MVP Rankings 1.0

[Bgil]

I didn't say he made his teammates worse... I said it's nonsense to suggest that he, more than another superstar, makes his teammates shine. Any good player does that automatically by attracting defensive attention, the same could be said for quite a few NBA players.

You're not getting it.

Take Smush for example. He left the Lakers and got a big contract in Miami next to D-Wade. Wade surely draws a lot of attention doesn't he? He played in Cleveland before that...
Did they run any plays for him? Did they help him out with his PG duties? How encouraging of his play were Wade and Lebron?

The Lakers did all of that. They put him in a position to be successful. In fact, I don't think he could have hoped for a better situation wrt to the role he played and the way the star players of the team (Kobe and Odom) choose to adapt their game to him. The same thing happened with Cook, Shannon Brown, Ariza, Artest, Gasol, Kwame, Bynum, and Fisher.

Speaking of Fisher: Watch this and note all the baseline iso's for Kobe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw-K7OxZ ... re=related
Wonder why they don't run those anymore? Personnel.

What is your basis for saying those players' games "shined" next to Kobe? Because their FG% was slightly higher? Brown, Fisher, Jones, Atkins, all had better or as good seasons elsewhere,

You're nuts if you think Kwame and Fisher had better seasons elsewhere. They may have gotten up more shots somewhere else but the quality of their play was substantially lower. Hell, Fisher was playing out of position in Utah and lost his job to speedy Claxton in Golden State.
Jumaine Jones was an actual valued bench contributor with the Lakers

Walton and Parker basically didn't play outside of LA

Smush played in a lot of places... the problem is that he sucks. The Lakers made him at least respectable. Would Lebron or Wade change their games in any way to accommodate Smush or Walton? You think Lebron would handle the ball a bit less so Walton could ultize his specialites? Would Lebron drive to the hoop a bit less so Walton could post up? The answer to all those is quite obviously no.

Would Lebron even change his game to suit Artest or Odom? Doubtful.

and Lamar Odom looked like a star before he went to play with Kobe

Yeah, sure he did.
He looked like the same borderline All-Star tweener he always has been. He's not a number one option... which is why a rookie D-Wade was leading the team in the playoffs and why Chucky Atkins became the leading scorer when Kobe went down with an ankle sprain.

Butler, of course, became an All-star once he left.

Simply because he continued to improve as a player. He would have done the same thing as a Laker and everyone knew it. That's why he was damn near traded for Carlos Boozer and why the Lakers eventually traded him for Kwame (didn't want to pay for his huge contract).

[An Unbiased Fan]

As of today I have....

1) Kobe
2) Nash
3) Lebron
4) Dirk
5) Melo

[NYK 455]

My MVP so far is Steve Nash. Everyone expected LeBron and Kobe to lead their respective teams to 60, 65+ wins this season, yet the Suns have the best record in the NBA. Most people didn't even expect the Suns to make the playoffs, and the few that did had the Suns as a low seed. As far as his stats go, his numbers aren't as good as someone like LeBron's, but they're still near the top of the league. He's averaging 16 and 12, in 32 minutes. 12 assists in 32 minutes is pretty awesome. I know it doesn't mean much, but per 36 he's averaging over 18 points and 13 assists.

It's sad to see so many people hate on Nash for his "playoff failures." He's always been awesome in the playoffs, most of the reasons the Suns haven't won anything aren't his fault. The Suns weaknesses come playoff time are low post defense and rebounding, something that is out of his control obviously. In 05-06, he lost Amare and took them into the WCF, and in 06-07, the Suns were right their with the Spurs until the Diaw/Amare suspensions. If luck had fallen the Suns way, then perhaps they would have won a couple of titles, who knows? Either way, it doesn't make Nash a lesser player in my opinion.

It's still early, and I still expect LeBron to finish at the top, but as of right now I have it

1. Nash
2. LeBron/Kobe
4. Dirk

[JimMurray]

Nope, Kobe isn't putting LeBron numbers because he just can't. He can never average 8 assists or shoot better than %50. It's not about "being forced to do" it's about limits. He's a less efficient scorer and on "passing", he's not on Bron's level. Well he can average 35 points per game but it won't be as effective as LeBron's.

