Evaluating the championship ring's value without finals MVP

[Point forward]

And what about Bird? He didn't win Finals MVP in his first title run, but everyone considers him the best player on that 81 team.

Good argument, and Bird was really covered well by Rob Reid during that Finals, so Cedric Maxwell saved the day. But then, Larry actually finished the job Lebron could not do: lead a miserable franchise (the Celtics were a 29 win team when Larry arrived) to the 'ship. In Bird's case, the fairy tale still ended happily, with Lebron, not.

Moral of the story: storyline > all

[mopper8]

The Bird example is a great one but also, what about the point that Lebron got far more MVP consideration than Wade in the regular season? Doesn't that matter to this discussion?

[ThaRegul8r]

Is Duncan's legacy diminished because Tony Parker won a finals MVP in 2007? Is Magic's legacy diminished when James Worthy won a finals MVP?

at when people don't even use good examples to prove their point.

Duncan already had three Finals MVPs when Parker won in 2007.

Magic already had three Finals MVPs when Worthy won in 1988.

How are those equivalent situations to this year should the Heat win and LeBron not win Finals MVP, when the aforementioned players won Finals MVP when they won their first rings and went on to win several more Finals MVPs before another teammate broke through?

It's similar to Duncan and Parker though, because Duncan was the best player through the first 3 rounds of the playoffs, just like LeBron was for the Heat. But Duncan willingly took a back seat to Parker in the Finals, because Parker had the favorable matchup. LeBron is doing the same thing for Wade.

Again, LeBron does not already have three championships. As of this moment, LeBron has zero. When Duncan also had zero title and won his first title in 1999, he was the Finals MVP. If LeBron already had three championships as Duncan did in the case mentioned, with three Finals MVPs to go along with them, then this wouldn't even be discussed. People have said LeBron could potentially be GOAT, and is thus compared to Jordan, who is the GOAT in the eyes of the oft-mentioned "majority" of the basketball public. Jordan was Finals MVP when he finally broke through and won his first ring in 1991. When talking about GOAT, this will be brought up.

(And this is what was said about Parker winning Finals MVP in 2007, BTW:

Parker was good but Duncan clearly deserved the finals MVP

In case you happened to catch the latest installment of the NBA finals (and if you didn't, I can't say that I blame you), you're probably aware that that finals MVP was won by a 6'2 french point guard. On paper, the casual observer would be more inclined to think that Tony Parker (or Mr Longoria) was fully entitled to winning the award. After all, Parker had just finished shredding the reminants a Cleveland Cavaliers defense that had previously styimed the Detroit Pistons in the conference finals, most notably holding stand - out Pistons point guard, Chauncey "Mr Big Shot" Billups to a mere fifteen points per game. Based on Parker's stats (24 ppg and 5 rpg), it may appear that his MVP award was legitimate, but that's where the final's MVP voters got it wrong.

Often times, voters have the tendency to justify their decisions based solely on the numbers that show up on a box score instead of dedicating a more concerted effort into actually watching the games. This flaw (one of many) with the NBA was perhaps epitomized best with Dirk Nowitzki winning the regular season MVP. While Dirk was clearly the best player on a 69 win team, many voters failed to account for the intangible qualities that should characterize the most valuable player of the league. Nowitzki's stats overshadowed his well documented ability (or lack thereof) to perform in the clutch, reflective of his failrue to lead his team past the first round of the playoffs. Clearly Steve Nash was the worthy recipient, with his uncanny aptitude to, not only make his teammates better players, but raise his game when the stakes were at the highest. In recent years NBA voters have been notorious in basing their selection on statistics, rather than an individual's intrinsic values. This needs to be changed.

While I genuinely appreciate the skills of Tony Parker, and in no way am I trying to discredit him, there were several factors that were overlooked in the voting process, and are some that I feel obliged to share with you.

Throughout the series, Parker was constantly matched up with Daniel Gibson, a rookie who appeared to be intimidated by playing on the game's greatest showcase, and Eric Snow, a solid but overrated defensive player. Another aspect is the fact that most of Parker's points were scored when the outcome of the game was no longer in doubt. Parker wasn't a closer and San Antonio relied heavily on Ginobili and Duncan as their prime finishers. And while I have no proof of this, I remain convinced that Cavaliers coach, Mike Brown, entered the series with a gameplan to inhibit Tim Duncan, even if it meant allowing Parker more room to operate. Duncan's the kind of player who beats you. Parker isn't. And as well as Tony Parker played, how many of you would rank him as a top tier, elite point guard in the NBA? He certainly wouldn't crack my top five. (Nash, J-Kidd, CP3, Billups and Baron Davis)

Tony Parker was solid, but he wasn't the best player on his team. Tim Duncan was. The very definition of a great NBA player, Duncan has remained grossly underrated through out his career, yet it is arguable that without him, the Spurs would not have even made the post season. One of the qualities that I admire about Duncan is his ability to defer to his teammates, yet when it gets down to crunch time, he is able to assert his dominance and single handedly shift the balance of a game in the favor of his team. Aside from Nash, I can't think of anyone who comes close to resembling Duncan's value to the Spurs.

