MVP Rankings 1.0

[Chris Hansen]

Well we might have it wrong.

I talked to a friend of mine in the media who usually has a MVP vote. He said that Kobe would win it if the season ended today. He said there's a lot of support for Melo and said it is basically going to come down to Melo v. Kobe.

I asked about Lebron. He said Lebron would be third unless the Cavs meet the expectations of being the best team in the league. He said they didn't just add Shaq, but added a bunch of other "solid" players.

Said it was too early to predict, but it'll be close between Melo and Bryant.

I personally think Lebron and Kobe have much better cases than Melo, but it is what it is.

Nice made up story. It was cute.

[YLSKillaCam]

Well we might have it wrong.

I talked to a friend of mine in the media who usually has a MVP vote. He said that Kobe would win it if the season ended today. He said there's a lot of support for Melo and said it is basically going to come down to Melo v. Kobe.

I asked about Lebron. He said Lebron would be third unless the Cavs meet the expectations of being the best team in the league. He said they didn't just add Shaq, but added a bunch of other "solid" players.

Said it was too early to predict, but it'll be close between Melo and Bryant.

I personally think Lebron and Kobe have much better cases than Melo, but it is what it is.

Nice made up story. It was cute.

I have no reason to lie about something so inconsequential.

[MHZ]

Honestly, LeBron's stats could be better than Kobe's, but he's not winning the MVP if his team is finishing fourth in the East, or probably even third. That's simply the most important factor to voters. They're not going to reward LeBron for his team regressing two or three spots in the Eastern Conference standings, after having the league's best record last year. A minor regression wouldn't be a surprise, but if they're finishing third or fourth, I don't see anyway he gets it.

I'm sure a few Cavs fans will argue that point, but based on the dynamics of MVP voting, I just don't see why you think he'll repeat if his team is dropping multiple slots in the standings. Whether you think that's fair or not is an entirely different point, but it's just the way it is.

[Dat Pass]

I'm sure a few Cavs fans will argue that point, but based on the dynamics of MVP voting, I just don't see why you think he'll repeat if his team is dropping multiple slots in the standings. Whether you think that's fair or not is an entirely different point, but it's just the way it is.

Absolutely. I kind of have a feeling that some of the MVP voters dont really do a lot of research. They'll simply look at the Cavs 66 wins last year, see that they dropped by 5-6 games even though they added 3 quality role players, and move on to another MVP candidate. Again, fair or unfair, thats not the point, its just how a lot of us see it playing out.

[INKtastic]

Last year Kobe lost MVP in a landslide. A one game lead over Kobe's Lakers in the standings wasn't the only reason LeBron won. Kobe's team won 65 games and they added artest. If the Cavs have to improve on 66 wins for LeBron to win, don't the lakers have to improve on 65 for Kobe to win?

[Dat Pass]

Last year Kobe lost MVP in a landslide. A one game lead over Kobe's Lakers in the standings wasn't the only reason LeBron won. Kobe's team won 65 games and they added artest. If the Cavs have to improve on 66 wins for LeBron to win, don't the lakers have to improve on 65 for Kobe to win?

Heres the difference; alot of people felt that Artest over Ariza wasnt even an upgrade, or a minimal upgrade at best. Hindsight shows that it was a slight upgrade, but not much.

For the Cavs; they added Shaq/Moon/Parker and lost virtually no one.

Adding 3 solid role players while not losing anyone is a huge difference than exchanging players that are similar in abilities. Either way, yes the Lakers do have to come at least within a game or 2 of those 65 wins from last year. (Which shouldnt be a problem)

[YLSKillaCam]

Last year Kobe lost MVP in a landslide. A one game lead over Kobe's Lakers in the standings wasn't the only reason LeBron won. Kobe's team won 65 games and they added artest. If the Cavs have to improve on 66 wins for LeBron to win, don't the lakers have to improve on 65 for Kobe to win?

no because they won a championship and then got rid of a key player on the championship team.

If anything, most people expected the Lakers to be worse with Artest, at least initially. The fact that they are arguably better is a +1 for Kobe.

This point might be moot since it seems likely that the Lakers will match or exceed their win total from last season.