I realize thats how you would like to see it, but it's not an argument anyone can take seriously when they play different positions, and perform completely different tasks for their respective teams. Everyone knows that "Lebron stats are inflated because of how much he dominates the ball" arguments, and I'm not going to repeat them here other than to say they are correct. The fact of the matter is that if Kobe wanted to play for stats, his numbers would be just as impressive as Lebrons with two exceptions, assists, and rebounds. It's impossible to be an assist hog in the triangle offense (I'm sure you've heard that before), and he's on the court with two 7 footers at all times; it's not realistic to project Kobe to average any more rebounds than he already is (not to mention he's a guard). I know that's not what Lebron fan boys want to hear, but it's truth.

I really wonder why numbers never back the argument "LeBron isn't skilled as Kobe or even as Wade/Melo/Durant/Granger bla bla". I guess it'll continue to be the biggest myth of the NBA. And if you're going to bring the "winning a ring" argument, come on we all know that LeBron would have several rings and Finals MVP awards if he had Kobe's teams.

It's pretty simple. Statistics are slave to the systems they evaluate. If player A plays in a superior offensive system that demands a strict set of attributes, player A's statistical output will be limited by what the system allows. If you give player B the ball and tell everyone else to get out of his way, there are no limits other than time constraints. Everyone knows Mike Brown is an idiot, I don't need to explain that one to you.

MVP so far is clearly Steve Nash. They have the best record and If it wasn't for him Phoenix would be nowhere near this level. But I can guarantee you that he won't win the MVP in the end.

I rate Kobe and LeBron as 2nd tiers and Melo&Dwight are following them.

If you are going to use statistics to argue why Lebron gets it over Kobe, than you can't say that Steve Nash is the MVP. You can say the same thing for every legitimate MVP candidate. Take them away and their team isn't on the same level. That isn't a valid argument. What you can say is that Kobe's team gets farther than any other team without their MVP candidate.

[JimMurray]

2) LeBron - I guess he's done more with less up to this point

Ok, not trying to bash LeBron or anything. But I would love to hear a legit response to how people can still be using that argument that LeBron doesnt have help. They won 66 games last season, and added several solid role players. How are people still using this lame argument that LeBron is doing everything by himself? Im getting sick of hearing it. Werent the Cavs favored by many to win the East again because of the talent they added?

Yeah, but I'll give him a pass because the Cavs haven't been at full strength all season. If that's the case than Kobe has to be punished for those three losses when Gasol was out, even if he was playing with a groin injury. You have to be fair, have to keep it objective.

[Chris Hansen]

to say LeBrons mid range game is not good is laughable so far this year.



the pic cut off so open it in a new page to view it all.

[JimMurray]

Of course playing with Kobe boosts FG%... but it's the same as the effect for any good team, where players are asked to do less because Kobe is shooting 20 times a game. That's the point... that Kobe doesn't have any special power to do this, any good team tends to "improve" the players around it because there it spreads the defensive attention.

Kevin Garnett shot two career highs with Boston instead of Minnesota! Paul Pierce for MVP!

I'm gonna have to say you are unqualified to make this statement. Furthermore it doesn't make sense when the scope of what he is arguing includes the awful Laker teams from 05, 06, and 07. It is undeniable that Kobe has made bad players look marketable. Smush was out of the league the minute he left L.A., Kwame was actually being argued to be a top 8 big man in 06, there was actually a market for Brian Cook (how else do you think the Lakers swindled the Magic out of Trevor Ariza). Sometimes you have to give credit where credit is due.

[Paydro70]

Of course playing with Kobe boosts FG%... but it's the same as the effect for any good team, where players are asked to do less because Kobe is shooting 20 times a game. That's the point... that Kobe doesn't have any special power to do this, any good team tends to "improve" the players around it because there it spreads the defensive attention.

Kevin Garnett shot two career highs with Boston instead of Minnesota! Paul Pierce for MVP!

I'm gonna have to say you are unqualified to make this statement. Furthermore it doesn't make sense when the scope of what he is arguing includes the awful Laker teams from 05, 06, and 07. It is undeniable that Kobe has made bad players look marketable. Smush was out of the league the minute he left L.A., Kwame was actually being argued to be a top 8 big man in 06, there was actually a market for Brian Cook (how else do you think the Lakers swindled the Magic out of Trevor Ariza). Sometimes you have to give credit where credit is due.

So now Kobe's a hero for being on terrible teams? You need to go a lot further to prove the thesis that Kobe has some special ability beyond what others have to make bad players "marketable." Take Kwame. He was drafted straight out of high school, and played generally pretty badly for the Wizards. He goes to the Lakers, and voila, he shoots .500! Kobe the genius? Or a player getting older and learning how to play? He shot .530 the next year on a sub-.500 Pistons team... I guess Allen Iverson made the difference in his case?