Always a vocal presence amongst teammates, Duncan holds them accountable for their actions and his leadership is another quality that makes him so invaluable to San Antonio. Duncan was also able to deliver in the clutch, making two crucial free throws in the pivotal game 3 of the series. A big deal considering it was the first time he had gone to the line all night, and the fact that he isn't a particularly good foul shooter. In a series where defensive stops were the key, Duncan's presence was unmistakably felt on that end of the court, Parker's wasn't. Think about it this way, without Parker, the Spurs would still have a fighting chance to beat Cleveland. The same cannot be said without Duncan.

Another theory I have is that MVP voters are so fixated on change that Duncan's prior three finals MVPs were discounted. It's almost as if the message being sent was: well he's good but he's already won it three times and we would like to see someone else win it this year, which is incredulous from my perspective. Duncan clearly was the deserving MVP of the series but even though Tony Parker won the award, Duncan had nothing but praise for his fellow teammate - the true hallmark of a selfless champion.

And this had nothing to do with what Duncan did or did not do during the playoffs prior to the Finals, but was about Duncan deserving Finals MVP for the Finals.)

And what about Bird? He didn't win Finals MVP in his first title run, but everyone considers him the best player on that 81 team.

That's because it can be (and has been) debated whether Maxwell actually deserved Finals MVP over Bird in the first place. Bird had an off-shooting series, which is why Maxwell got it, but Bird did everything else. Bird averaged 15.3 points on 41.9% FG, 81.3% FT and 46.0% TS, 15.3 rebounds—which was just 1 rpg less than rebounding champion Moses Malone averaged for the series (think about that for a moment), 7 assists and 2.33 steals in 42.8 minutes per game. Maxwell averaged 17.7 points on 56.8 %FG, 75.9% FT and 61.1% TS, 9.5 rebounds and 2.8 assists. Maxwell averaged almost 2½ more points on better efficiency, but was inferior to Bird in everything else.

Bird had a team-high 18 points and game-highs of 21 rebounds and nine assists in a 98-95 Game 1 win, 19 points, a game-high 21 rebounds and five steals, and three assists in a 92-90 Game 2 loss, eight points on 3-for-11 shooting, but a team-high 13 rebounds, game-high 10 assists and five steals, and two blocked shots in a 94-71 Game 3 win, eight points on 3-for-11 shooting, but 12 rebounds, seven assists and three steals in Game 4, 12 points on 5-for-16 shooting, but 12 rebounds and game-high eight assists in a 109-80 Game 5 win, and 26 points on 11-for-20 shooting, 13 rebounds and five assists in a 102-91 Game 6 win.

Maxwell had 10 points on 4-for-12 shooting, nine rebounds and five assists in Game 1, 19 points on 9-for-16 shooting, 10 rebounds and two blocks in 36 minutes in Game 3, 24 points on 9-for-14 shooting, 14 rebounds in Game 4, a game-high 28 points on 10-for-13 shooting from the floor, game-high 15 rebounds, three assists and two blocks in Game 5, and 19 points, six assists and five rebounds in Game 6.

Basically Maxwell won Finals MVP because he scored more (2½ ppg) on higher efficiency. That's the only thing he had over Bird. I prefer players who can do more things than just score, because then even if they have an off night (as everyone does) they can still help their team win, rather than players whose value primarily lies in scoring, because if they have an off night, they are then useless to the team and won't contribute to the team winning. And it's not even like Maxwell had the biggest game for the team in the deciding game (e.g, Worthy's triple double in '88) to clinch the award—Bird did. So that doesn't work either. Can a similar case be made for LeBron—as of right now—that he should be Finals MVP over Wade?

[therealbig3]

Again, LeBron does not already have three championships. As of this moment, LeBron has zero. When Duncan also had zero title and won his first title in 1999, he was the Finals MVP. If LeBron already had three championships as Duncan did in the case mentioned, with three Finals MVPs to go along with them, then this wouldn't even be discussed. People have said LeBron could potentially be GOAT, and is thus compared to Jordan, who is the GOAT in the eyes of the oft-mentioned "majority" of the basketball public. Jordan was Finals MVP when he finally broke through and won his first ring in 1991. When talking about GOAT, this will be brought up.

