MVP Rankings 1.0

[JimMurray]

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.

When average players play with superstars, they are made temporarily better.

When potential or budding superstars play with real superstars, the become permanently better.

[CzBoobie]

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.

You make it sound like the Cavs are a struggling .500 team while being at full strength. Newsflash for you, they are still one of the best teams in the NBA. Despite having 2 new players in the starting lineup, despite Delonte's problems, despite Shaq's, Varejao's and Moon's injuries. And they didn't get to play 75% of their games at home either, no, they already played 4 in 5 days twice during this stretch instead.

[JimMurray]

You make it sound like the Cavs are a struggling .500 team while being at full strength. Newsflash for you, they are still one of the best teams in the NBA. Despite having 2 new players in the starting lineup, despite Delonte's problems, despite Shaq's, Varejao's and Moon's injuries. And they didn't get to play 75% of their games at home either, no, they already played 4 in 5 days twice during this stretch instead.

I guess we'll see how well that holds up, won't we? Lebron certainly deserves some credit for that.

[YLSKillaCam]

I have Kobe as my MVP over Lebron for a couple of reasons.

1. Kobe's team is winning more games. You can point to the talent the Lakers have, but the simple fact is that you couldn't be asking more out of the guy. It is ridiculous to deny a guy from getting MVP because he has talent on his team. One of the hardest things to do is to take talent and mesh it well into an elite team. Kobe, as the floor leader, is doing a superb job.

2. Lebron's team is only third in the Eastern Conference and today they'd be tied for 6th overall. Gimme a break. When's the last time a MVP came from a guy who was on the 6th best team in the league? Last year, the Cavs were # 1 overall. Hard to see a guy winning MVP back to back when his team was much better last year and they have the same or upgraded personnel.

3. Kobe's defense has been superb and it has been better than Lebron's this season. The Lakers have the best opponent FG% of any team in the league and, relevant to Kobe, they have the best opponent 3 point FG %. Lakers don't foul a lot on 3 pointers, so it is worth mentioning that both Artest and Kobe are playing spectacular perimeter defense.

4. The difference between Lebron and Kobe, in my opinion, is simple. If you want to take a team and make them a championship contender, you pick Lebron. If you want to take a team and make them champions, you choose Kobe. That's where Kobe's personality, drive, will...all the intangibles that make him great come into play. For all the talk about statistics and objective data, it is the things that cannot be measured that really set these two players apart.

1. Kobe
2. Nash
3. Lebron
---------------
4. Melo
4. Dirk
----------------

No one else is close at this point, I feel.

[CzBoobie]

4. The difference between Lebron and Kobe, in my opinion, is simple. If you want to take a team and make them a championship contender, you pick Lebron. If you want to take a team and make them champions, you choose Kobe. That's where Kobe's personality, drive, will...all the intangibles that make him great come into play. For all the talk about statistics and objective data, it is the things that cannot be measured that really set these two players apart.

Or you have to trade for Pau Gasol and have the best coach ever on the bench...

Give me a freaking break about this nonsense. You really want to tell people LeBron wouldn't have won the title with the Lakers last year?

[Kaykoose]

4. The difference between Lebron and Kobe, in my opinion, is simple. If you want to take a team and make them a championship contender, you pick Lebron. If you want to take a team and make them champions, you choose Kobe. That's where Kobe's personality, drive, will...all the intangibles that make him great come into play. For all the talk about statistics and objective data, it is the things that cannot be measured that really set these two players apart.

lmaoooooooooooooooo

[Dat Pass]

4. The difference between Lebron and Kobe, in my opinion, is simple. If you want to take a team and make them a championship contender, you pick Lebron. If you want to take a team and make them champions, you choose Kobe. That's where Kobe's personality, drive, will...all the intangibles that make him great come into play. For all the talk about statistics and objective data, it is the things that cannot be measured that really set these two players apart.

Or you have to trade for Pau Gasol and have the best coach ever on the bench...

Give me a freaking break about this nonsense. You really want to tell people LeBron wouldn't have won the title with the Lakers last year?

The Lakers went 8-3 without Gasol this season.

And they were 35-20 before they traded for him in 2008. (A winning percentage much better than the Cavs of that same season)

[CzBoobie]

BB, I don't care what they record was...they wouldn't be where they are now if it wasn't for Gasol. Kobe doesn't posses some magical powers that make his teams champions. He just happens to play on close to prefect team with loads of talent. LeBron never had it, he only got closer to it last year. Yeah, if Kobe played on inferior squads and somehow still managed to win or do better, then there is no question. But it's not the case...

[MixedUp]

MVP 2.0 is up Please close this one a sticky the other one of possible!

[semi-sentient]

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

Statistics have rarely favored Kobe as far as PER or other advanced metrics are concerned, so what are you talking about? The arguments for Kobe being better have always been about analyzing their games (skill on both ends, impact, leadership, etc.), how they dominate their position, and of course, the end result.