Fabricio Oberto, for instance, looked half-decent for the Spurs, and sucks terribly for the Wizards. Was that Tim Duncan using the same power? Or is it just that he played OK on a good team, like Smush Parker or Brian Cook, but secretly sucks?

This is especially true because the points are sometimes contradictory. For instance, Ariza was used as evidence that Kobe is a teacher, and makes his teammates better on a permanent basis... did the magic wear off when he got traded, so now he's evidence of Kobe's temporary effect (as already done in this thread)?

The reality is, "making others better" is a myth, used in order to give credit for winning to individual players rather than the entire team. It's ironic, really, that those who scream loudest about team success are those who seek to promote an individual above a system or a team.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Nope, Kobe isn't putting LeBron numbers because he just can't. He can never average 8 assists or shoot better than %50. It's not about "being forced to do" it's about limits. He's a less efficient scorer and on "passing", he's not on Bron's level. Well he can average 35 points per game but it won't be as effective as LeBron's.

LOL, you do realize that Lebron has never shot 50% nor average 8 apg either, don't you?

[Greatness]

Nope, Kobe isn't putting LeBron numbers because he just can't. He can never average 8 assists or shoot better than %50. It's not about "being forced to do" it's about limits. He's a less efficient scorer and on "passing", he's not on Bron's level. Well he can average 35 points per game but it won't be as effective as LeBron's.

LOL, you do realize that Lebron has never shot 50% nor average 8 apg either, don't you?

True, but both might happen this year.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Nope, Kobe isn't putting LeBron numbers because he just can't. He can never average 8 assists or shoot better than %50. It's not about "being forced to do" it's about limits. He's a less efficient scorer and on "passing", he's not on Bron's level. Well he can average 35 points per game but it won't be as effective as LeBron's.

LOL, you do realize that Lebron has never shot 50% nor average 8 apg either, don't you?

True, but both might happen this year.

It's way too early in the season to project stats. Kobe's at 49% right now, so he could very well score over 30 ppg while shooting 50%. But less than 15 games into a 82 game season, It's a bit premature.

[JimMurray]

So now Kobe's a hero for being on terrible teams? You need to go a lot further to prove the thesis that Kobe has some special ability beyond what others have to make bad players "marketable." Take Kwame. He was drafted straight out of high school, and played generally pretty badly for the Wizards. He goes to the Lakers, and voila, he shoots .500! Kobe the genius? Or a player getting older and learning how to play? He shot .530 the next year on a sub-.500 Pistons team... I guess Allen Iverson made the difference in his case?

Your first sentence is out of the scope of this discussion. Nobody purported Kobe a hero that he played on bad teams (even if the underlying context of that is it is remarkable what he was able to accomplish with those teams). 2nd, it speaks to a deeper agenda on your part to even blurt something like that out. Are you speaking objectively or do you just not like Kobe? I don't need to go a lot further if the evidence is obvious. You have plenty of before and after examples of players who have played with Kobe not playing well after they left. You also have plenty of examples of NBA players who were afterthoughts and all of a sudden making a name for themselves while playing with Kobe. I'm not going to write a 5000 word report on the matter, but the surface evidence overwhelmingly supports the fact that Kobe makes players around him better. I don't think that's a reach, and I don't understand why you are arguing this so ardently.

If you want to make the argument that Kwame is a better player now then when he was with the Lakers, that's on you. I don't know what to say if that's the argument you want to make. I'm staying out of that one.

Fabricio Oberto, for instance, looked half-decent for the Spurs, and sucks terribly for the Wizards. Was that Tim Duncan using the same power? Or is it just that he played OK on a good team, like Smush Parker or Brian Cook, but secretly sucks?

Does the fact that Tim Duncan can make players better preclude the fact that Kobe can do the same thing? Are you really going to argue that any Laker team that started Smush Parker and Brian Cook was actually a good team?

To answer your question another way...yes, superstar players have a magical ability to enhance the potential of average players around them. Matter of fact, it might be a prerequisite to being labeled a legit superstar. Furthermore, the biggest reason superstars are most commonly found on playoff teams is because by default, they enhance the quality of the players around them. If you want to call this ability, "magical", that's fine. Others might define it as what commonly happens when you stick a super human talent with above average intelligence on the floor with other capable players.