And what about Bird? He didn't win Finals MVP in his first title run, but everyone considers him the best player on that 81 team.

That's because it can be (and has been) debated whether Maxwell even deserved Finals MVP over Bird. Bird had an off-shooting series, which is why Maxwell got it, but Bird did everything else. Bird averaged 15.3 points on 41.9% FG, 81.3% FT and 46.0% TS, 15.3 rebounds—which was just 1 rpg less than rebounding champion Moses Malone averaged for the series (think about that for a moment), 7 assists and 2.33 steals in 42.8 minutes per game. Maxwell averaged 17.7 points on 56.8 %FG, 75.9% FT and 61.1% TS, 9.5 rebounds and 2.8 assists. Maxwell averaged almost 2½ more points on better efficiency, but was inferior to Bird in everything else.

Bird had a team-high 18 points and game-highs of 21 rebounds and nine assists in a 98-95 Game 1 win, 19 points, a game-high 21 rebounds and five steals, and three assists in a 92-90 Game 2 loss, eight points on 3-for-11 shooting, but a team-high 13 rebounds, game-high 10 assists and five steals, and two blocked shots in a 94-71 Game 3 win, eight points on 3-for-11 shooting, but 12 rebounds, seven assists and three steals in Game 4, 12 points on 5-for-16 shooting, but 12 rebounds and game-high eight assists in a 109-80 Game 5 win, and 26 points on 11-for-20 shooting, 13 rebounds and five assists in a 102-91 Game 6 win.

Maxwell had 10 points on 4-for-12 shooting, nine rebounds and five assists in Game 1, 19 points on 9-for-16 shooting, 10 rebounds and two blocks in 36 minutes in Game 3, 24 points on 9-for-14 shooting, 14 rebounds in Game 4, a game-high 28 points on 10-for-13 shooting from the floor, game-high 15 rebounds, three assists and two blocks in Game 5, and 19 points, six assists and five rebounds in Game 6.

Basically Maxwell won Finals MVP because he scored more (2½ ppg) on higher efficiency. That's the only thing he had over Bird. I prefer players who can do more things than just score, because then even if they have an off night (as everyone does) they can still help their team win, rather than players whose value primarily lies in scoring, because if they have an off night, they are then useless to the team and won't contribute to the team winning. And it's not even like Maxwell had the biggest game for the team in the deciding game (e.g, Worthy's triple double in '88) to clinch the award—Bird did. So that doesn't work either. Can a similar case be made for LeBron—as of right now—that he should be Finals MVP over Wade?

What should be brought up is not who won Finals MVP, but who was the best player on the team, and who led them to the championship, meaning who was their best player in the regular season and who was their best player overall for the playoffs? That's LeBron.

And LeBron's scoring has been down (20.3 ppg), but his TS% is .617, and he's averaging ~7 rpg and 6 apg. He's playing great defense, and he's playing incredibly selfless and mature basketball right now. He recognizes that he's matched up with Marion, who's a tougher defensive player than Kidd/Terry, who Wade is matched up with. So he's allowing Wade to take over and be the man in this series. For a 26-year old, who's constantly being criticized for not leading a team anywhere and for running behind Wade, for him to still take the backseat to Wade when he recognizes the mismatches is incredibly unselfish.

But to answer your question, no, I don't think LeBron, as of right now, would have a case over Wade for Finals MVP. Wade is playing a great series. But in this case, Finals MVP wouldn't be indicative of who the best player on the team actually is.

Oh, and btw, 18 ppg on 60% TS>>>15 ppg on 46% TS. You're trying to dismiss that as a slight difference, and then say Bird made up for it everywhere else. Yeah Bird averaged 15 boards and 7 assists, but Maxwell also was grabbing about 10 boards a game. And the difference in scoring is absolutely monstrous, that can't be debated. You can maybe argue that Bird's playmaking made up for it, but I don't see a problem with Maxwell getting Finals MVP...people just need to realize that Bird was the best player overall.

LeBron: 20.3 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 6.0 apg, .617 TS%
Wade: 29.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg, 5.0 apg, .628 TS%

These are their Finals stats. LeBron is right there in terms of efficiency, is averaging more assists, is facing a much tougher defender, and is the guy who usually closes out the games. He's also playing better defense than Wade. Wade is outrebounding LeBron, and he's scoring a lot more.

Wade's not outplaying LeBron by as much as people want to believe.

[D.Brasco]

This series looks like it could go to 7 games there's still a lot game to be played. At 3 games in we may be not even half way done.