[YLSKillaCam]

The people talking about Gasol are silly. When Gasol came to the Lakers, he wasn't considered a Garnett or a Duncan. He wasn't even considered a top 15 player in the league. He was a 18/10 guy with great fundamentals, but was considered weak on defense and weak mentally. There's a bunch of guys that can get you 18/10 and wouldn't catupult you to a championship.

Also, to say that Lebron would've won a championship with Gasol is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. This isn't to say that he wouldn't, but to say that he would merely because Kobe was able to is ridiculous. There's so many factors that go into winning a championship. It is very difficult to win a championship even if you have a great great team. Look at the Cavs last year. Everyone thought they were a great team until they failed to win a championship and now there's a bunch of revisionist history going on trying to rewrite it as if Lebron had no help. Winning a championship is a very delicate process and the victor should be credited and celebrated. There's a bunch of sour grapes going on here with Lebron fans and it isn't very classy.

The fact is that Kobe led his team to a championship, Lebron has not. The Cavs won more games in the regular season and the Cavs, as a team, were stastitically BY FAR the best team in the league. They should have at least gotten past Orlando. You can talk about Kobe having Gasol, but there is simply no excuse for the Cavs to have lost to the Magic. I could understand the argument if the Cavs made it to the finals to play the Lakers, but they did not. It is hard to see how Czbron's point makes any analytical sense or even has any support as a result. If the point is Lebron > Kobe so therefore, he would've won with Kobe's team, then it is a foolish argument to begin.

That being said, between Kobe, Lebron and Nash, the race is close. Lebron is third because it is unfathomable that a guy on the sixth best team in the league deserves it over two guys playing comparably well individually with better records in a tougher conference.

[TheOUTLAW]

almost nobody thought of the Cavs as a great team last year. In fact just about everyone was astounded that they won as many as they did. The Cavs lost to the Magic for the exact same reason that the Magic won the season series against them. It's not as though you couldn't have seen that coming and to view the Magic as some kind of awful team is both disengenuous and insulting to that team.

[CzBoobie]

The people talking about Gasol are silly. When Gasol came to the Lakers, he wasn't considered a Garnett or a Duncan. He wasn't even considered a top 15 player in the league. He was a 18/10 guy with great fundamentals, but was considered weak on defense and weak mentally. There's a bunch of guys that can get you 18/10 and wouldn't catupult you to a championship.

He was a 20/10 guy who was also a pretty good passer and averaged around two blocks per game in his best years in Memphis, he was easily the best player on winning teams, even having a 50-win season under his belt, he just obviously wasn't a first option on a championship contender. He got to a pretty good team for almost nothing in return and you want to tell me it wasn't something that ultimately got the Lakers where they are now, i.e. champions?

Also, to say that Lebron would've won a championship with Gasol is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. This isn't to say that he wouldn't, but to say that he would merely because Kobe was able to is ridiculous. There's so many factors that go into winning a championship. It is very difficult to win a championship even if you have a great great team. Look at the Cavs last year. Everyone thought they were a great team until they failed to win a championship and now there's a bunch of revisionist history going on trying to rewrite it as if Lebron had no help. Winning a championship is a very delicate process and the victor should be credited and celebrated. There's a bunch of sour grapes going on here with Lebron fans and it isn't very classy.


]The fact is that Kobe led his team to a championship, Lebron has not. The Cavs won more games in the regular season and the Cavs, as a team, were stastitically BY FAR the best team in the league. They should have at least gotten past Orlando. You can talk about Kobe having Gasol, but there is simply no excuse for the Cavs to have lost to the Magic. I could understand the argument if the Cavs made it to the finals to play the Lakers, but they did not. It is hard to see how Czbron's point makes any analytical sense or even has any support as a result. If the point is Lebron > Kobe so therefore, he would've won with Kobe's team, then it is a foolish argument to begin.

LeBron would have won a championship last year if he was on the Lakers instead of Kobe. I'm 100% positive about it. Kobe has had much more help than LeBron ever had. Trade Bosh to the Cavs, steal Popovich from the Spurs and then you can brag about how Kobe is a miracle champion maker all you want...

That being said, between Kobe, Lebron and Nash, the race is close. Lebron is third because it is unfathomable that a guy on the sixth best team in the league deserves it over two guys playing comparably well individually with better records in a tougher conference.

It's also unfathomable to play 62 games at home, that's the pace the Lakers are at right now...

[JimMurray]

4. The difference between Lebron and Kobe, in my opinion, is simple. If you want to take a team and make them a championship contender, you pick Lebron. If you want to take a team and make them champions, you choose Kobe. That's where Kobe's personality, drive, will...all the intangibles that make him great come into play. For all the talk about statistics and objective data, it is the things that cannot be measured that really set these two players apart.

Or you have to trade for Pau Gasol and have the best coach ever on the bench...

Give me a freaking break about this nonsense. You really want to tell people LeBron wouldn't have won the title with the Lakers last year?

