MVP Watch Part VI

[semi-sentient]

No, I didn't really just say that. Here's what I said, and I posted statistics to go along with it from each player that showed how they all improved:

Actually, you did say it. Here is the quote:

Fair enough. I'll retract that particular statement. Poor choice of wording on my part, or maybe I just went into homer mode.

[semi-sentient]

snaquille oatmeal: Thanks for posting that. First time I've actually read that particular interview with the team.

[semi-sentient]

No one clicked my link in my earlier post?

[eatyourchildren]

SA37: When you add other players into the mix of comparisons, it gets complicated. But what Doctor MJ said still stands: that between the two players--CP and Kobe--what Jeff Van Gundy is saying is somewhat inconsistent. There isn't a gulf of difference between Kobe and CP's supporting cast. But, according to JVG, there is a gulf of difference between the two players individually. So yes, if the Hornets had beaten the Lakers to that top spot, we'd be saying that there's something that CP's doing that's somehow more valuable than what Kobe's doing. But that's not the case as far as individual player ability goes and as far as team record goes.

Doctor MJ's point is that individual value ultimately trickles down into the W-L columns. Am I right Doc?

[Ronaldo/dinho]

-= original quote snipped =-



Well that's a nice way to give props to both guys, but it takes what I've always thought was a ridiculous statement to all new heights. It's true that the best player in the league is not always the MVP, but when your best player in the league leads his team to a better record than another guy, it's insane that the other guy is your MVP. If Van Gundy thinks so much of Chris Paul's performance that he's by far the MVP over Kobe at his most valuable, I say he's lost perspective on what it means to be the "best player" when giving that title to Kobe. The purpose of any player is to generate value for his team, nothing more.

Van is right on one account and slightly off on the other. Chris is the MVP and it's not even close. However, Lebron is the best player in the league but it's close...as TD, KG, Paul, Kobe can all make an argument.

[Miami's Finest]

-= original quote snipped =-



Van is right on one account and slightly off on the other. Chris is the MVP and it's not even close. However, Lebron is the best player in the league but it's close...as TD, KG, Paul, Kobe can all make an argument.

Agreed completely. Paul is hands down MVP but that doesn't automatically makes him the best player. Just as the best player shouldn't automatically be the MVP. It is awarded to the player most valuable to their team's success and no one can tell me any player is more valuable than Paul is to the Hornets success.

[SA37]

No one clicked my link in my earlier post?

Guilty.

[SA37]

SA37: When you add other players into the mix of comparisons, it gets complicated. But what Doctor MJ said still stands: that between the two players--CP and Kobe--what Jeff Van Gundy is saying is somewhat inconsistent. There isn't a gulf of difference between Kobe and CP's supporting cast. But, according to JVG, there is a gulf of difference between the two players individually. So yes, if the Hornets had beaten the Lakers to that top spot, we'd be saying that there's something that CP's doing that's somehow more valuable than what Kobe's doing. But that's not the case as far as individual player ability goes and as far as team record goes.

Doctor MJ's point is that individual value ultimately trickles down into the W-L columns. Am I right Doc?

Understood. I just disagreed with the idea that if two teams have similar records, the better player is more valuable to his team.

I don't agree with JVG's statement to a T, but I do think Paul has been the MVP.

[semi-sentient]

Guilty.

YES!

My first official rickroll...

[eatyourchildren]

-= original quote snipped =-



Agreed completely. Paul is hands down MVP but that doesn't automatically makes him the best player. Just as the best player shouldn't automatically be the MVP. It is awarded to the player most valuable to their team's success and no one can tell me any player is more valuable than Paul is to the Hornets success.

Don't conflate 'value' with 'dependency'

[ILikeTheGrizz]

However, Lebron is the best player in the league but it's close...as TD, KG, Paul, Kobe can all make an argument.

Well said, but I'd say Kobe is the MVP and it's just as close as the 'best player' argument.

[yiskobesogood]

-= original quote snipped =-



Van is right on one account and slightly off on the other. Chris is the MVP and it's not even close. However, Lebron is the best player in the league but it's close...as TD, KG, Paul, Kobe can all make an argument.

