MVP Watch Part VI

[BRINGTHEPAIN]

KB has carried his team to the playoffs all year, but their record with Gasol indicates he is the reason why they are at the top of the seedings. And you don't win the MVP for carrying a team to the playoffs.

[eatyourchildren]

Well, sometimes you win the MVP for carrying your team to the #1 seed, the byproduct being you get home-court advantage throughout the conference playoffs. Which is nice.


By the way, did you guys see this? http://82games.com/COM1S11.HTM

Just to scrum up some talks here because the MVP race is officially boring:

Kobe:
Good teams: 30.0 ppg, 47% fg, 40% from 3, 7.2 reb, 4.9 assists
Bad teams: 27.5 ppg, 45.6% fg, 35.5% from 3, 4.9 reb, 5.3 assists

LeBron:
Good teams: 28.3 ppg, 44% fg, 30% from 3, 7.5 reb, 7.7 assists
Bad teams: 32.9 ppg, 50.4% fg, 32.9% from 3, 7.5 reb, 6.8 assists

[tracey_nice]

KB has carried his team to the playoffs all year, but their record with Gasol indicates he is the reason why they are at the top of the seedings. And you don't win the MVP for carrying a team to the playoffs.

I recall a healthy Lakers team pre-gasol on top of the Western Conference.

[Andrew Bynasty]

Don't hold it against Paul for making the players around him better, what type of numbers did he put up before playing with Paul? Kobe playing with several former all-stars, some in their prime like Odom, struggled to make 8th place and didn't even make the playoffs in the past putting up the same numbers he did this year. If Kobe could complain about needing stars on the Lakers roster this year minus Gasol he would certainly do the same if he was on the Hornets minus Paul.

1. David West was only in his 3rd year when Chris Paul joined the team. And he had started just 9 games to that point in his career. So I think more playing time was the reason he got better, not Chris Paul. Give me a break.

1B. If Chris Paul gets the credit for West becoming an All-Star and a better player, than why doesnt Kobe get credit for Bynum, Sasha, Farmar and Turiaf getting better? Seems like a double standard to me.

2. Kobe playing with several former All-Stars? Really? Name them. Pau Gasol is the FIRST All-Star (former or current) that Kobe has played with since Shaq left. Get your facts straight.

3. He complained because his supporting cast was Kwame, Smush and Cook. 3 guys that arent really even in the league anymore the years they left the Lakers... I think any competitive player would've been complaining as well.

[tkb]

RealGM vote pretty close for DPOY too. Duncan got shafted in the official vote IMO.

Official vote:
1. Kevin Garnett
2. Marcus Camby
3. Shane Battier

RealGM vote:
1. Kevin Garnett
2. Tim Duncan
3. Marcus Camby
4. Shane Battier

Nice to see Kobe finish in the top 5 again for DPOY.

[semi-sentient]

Nice indeed. Going back and looking at who I voted for, it's hard to believe I left Duncan and Battier out of my top 3. Must have been sippin' on some Kool-Aid when I had Josh Smith and Kobe above those 2.

[semi-sentient]

I'm curious. Why does it take so long to release the award winners? It can't take that long to tally up all the votes and announce who won. If things go as expected, the MVP won't be announced for another 2 or 3 weeks.

[Blame Rasho]

I'm curious. Why does it take so long to release the award winners? It can't take that long to tally up all the votes and announce who won. If things go as expected, the MVP won't be announced for another 2 or 3 weeks.

I think they are announcing the award winners every day now until the MVP... The MVP is always announced before the end of the first round.

[2poor]

Dick Vitale weighs in, FWIW:

http://espn.go.com/dickvitale/080422paulformvp.html

[lunatic4jc]

KB has carried his team to the playoffs all year, but their record with Gasol indicates he is the reason why they are at the top of the seedings. And you don't win the MVP for carrying a team to the playoffs.

First of all.. Laker starters during the 2007 season

PG Smush Parker who got cut by MIAMI HEAT.. you know.. the team that won 15 games this year and sat their starters 75% through the season?

SF1 Luke Walton - C-player at best.. missed 20 games
SF2 Vladimir Radmanovic - injured most of the 2nd half of the season .. thanks to snowboarding

PF Lamar Odom - missed 25 games

C Kwame Brown .. racking up DNPs in Memphis.. 3rd option in MEMPHIS.. playing behind Darko Milicic and Jason/Jaron Collins


second of all..

the lakers were alternating the #1 seed for a good chunk of the early part of the season before andrew bynum got injured.

third of all

Pau with MEMPHIS - 50% FG
Pau with LAKERS - 59% FG

Pau made the lakers better, no doubt.. as manifested by the 82% win percentage with Pau as opposed to 70% win percentage without Pau.. but he became a better player alongside Mr. Bryant

[semi-sentient]

Dick Vitale weighs in, FWIW:

http://espn.go.com/dickvitale/080422paulformvp.html

Kobe also has that great name recognition which is why he will probably win it.

