this idea.

Just because a player may be considered the best in the L doesn't mean he fits the criteria for MVP.

This is the first year Kobe has ever been on a 50+ win team and clearly been its most dominant player/leader.

This year you see most people have LeBron at 3rd or 4th and he has had a spectacular individual season; he just hasn't had the team record. It is quite consistent with Kobe's finishes in the previous few years.

It seems to me some people can't get past the fact the MVP isn't an award given to the best player in the league.

No, I'm saying that the award is typically given players on very good teams for the sake of perceived legitimacy. That's kinda thrown in the face of the voters when the MVP gets shown up or exposed in the playoffs.

I doubt the media would be cool with the MVP getting eliminated in the first round every year, ya know.

[enko]

the lakers are # 1 because they have better record on western opponent than NO, this is the basis of the tie braker

Kobe is the mvp enought said

[RobertGlory]

even though it is the tiebreaker, it is pretty arbitrary

after all the hornets were better against the east, and you don't want to be losing vs. the east, don't you???????

[BigAkers]

even though it is the tiebreaker, it is pretty arbitrary

after all the hornets were better against the east, and you don't want to be losing vs. the east, don't you???????

Yeah, enjoy your runner up.

[eatyourchildren]

even though it is the tiebreaker, it is pretty arbitrary

after all the hornets were better against the east, and you don't want to be losing vs. the east, don't you???????

'

How is that arbitrary?