[JordansBulls]

Again, LeBron does not already have three championships. As of this moment, LeBron has zero. When Duncan also had zero title and won his first title in 1999, he was the Finals MVP. If LeBron already had three championships as Duncan did in the case mentioned, with three Finals MVPs to go along with them, then this wouldn't even be discussed. People have said LeBron could potentially be GOAT, and is thus compared to Jordan, who is the GOAT in the eyes of the oft-mentioned "majority" of the basketball public. Jordan was Finals MVP when he finally broke through and won his first ring in 1991. When talking about GOAT, this will be brought up.

And what about Bird? He didn't win Finals MVP in his first title run, but everyone considers him the best player on that 81 team.

That's because it can be (and has been) debated whether Maxwell even deserved Finals MVP over Bird. Bird had an off-shooting series, which is why Maxwell got it, but Bird did everything else. Bird averaged 15.3 points on 41.9% FG, 81.3% FT and 46.0% TS, 15.3 rebounds—which was just 1 rpg less than rebounding champion Moses Malone averaged for the series (think about that for a moment), 7 assists and 2.33 steals in 42.8 minutes per game. Maxwell averaged 17.7 points on 56.8 %FG, 75.9% FT and 61.1% TS, 9.5 rebounds and 2.8 assists. Maxwell averaged almost 2½ more points on better efficiency, but was inferior to Bird in everything else.

Bird had a team-high 18 points and game-highs of 21 rebounds and nine assists in a 98-95 Game 1 win, 19 points, a game-high 21 rebounds and five steals, and three assists in a 92-90 Game 2 loss, eight points on 3-for-11 shooting, but a team-high 13 rebounds, game-high 10 assists and five steals, and two blocked shots in a 94-71 Game 3 win, eight points on 3-for-11 shooting, but 12 rebounds, seven assists and three steals in Game 4, 12 points on 5-for-16 shooting, but 12 rebounds and game-high eight assists in a 109-80 Game 5 win, and 26 points on 11-for-20 shooting, 13 rebounds and five assists in a 102-91 Game 6 win.

Maxwell had 10 points on 4-for-12 shooting, nine rebounds and five assists in Game 1, 19 points on 9-for-16 shooting, 10 rebounds and two blocks in 36 minutes in Game 3, 24 points on 9-for-14 shooting, 14 rebounds in Game 4, a game-high 28 points on 10-for-13 shooting from the floor, game-high 15 rebounds, three assists and two blocks in Game 5, and 19 points, six assists and five rebounds in Game 6.

Basically Maxwell won Finals MVP because he scored more (2½ ppg) on higher efficiency. That's the only thing he had over Bird. I prefer players who can do more things than just score, because then even if they have an off night (as everyone does) they can still help their team win, rather than players whose value primarily lies in scoring, because if they have an off night, they are then useless to the team and won't contribute to the team winning. And it's not even like Maxwell had the biggest game for the team in the deciding game (e.g, Worthy's triple double in '88) to clinch the award—Bird did. So that doesn't work either. Can a similar case be made for LeBron—as of right now—that he should be Finals MVP over Wade?

What should be brought up is not who won Finals MVP, but who was the best player on the team, and who led them to the championship, meaning who was their best player in the regular season and who was their best player overall for the playoffs? That's LeBron.

And LeBron's scoring has been down (20.3 ppg), but his TS% is .617, and he's averaging ~7 rpg and 6 apg. He's playing great defense, and he's playing incredibly selfless and mature basketball right now. He recognizes that he's matched up with Marion, who's a tougher defensive player than Kidd/Terry, who Wade is matched up with. So he's allowing Wade to take over and be the man in this series. For a 26-year old, who's constantly being criticized for not leading a team anywhere and for running behind Wade, for him to still take the backseat to Wade when he recognizes the mismatches is incredibly unselfish.

But to answer your question, no, I don't think LeBron, as of right now, would have a case over Wade for Finals MVP. Wade is playing a great series. But in this case, Finals MVP wouldn't be indicative of who the best player on the team actually is.

Oh, and btw, 18 ppg on 60% TS>>>15 ppg on 46% TS. You're trying to dismiss that as a slight difference, and then say Bird made up for it everywhere else. Yeah Bird averaged 15 boards and 7 assists, but Maxwell also was grabbing about 10 boards a game. And the difference in scoring is absolutely monstrous, that can't be debated. You can maybe argue that Bird's playmaking made up for it, but I don't see a problem with Maxwell getting Finals MVP...people just need to realize that Bird was the best player overall.