You gotta love how everyone who selects Paul has the same type of answer. It's either because Kobe is getting a lifetime achievement award or because he has better name recognition. Fantastic. I thought the voting was done by those who actually follow the NBA? If so, then they clearly know who Chris Paul is and what he's done.

[SA37]

-= original quote snipped =-



You gotta love how everyone who selects Paul has the same type of answer. It's either because Kobe is getting a lifetime achievement award or because he has better name recognition. Fantastic. I thought the voting was done by those who actually follow the NBA? If so, then they clearly know who Chris Paul is and what he's done.

By the same token, a good amount of people who have said they would vote for Kobe or who have said they feel Kobe is the MVP have all mentioned that 'it is amazing Kobe has been the best player in the league for so long and still not won an MVP,' or 'How long does Kobe have to wait to get an MVP/Kobe has waited long enough to get an MVP having been the best player in the league the last few years,' or 'It would be a shame for Kobe to retire without an MVP.'

One writer flat out said, 'The number of MVPs a player has influences they way they are perceived in a historical context, and therefore Kobe deserves to have multiple MVPs next to his name.'

And, if they haven't mentioned that, they all say LeBron and Paul's time will come because they're young, and Garnett already has his MVP.

I mean, everyone, regardless if they have Kobe as their MVP or not, knows Kobe has a good case based solely on his play for this season. However, I don't think anyone can deny the sympathy vote is high and that a lot, if not most, voters are using the 'Kobe has never won one/when is Kobe ever going to win an MVP' thing to break the tie in a very close race.

That is not the way the award is meant to be given out.

[Miami's Finest]

Paul's year has been amazing/historic and it's sad it will go unrewarded, because of his youth/lack of a big name- who knows if a year this good by a PG will happen again. I can't believe people can actually debate who is more important to their team's success, it's not even close imo.

[semi-sentient]

...

Post links to the "experts" that have stated that they would vote for Kobe based on those reasons. Assuming they aren't complete homers, I'm sure they give more reasoning than "it's just his time." I'm willing to bet that most, if not all of those guys went on to say that they were voting for him this year based on what he has done this year.

Anyway, below is an example of what I'm talking about. 3 out of 6 ESPN "experts" that picked Paul over Kobe had the following to say regarding Kobe not being their choice:

Kobe is have a great season, but it's not been his best. The Lakers are winning, and I know some will want to give it to him as a "Lifetime Achievement Award" ... but he's neither the best player on the best team nor the best individual player in the league. So how do you give it to him?

Kobe is a favorite because he's never won and the Lakers are likely to finish first in the West. But he didn't have his best season individually -- 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.

Another one of my beefs: the "lifetime achievement award" argument that some are making to support Bryant's candidacy.

In short, I don't get the Kobe argument unless you're playing the "career achievement award" angle, which is just a moronic way to look at it.

I read the remarks from all the ESPN "experts" that voted, and not a single one of them voted for Kobe based on him being due or anything similar. If anything, they had to first explain that they weren't selecting him for such reasons, meaning that guys like the above are putting voters on the defensive already.

I realize that there are going to be homers that have Kobe as #1 simply because they think he's due, but those are the overwhelming minority. I have yet to read a single article/comment (from a non-homer, that is) which states that Kobe should be MVP because he was robbed in past seasons. They've all given sound reasoning as to why he deserves it this year. While some of them might think that he deserved it in the past, that's not the reasoning they used in determining who their vote would go to.

So anyway, let me ask you this... how would you interpret the following comment by an SI sports writer? Do you think he's giving Kobe the nod (at least partially) because of what happened in the past?

Bryant has been the game's best all-around player since Michael Jordan departed, yet he's never been the MVP. This is the year he proved that he should be.

[SA37]

Paul's year has been amazing/historic and it's sad it will go unrewarded, because of his youth/lack of a big name- who knows if a year this good by a PG will happen again. I can't believe people can actually debate who is more important to their team's success, it's not even close imo.

I disagree that it is not a close race, but I do agree that if Paul's season is brushed aside because voters feel Bryant's time has come and he is "owed" this MVP then it is an absolute travesty.

Of course, we can never know for sure what the voters' true intentions are, but I think given what I've read, the tie-breaker seems to be coming down to factors that aren't relevant to this particular season.

Does that mean Kobe isn't a deserving candidate? No. But I think going through and having read the arguments for Bryant from writers, almost none have been immune to the "when will Bryant ever win the MVP if not this year/Bryant deserves an MVP."