But Win/Loss total is missing the point. The key is standings. When you play a game, you win if you win by 100 points or by 1 point. A win is a win. There's no extra credit for beating your opponent by 40. Similarly, if you're the first seed in the playoffs with 58 wins, you're the first seed. Have 65 wins is just icing on the cake, but you don't get a higher seed because you win more games. As long as the Lakers are #1, Kobe is the MVP and probably if they end up #2 behind the Celts as well.

[KobeFarmarEra]

Lebron's defense has regressed. So has his team.

Kobe's playing better defense than Lebron, came into the season with the best post-game from a guard this league has seen since MJ.

Not only is Kobe the MVP thus far. He's easily the best player in the league.

[JimMurray]

Well we might have it wrong.

I talked to a friend of mine in the media who usually has a MVP vote. He said that Kobe would win it if the season ended today. He said there's a lot of support for Melo and said it is basically going to come down to Melo v. Kobe.

Actually, we have it right!

I asked about Lebron. He said Lebron would be third unless the Cavs meet the expectations of being the best team in the league. He said they didn't just add Shaq, but added a bunch of other "solid" players.

That's pretty much what we've been saying, I'm glad people recognize this.

Said it was too early to predict, but it'll be close between Melo and Bryant.

I really have no problem with Melo being ahead of James. I don't even have a problem with Melo being tied with Kobe if that's how people want to see it. At the end of the day though, I just don't see Melo surpassing Kobe.

I personally think Lebron and Kobe have much better cases than Melo, but it is what it is.

I'm not so sure it's.."much better", but yeah, I have Kobe and Lebron ahead of Melo for now.

[JimMurray]

Honestly, LeBron's stats could be better than Kobe's, but he's not winning the MVP if his team is finishing fourth in the East, or probably even third. That's simply the most important factor to voters. They're not going to reward LeBron for his team regressing two or three spots in the Eastern Conference standings, after having the league's best record last year. A minor regression wouldn't be a surprise, but if they're finishing third or fourth, I don't see anyway he gets it.

I'm sure a few Cavs fans will argue that point, but based on the dynamics of MVP voting, I just don't see why you think he'll repeat if his team is dropping multiple slots in the standings. Whether you think that's fair or not is an entirely different point, but it's just the way it is.

This.

[JimMurray]

Last year Kobe lost MVP in a landslide. A one game lead over Kobe's Lakers in the standings wasn't the only reason LeBron won. Kobe's team won 65 games and they added artest. If the Cavs have to improve on 66 wins for LeBron to win, don't the lakers have to improve on 65 for Kobe to win?

Nope...best record in the league will do it. Whether or not that requires 66 wins or 56 wins is irrelevant.

[JimMurray]

Lebron's defense has regressed. So has his team.

Kobe's playing better defense than Lebron, came into the season with the best post-game from a guard this league has seen since MJ.

Not only is Kobe the MVP thus far. He's easily the best player in the league.

Also....this.

[INKtastic]

Last year Kobe lost MVP in a landslide. A one game lead over Kobe's Lakers in the standings wasn't the only reason LeBron won. Kobe's team won 65 games and they added artest. If the Cavs have to improve on 66 wins for LeBron to win, don't the lakers have to improve on 65 for Kobe to win?

no because they won a championship and then got rid of a key player on the championship team.

If anything, most people expected the Lakers to be worse with Artest, at least initially. The fact that they are arguably better is a +1 for Kobe.

what kind of spin is that - Artest is a former DPOY who was 2nd team all defense last year. He's quite clearly an upgrade over ariza. The lakers must think so, they could have kept ariza, who wanted to stay, but quickly went after Artest instead. Cleveland was after him too, and he would have been a much better addition than Parker/Moon.

Who expected the lakers to struggle? Preseason power rankings univerally had them #1 and the cavs in the 4-5 range, and right now the lakers are in a 2 way tie for first while the cavs are in a 5 way tie for 3rd with all of a 2 game gap between those 7 teams.

The cavs added shaq, moved Z to the bench, moved parker to teh starting lineup, don't know what they'll get from Delonte from day to day, added Moon to the rotation, moved Andy to the bench, moved a 2nd year player who missed part of his rookie season into the starting lineup. That's a lot of change compared to plugging artest in for ariza and leaving the rest in tact.