Lebron is no where close to being the best in the league son. Im sorry to say. Its safe to say you are around 16 or 17 correct? You see my friend, the game of basketball is played on both ends of the floor. Lets first get Lebron dominating on one end first. Im assuming your argument for Lebron being the best would include the scoring title he will recieve and his rebounds and assists being where they are right? Well...you would have to agree with me on this? If i asked you are the Cavs a good team? You would say YES, but not compared to the top teams in the league. So my question again would be don't you agree that players around the so called star would make his numbers go down.

Key point:Kobe could avg 40 plus a game if he wanted to. But he doesnt need to, the Lakers have the talent now. Thats the difference with him and Lebron. Lebron knows what he needs to do, but stops himself from doing more.

Yes. I think with the team Lebron has he should be putting up better then 30 8 and 8 Heck Kobe did it, Jordan did, All the big players did it. And being in the east gives him a huge advantage. Now then you could go on the defensive end, and see Lebron is far away from Kobes ability. And to add to it, kobe is about 3 inches shorter and 75 pounds less. This will be Kobes third straight season with First team all nba and First team all defense. By the way Kobe finished 5th in Defensive Player of the year awards.

You have alot to learn my friend.

By the way my vote for MVP, this season is LeBron James. He simply means the most to his team. That is what the definition of MVP means, most valuable player to a team. It should not matter about record, or playoff status or anything other then value. My vote for last season was Chris Bosh. And in 2005-2006 it was Kobe Bryant.

[yiskobesogood]

-= original quote snipped =-



Well said, but I'd say Kobe is the MVP and it's just as close as the 'best player' argument.

Well said? He put together 15 words and had no basis on his selections. Its actually one of the worst things I've read.

[RobertGlory]

-= original quote snipped =-



But what does being the best player in the league have to do with being the MVP? The MVP is generally given to the player having the most outstanding season on a top-5 team (thereabouts).

An argument can be made that Kobe Bryant or any other candidate has not had the most outstanding season this year. (Conversely, the argument can obviously be made that Kobe or any candidate are having the most outstanding season.)

Garnett has come out and said that Paul Pierce has been the MVP of his team this year, but even if you believe that to be true, you would find it hard to agree with an argument he has been the most valuable/influential player this season for Boston. To show you just how little influence that has on the MVP vote, a lot of people are still strongly considering Garnett for MVP even though, by his own admission, he may not even have been the best player on his team this year.

Sometimes being the best and being the MVP don

[RobertGlory]

-= original quote snipped =-

Given that, in one scenario can it possibly be the case that between player A and B, 1) A is by far the better at adding value to a team in general, 2) A has the better team success in reality, but 3) B actually provided far more value than A?

I honestly don't believe it's possible, and I don't think Van Gundy believes it either to be honest.

it's very possible

remember, we're not dealing with 5,000 computer simulated seasons of basketball where kobe would win 700 MVPs, KG 900, and CP3 100.

this current MVP race happened over one real NBA season and may just be one of the 100 where CP wins it.

but for the question it depends on the expectations surrounding a team. team A was slightly better by one game out of 82, but going into the season their expectations were either the same or a bit higher than team B.

without those players, which team would be worse off????

player A and player B are both the best at their positions

[NO-KG-AI]

-= original quote snipped =-



Well said? He put together 15 words and had no basis on his selections. Its actually one of the worst things I've read.

Omgggggggggggg, your back already? You really fail at discretion.

[big123]

-= original quote snipped =-



it's very possible

remember, we're not dealing with 5,000 computer simulated seasons of basketball where kobe would win 700 MVPs, KG 900, and CP3 100.

this current MVP race happened over one real NBA season and may just be one of the 100 where CP wins it.

but for the question it depends on the expectations surrounding a team. team A was slightly better by one game out of 82, but going into the season their expectations were either the same or a bit higher than team B.

without those players, which team would be worse off????

player A and player B are both the best at their positions

I think the Hornets would be worse off without Paul, but before the Lakers got Gasol, I'd say the Lakers without Kobe.

[Bgil]

This is where we'll just have to disagree. I think the largest reason for the Hornets rise was the fact that they were healthy. Paul's statistical increase from one season to the next is not enough to account for such a turnaround, and his season wouldn't have been possible had he not had the right talent around him.

Fair enough. I don't disagree that the Hornets' health is a major factor in helping the Hornets becoming one of the best teams in the league. I just think if Paul plays at or around the same level as last year, the Hornets, regardless of their health, are not a top-2 team in the West.