Marc Stein alluded to Bryant finally having done what "we've asked" from him this season. Gene Wojenowski is the guy who mentioned historical context and players being judged on the number of MVPs. Those are two I can think of off the top of my head. My response is, who cares?

You shouldn't win the award because you've weren't the best player on your team when you were winning titles and this is the first year you've been the leader of a top team since you've been in the league.

Bill Simmons said he felt Kobe's season hasn't been much different than any other season except his teammates are better. I think it is a bit overly simplistic, but he has a point.

Statistically, there is nothing spectacular about Bryant's numbers, especially in looking at the past 3 seasons. Bryant has made adjustments and has been more willing to accept his teammates and accommodate his play to their games, but why is it "special" when he does it but it is just a passing comment when discussing Garnett and Paul?

What's sad is Bryant has a great case to be MVP, but unless you're a Laker fan, there is no way you can say Bryant has had a clearly superior season to Chris Paul's, just like you can't say his impact has been greater than Garnett's on the Celtics.

When you look back at this season, what will you remember being so special about Kobe and the Lakers' regular season? The one thing I can think of that stands out is the fact the Lakers won the most competitive western conference race. However, on an individual level, I can't think of anything that particularly stands out. So, why give Bryant the MVP? Because he finally got good teammates? He had a relatively average season by his standards?

When I look back at Garnett and the Celtics' season, I will think of the turnaround they had. I will think of Garnett's effect on the franchise and their defensive identity. I will remember they had the best record in the league.

The big case against Garnett is his play in the clutch and his lack of numbers, although if you average it out to the 39-40 minutes he has normally played, it is about an average season for him. Individually he was this year's top defensive player, but little else stands out from his season this year.

When I think of Chris Paul and the Hornets' season, I will remember their unexpected 2nd place finish in the west. And I will remember Chris Paul having a season for the ages at his position.

Individually, Paul put up incredible numbers, leading the league in assists and steals, while finishing second in double-doubles. That is why he is my MVP: he stood out both individually and he had the prerequisite top-5 team.

You can make a great case for all 3. The above was my particular breakdown, but ultimately, the voters are going to decide what they feel deserves the most merit, and in the end I think they will pick Bryant for a lifetime achievement award, even if they won't admit that is what their tie-breaker is.

[semi-sentient]

You're a fantastic mind-reader. They won't admit it? OK.

[tracey_nice]

Are you guys serious, we literally have hundreds of pages giving reasons why Kobe should win MVP over Paul and none of them include "life time achievement". Go back and read it if your not convinced he should win it.

[SA37]

-= original quote snipped =-

I read the remarks from all the ESPN "experts" that voted, and not a single one of them voted for Kobe based on him being due or anything similar. If anything, they had to first explain that they weren't selecting him for such reasons, meaning that guys like the above are putting voters on the defensive already.

Let me just be clear, so as not to cause confusion: I think Bryant has a great case for being MVP this year. Personally, he isn't my choice for MVP (explained in my post above), but I can see why people might pick him.

Anyway, too many writers that I've read -- I've probably read about 15 columns or so about MVP voting -- have spoken about Kobe's lack of an MVP and how he deserves it having been the best player in the league for the last few years.

That isn't to say those who were going to vote for him or would didn't think he deserved it based on his play this year, but I can't see what him not having an award has anything to do with the MVP selection process or why it should be mentioned at all.

-= original quote snipped =-
So anyway, let me ask you this... how would you interpret the following comment by an SI sports writer? Do you think he's giving Kobe the nod (at least partially) because of what happened in the past?

-= original quote snipped =-
"Bryant has been the game's best all-around player since Michael Jordan departed, yet he's never been the MVP. This is the year he proved that he should be."

I do think it is partially a "lifetime achievement award," in this case. But, again, Kobe has a good case for this season based on what he has done this year, so why do we need a mention of the fact he has been the best player in the league the last few years and has no MVPs?

[SA37]

You're a fantastic mind-reader. They won't admit it? OK.

It has nothing to do with mind-reading and everything to do with all the writing about Kobe not having a MVP, Kobe deserving a MVP because he has been the best player in the league the last few years...etc.

I don't need to go find all the comments because we all know they exist, which is why some writers voting for Kobe have had to mention it in their column that it isn't a lifetime achievement award.

How would it look if a writer wrote, 'well, it is a close race, but since Kobe has never won one and it would be a shame for him to go an entire career without one, I will pick him?'

One writer actually did come out and say that, essentially. (If I can find that article, I will post a link.)

I am not saying people who are picking Kobe are just picking him because he has never won. They have legit reasons. I just think it factors into their decision more than they're letting on.

EDIT: Here is the "one writer"

Still, Bryant is an MVP. He

[eatyourchildren]

Are these writers that have votes or not? The writers who do have votes come out and say they have a vote.