This is especially true because the points are sometimes contradictory. For instance, Ariza was used as evidence that Kobe is a teacher, and makes his teammates better on a permanent basis... did the magic wear off when he got traded, so now he's evidence of Kobe's temporary effect (as already done in this thread)?

I didn't make that argument, and I could see why would label that contradictory. I'm not sure who originally brought up that point so I won't comment on it. I will however say this....I don't think it takes a rocket scientist or NBA expert to understand that average NBA players will play better alongside superstars. I don't think it's an attribute exclusive to Kobe Bryant.

The reality is, "making others better" is a myth, used in order to give credit for winning to individual players rather than the entire team. It's ironic, really, that those who scream loudest about team success are those who seek to promote an individual above a system or a team.

No it's not, and Phil Jackson has 10 shiny physical pieces of evidence to prove otherwise. No way any of those Bulls teams win a championship with a lesser superstar. Replace Jordan with, lets say....Karl Malon; instead of 6 rings, MAYBE you have one. Making other players better is a historical fact. And if you want to prove it a myth, I'd love to hear any arguments you have that are not based on abstract assumptions, the same kind you have been inclined to promote thus far.

[poopdamoop]

Making players better =/= making players look better

[JimMurray]

Making players better =/= making players look better

+1

[Bank Shot]

As a big Nash fan I am absolutely loving this year. This year has been great for his legacy. Maybe you don't agree with his MVPs which is fine, but really there is no way you can legitimately argue that Nash wasn't/isn't an all-time great and was overrated or his success was just due to D'Anotoni anymore. The guy is an awesome talent. Obviously not top 10 great or anything like that but the guy is a no questions asked HOF.

Anyways my list for now:
1) Nash
2) Bron (no doubt in my mind he wins it barring injuries)
3) Kobe
4) Dirk
5) Howard

[INKtastic]

It's way too early in the season to project stats. Kobe's at 49% right now, so he could very well score over 30 ppg while shooting 50%. But less than 15 games into a 82 game season, It's a bit premature.

This thread is about who is MVP right now, so you go by today's records and stats.

29.2 points on 19.1 shots vs 29.5 points on 22.8 shots

When Kobe had the statistical advantage, the stats were used to prove he was better. Now the argument for Kobe has been reduced to talk of footwork and form, i.e. one of style over substance

[Boognish]

I hate all of you.

[BROWN]

Nash, Melo, Kobe, Lebron, Dirk all deserve MVP considerations. Lebron will win it barring any type of injury.

[JimMurray]

It's way too early in the season to project stats. Kobe's at 49% right now, so he could very well score over 30 ppg while shooting 50%. But less than 15 games into a 82 game season, It's a bit premature.

This thread is about who is MVP right now, so you go by today's records and stats.

29.2 points on 19.1 shots vs 29.5 points on 22.8 shots

When Kobe had the statistical advantage, the stats were used to prove he was better. Now the argument for Kobe has been reduced to talk of footwork and form, i.e. one of style over substance

No it hasn't. Thats what Lebron supporters reduce it to. I really feel Lebron has to be held to a higher standard this year. He's no longer the up and comer. He's the reigning MVP and it's not enough to stuff the box scores every night. He has to show that he can win and lead a team. His supporting cast is no longer a valid argument since he finished with the best record last year with a team that had fewer weapons than he has now. It's going to be difficult for him this year with his pending free agency. It's hard to lead when your followers don't know if your there for the long haul, or if they are constantly being evaluated on whether or not they are worth playing with in the future. Lebron didn't have this problem last year, and he rightfully won the MVP. Based on what I've seen so far, I'd give it to Nash or Kobe a million times before I gave it too Lebron. He has to pull that team together, they appear to be a mess.

This year it's not going to be about numbers, because Nash is too obvious of an MVP candidate and he will never win based on numbers alone. This year is about leadership, and Lebron has to show something. He has to grow up, much in the same way Kobe had to grow up after Shaq left.

[Inhuman]

The reality is, "making others better" is a myth, used in order to give credit for winning to individual players rather than the entire team. It's ironic, really, that those who scream loudest about team success are those who seek to promote an individual above a system or a team.

Even some of the guys in the Olympic team came back better players with the small amount of time they had with kobe. Yeah the big name players included. Its not a stretch to think that having full seasons with kobe would make no name guys relevant. Whatever the reason, work ethic, more open shots, learning from him, etc.