They still aren't a "top 2" team in the West in terms of how good people think they are in relation to their competition. For instance, very few people think they are better than the Lakers, Suns, or Spurs or even on the same level as those teams. They had a better record because mainly because they were healthy all year. Which, is also the reason many people give as being most responsible for their turn around.

The "Ship his ass out" comments were clearly directed at the FO for not trading an unproven big for a superstar type player. That's quite different than dissing Bynum or "trashing" his teammates like some writers are proposing. The truth of the matter is that Bynum had not proven much of anything, and throughout the season Phil (and others) had questioned his work ethic and professionalism. At the time, there wasn't very much working in Bynum's favor, particularly when you keeping hearing names like Boozer, Kidd, JO, Marion, etc. come up.

At the end, it still is saying 'Bynum isn't good enough to help me, get me someone in here who can.'

It should be noted that Odom was involved in a lot of the the trade discussions. So Bryant wouldn't just have been shipping out one unproductive player for a productive one. IIRC, he was involved in the Kidd and JO talks. I don't remember Marion or Boozer ever being linked to the Lakers or hearing the Lakers actually turning down a deal for these guys, but I would imagine Odom would have been a key component in those talks as well, as neither team would have been looking to just take back an expiring deal.

That's because you weren't following the situation closely. You're just responding on the controversy the media tried to spark. Kobe's did some interviews with various radio stations and they're all on youtube. He specifically talks about Boozer, B-Diddy etc.

Either way, I think we can agree Kobe's tactics weren't the best, it worked out in the end -- especially in the trade department -- and we can leave it at that.

Nothing was wrong with his tactics. He privately voiced all this stuff for several years (even dating back to the Shaq era). Even Phil Jackson voiced some of the same opinions. Speculation: I think Phil had a big hand in orchestrating the whole thing. He was up for a new contract and it doesn't make sense for him to be the coach if the team is going to be rebuilding for the next 3-5 years.

The thing is that management told Kobe and Phil that they were gunning for a championship while running around telling everyone else in management that they were rebuilding and using Kobe and Phil to keep the team value afloat until they were good again.

Was Jordan a good leader? Magic Johnson? You realize how many times those guys criticized players/coaches?

Anyway, blind faith is not a prerequisite to being a good leader. How can you possibly have faith in a team that has done nothing for 3 straight seasons and has shown no real improvement? At some point a leader absolutely has to say something to address that lack of improvement. You seem to see criticism as something negative (and I'll continue to note that we saw no negative effects of that criticism), but that's not always the case.

I don't think Magic or Jordan ever dealt with any issue quite like Kobe did, but I can't say for sure. I know they've been linked to having certain coaches removed, though.

Again, there are different ways of saying, "I need some help," or "We need to improve as a team." Kobe did his in one of the worst possible ways I can think of. I mean, it really was akin to a kid screaming at his parents for an ice cream cone in the middle of a mall.

Magic and Jordan both did similar things. Jordan even retired and threatened to retire another time because of his riffs with management. He called them all out in the media numerous times. Read The Jordan rules sometime.

Magic had his coach fired because he said it was either him or the coach.

How much should that affect his candidacy for MVP? Not much, I would think. But when people are comparing the leadership qualities of Bryant, Garnett, and Paul, I think it is has a place in the conversation.

Even though nothing negative came from it, the end didn't justify the means, which I think we can both agree on. No one wants to see their star player act like Kobe did. And I know you wouldn't want to see him do it again or any other future Laker star.

If management does that again then I'm all for them being called out. A few other teams in the league need to be called out too... Phoenix being the most obvious culprit for selling draft picks and sheding valuable contracts for a few bucks in the owners pocket.

[eatyourchildren]

Did you see how Byron Scott ran the offense through David West today once CP started getting stifled by the soft-under-screen defense Dallas was employing? Did anyone else see how good Jannero Pargo has been, dropping midrange J's like nothing?

LOL@ CP-Backers in saying that CP's supporting cast isn't self-sufficient or is appreciably worse than KB's.

also LOL @ CP-Backers after Kobe's bad Game 1 comin out the woodwork to say that they wished the MVP award were given after some post-season play, and then Kobe droppin a cold 49/4/10 on 68% on your heads as if he were saying "Y'all forgot me muhf*ckas?"

Where are you now??

[cftjk]

Pargo
Playoffs statistics: 26 mpg 15 ppg
regular season: 19 mpg 8 ppg