To be fair, I don't think it's an unreasonable question given the fact that Lebron couldn't get out of the East last year with a superior team. How do you guys not beat the Magic?! Those guys were dirt. Dwight Howard is a fake superstar and their 2nd best players was Turkeyglue, and they didn't even have Nelson.

[JimMurray]

The people talking about Gasol are silly. When Gasol came to the Lakers, he wasn't considered a Garnett or a Duncan. He wasn't even considered a top 15 player in the league. He was a 18/10 guy with great fundamentals, but was considered weak on defense and weak mentally. There's a bunch of guys that can get you 18/10 and wouldn't catupult you to a championship.

Zach Randolph anyone? Nobody wants to talk about this, and it's a great point.

[InBoobieWeTrust]

The people talking about Gasol are silly. When Gasol came to the Lakers, he wasn't considered a Garnett or a Duncan. He wasn't even considered a top 15 player in the league. He was a 18/10 guy with great fundamentals, but was considered weak on defense and weak mentally. There's a bunch of guys that can get you 18/10 and wouldn't catupult you to a championship.

Zach Randolph anyone? Nobody wants to talk about this, and it's a great point.

Remind me when Zach Randolph was the best player and go-to-guy on a 50 win team, will you?

[JimMurray]

almost nobody thought of the Cavs as a great team last year. In fact just about everyone was astounded that they won as many as they did. The Cavs lost to the Magic for the exact same reason that the Magic won the season series against them. It's not as though you couldn't have seen that coming and to view the Magic as some kind of awful team is both disingenuous and insulting to that team.

It doesn't matter, nobody thought of the Lakers as a great team the year they went to the finals against the Celtics, after that the general consensus among Cavs fans was "Well, Kobe can't be MVP because his supporting cast is too good. His supporting cast was virtually identical to the team that was bounced in the first round the year before. You only get to play that card once. Once you establish that you can win with a team, by default, they are a good enough team. The Cavs had the best record in the league last season and got better in the off-season. You guys can no longer use the "Lebron has no supporting cast" card.

Call me disingenuous, call me insulting...but the Magic had no business being in the finals last season. They were a three point shooting team, those teams don't normally win in the playoffs. They took advantage of a beat up Celtics team and abused an overconfident Cavs team (That was Lebron's fault, the Cavs had no business losing to that team). The Magic are better this year because of VC, but don't tell me the Magic were a finals caliber team last year.

[CzBoobie]

To be fair, I don't think it's an unreasonable question given the fact that Lebron couldn't get out of the East last year with a superior team. How do you guys not beat the Magic?! Those guys were dirt. Dwight Howard is a fake superstar and their 2nd best players was Turkeyglue, and they didn't even have Nelson.

What was so superior about the team? The Cavs won more games than Orlando only because of LeBron and Nelson's injury. In the playoffs they were competitive against them only because LeBron played like god. There was nothing superior about the team compared to the Magic and anyone who watched the Cavs for the whole season and especially against the Magic could see that. Not to even mention that Magic were just HOT in the series, they shot insanely well for three and Dwight was even hitting free throws, even the Lakers would have their hands full with them if they were hitting shots like against the Cavs. It also didn't help that Cavs' second best player played terribly in the first four games of the series. And about "Turkeyglue", they also had that one guy who won them two games in the series, his name was Rashard I believe.

[JimMurray]

He was a 20/10 guy who was also a pretty good passer and averaged around two blocks per game in his best years in Memphis, he was easily the best player on winning teams, even having a 50-win season under his belt, he just obviously wasn't a first option on a championship contender. He got to a pretty good team for almost nothing in return and you want to tell me it wasn't something that ultimately got the Lakers where they are now, i.e. champions?

The Lakers were already the number one seed in the West before they got Gasol. They were doing it with 19 year old Andrew Bynum as their starting center, who was only starting because Kwame Brown was hurt. It's not fair to say the Lakers started winning only because they got Gasol. It is fair to say the Lakers got better by adding Gasol.

LeBron would have won a championship last year if he was on the Lakers instead of Kobe. I'm 100% positive about it. Kobe has had much more help than LeBron ever had. Trade Bosh to the Cavs, steal Popovich from the Spurs and then you can brag about how Kobe is a miracle champion maker all you want...

Thats debatable, since he lost in the ECF to an inferior team because he couldn't keep his guys focused. I'm 100% positive that the Lakers don't get past the Nuggets if they had Lebron instead of Kobe. It doesn't happen.

It's also unfathomable to play 62 games at home, that's the pace the Lakers are at right now...

It all evens out in the end, don't worry about it . What kind of argument is that. "Oh look, the Lakers play 17 or 21 at home, they have an un-fair advantage!". That only means they'll be living on the road in the 2nd half, so I don't see why that even needs to be mentioned. You're reaching.

[tracey_nice]

LeBron would have won a championship last year if he was on the Lakers instead of Kobe. I'm 100% positive about it. Kobe has had much more help than LeBron ever had. Trade Bosh to the Cavs, steal Popovich from the Spurs and then you can brag about how Kobe is a miracle champion maker all you want...

I guess we should take your word on it if your 100% positive.