[YLSKillaCam]

Last year Kobe lost MVP in a landslide. A one game lead over Kobe's Lakers in the standings wasn't the only reason LeBron won. Kobe's team won 65 games and they added artest. If the Cavs have to improve on 66 wins for LeBron to win, don't the lakers have to improve on 65 for Kobe to win?

no because they won a championship and then got rid of a key player on the championship team.

If anything, most people expected the Lakers to be worse with Artest, at least initially. The fact that they are arguably better is a +1 for Kobe.

what kind of spin is that - Artest is a former DPOY who was 2nd team all defense last year. He's quite clearly an upgrade over ariza. The lakers must think so, they could have kept ariza, who wanted to stay, but quickly went after Artest instead. Cleveland was after him too, and he would have been a much better addition than Parker/Moon.

Who expected the lakers to struggle? Preseason power rankings univerally had them #1 and the cavs in the 4-5 range, and right now the lakers are in a 2 way tie for first while the cavs are in a 5 way tie for 3rd with all of a 2 game gap between those 7 teams.

The cavs added shaq, moved Z to the bench, moved parker to teh starting lineup, don't know what they'll get from Delonte from day to day, added Moon to the rotation, moved Andy to the bench, moved a 2nd year player who missed part of his rookie season into the starting lineup. That's a lot of change compared to plugging artest in for ariza and leaving the rest in tact.

Let's not sugarcoat the issue. You're the one trying to spin. Why don't you note that "power rankings" are usually created and maintained by just one person. How about more diversity in thought?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... WestChamps

That link will show you that 53 ESPN analysts had predictions. Only 41 picked the Lakers to win the West. That means 12 others - over a fifth- of ESPN analysts predicted Lakers not even to win the West much less have the best record. Hardly "universal."

The same panel thought that the Lakers would win 62 games throughout the regular season.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... tStandings


How did the Cavs do?

Well 32, or over 60%, thought the Cavs would be in first place. That's even with a healthy Celtics squad there.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... EastChamps

In fact, the same analysts predicted Cleveland to win 61 games. Just one less than the Lakers this season.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... tStandings

As a result, almost an equal number of analysts predicted the Cavs to win the championship as the Lakers.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... -NBAChamps

Then most of those anaysts predicted Lebron to repeat as MVP.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... ions09-MVP

The MVP predictions are not surprising given that the Cavs were expected to be within 1 game of LA AND be 1st in the Eastern Conference and look like contenders for a championship.

Like I said, Kobe is meeting expectations...cleveland is not. I don't know how I can make it any clearer than this.

[YLSKillaCam]

Oh and just for the record,

people thought that Artest was both a "best and worst" newcomer, while Shaq was considered only for "best newcomer" and received more votes in that category than Artest.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... stNewcomer

[Dat Pass]

Haha, nice work on that research YLSKilla.. That should keep him quiet for awhile.

lj4mvp is the one that does all the "spinning", as he like to call it.

(Artest won DPOY almost 6 years ago, and you really think that switching from Ariza to Artest is a bigger upgrade then getting Shaq/Moon/Parker for nothing?)

[YLSKillaCam]

Both ESPN and NBA.com have Kobe as the MVP so far.

http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/1 ... index.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/awards

[CzBoobie]

So what if the only difference in those "experts" predictions is that Boston will get the best record in the league, the Lakers get the first seed in the West and the Cavs have about 3 wins less than the Lakers? All that while LeBron maintaining his clear statistic advantage. Who is the MVP then?

[Dat Pass]

So what if the only difference in those "experts" predictions is that Boston will get the best record in the league, the Lakers get the first seed in the West and the Cavs have about 3 wins less than the Lakers? All that while LeBron maintaining his clear statistic advantage. Who is the MVP then?

If the Cavs finish 3 games back of the Lakers and LeBron still has the clear advantage in stats, then it goes to LeBron. (Barring any major Laker injuries)

But if the Cavs win 58-59 games and are the 3rd seed, while the Lakers win 65-66 and are the 1st seed, it should go to Kobe.

[INKtastic]

I never said anything about who would win the championship, the moves we made were clearly made to give us a better chance to win the championship (which I fully expect Cleveland to win). The fact is we have quite a few changes to integrate plus the unexpected issues with delonte (the forecast you posted was before any of the delonte issues happened). I specifically said pre-season power rankings, which took into account that we may start out a bit slow.