LeBron: 20.3 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 6.0 apg, .617 TS%
Wade: 29.0 ppg, 8.7 rpg, 5.0 apg, .628 TS%

These are their Finals stats. LeBron is right there in terms of efficiency, is averaging more assists, is facing a much tougher defender, and is the guy who usually closes out the games. He's also playing better defense than Wade. Wade is outrebounding LeBron, and he's scoring a lot more.

Wade's not outplaying LeBron by as much as people want to believe.

Sorry the only type of comparison were this would hold weight would be had if Rick Barry and let's say Dr J played together on the same team where Barry won a title as the man in the NBA and they both played together afterward and Barry won finals mvp again over Dr J when they were on the same team. Using Maxwell or Worthy or Parker does not qualify since they were not top 3-5 players in the league.

[Laimbeer]

Sorry the only type of comparison were this would hold weight would be had if Rick Barry and let's say Dr J played together on the same team where Barry won a title as the man in the NBA and they both played together afterward and Barry won finals mvp again over Dr J when they were on the same team. Using Maxwell or Worthy or Parker does not qualify since they were not top 3-5 players in the league.

Seriously, can you stop with the tortured logic about who was here first and what they've done on that team in prior years? It's an obvious ploy to undermine the outside possibility of LeBron challenging for GOAT. The only season to consider is the title season.

It's about being the team's best player that season. In that case, it's "your" title. I will say if it's very close the guys that really shines in the playoffs can get the edge.

[Laimbeer]

The Bird example is a great one but also, what about the point that Lebron got far more MVP consideration than Wade in the regular season? Doesn't that matter to this discussion?

What matters is LeBron is the better player, but Wade is the sentimental choice.

[mopper8]

The Bird example is a great one but also, what about the point that Lebron got far more MVP consideration than Wade in the regular season? Doesn't that matter to this discussion?

What matters is LeBron is the better player, but Wade is the sentimental choice.

Wade's not the "sentimental choice" when he's flatly out-playing Lebron in the Finals and clearly would deserve the award if the Finals ended before tonights game, but that doesn't change who the better player on the team is.

It's just a reflection of the fact that the two are close enough in talent and impact that who has the better matchup often dictates who ends up impacting the game more, and it just so happens that their Finals opponent has far fewer options to guard Wade than Lebron. But a guy averaging 29ppg, 9rpb, 5apg with a 63% TS% in the series is not by any stretch simply winning an award because he's the sentimental choice

[JordansBulls]

Sorry the only type of comparison were this would hold weight would be had if Rick Barry and let's say Dr J played together on the same team where Barry won a title as the man in the NBA and they both played together afterward and Barry won finals mvp again over Dr J when they were on the same team. Using Maxwell or Worthy or Parker does not qualify since they were not top 3-5 players in the league.

Seriously, can you stop with the tortured logic about who was here first and what they've done on that team in prior years? It's an obvious ploy to undermine the outside possibility of LeBron challenging for GOAT. The only season to consider is the title season.

It's about being the team's best player that season. In that case, it's "your" title. I will say if it's very close the guys that really shines in the playoffs can get the edge.

You talking about me with the tortured logic when you are the one undermining Wade. Wade is the one who performs well on the highest stage and is the one who won as the man on a team and is still in his prime. Wade didn't go to Lebron's team, Lebron went to Wade's team to play with someone who is top 3 in the league and who got it done as the man. Let me ask you, had someone like Karl Malone went to the Pistons in 1990 and won with Detroit when Isiah had done so, you wouldn't be ranking Malone higher than Isiah on any list since he went to go play with a proven winner.

[bigrussia]

the real problem is that lebron and wade are clearly the 2 best players in the league (fine 2 out of 3, but at the end of last season, it was the 2 best players teaming up). the difference between them obviously isn't great, so matchups will have a much greater impact on who performs better. finals mvp will just be who has the better matchup against the opposing team (not only is lebron being guarded by better players, he's guarding better players and playing better on the defensive end, so the difference isn't as great as the stats would make it seem)

also worry to note, wade has been the best perimeter scorer against great team defenses the last few years (as in he was more efficient than kobe and lebron against better defenses), but lebron performed better against the celtics and bulls this year (tougher defensive teams than dallas, even though the miami's overall offense against dallas hasn't been as good as it should be)

last point, i still don't understand how lebrons 4th quarter play is being questioned just because he had a poor start in miami. not only has he been consistently a clear #1 in the league for the past few years, but he stepped it up this year in the playoffs after his first "unclutch" regular season in a long time (and he was still one of the best in the league)

[ElGee]

The problem is you aren't correctly evaluating a championship ring in the first place. It's a team accomplishment, not an individual one. Players don't have "Ring Shares" when they retire, they just play a certain level of basketball, and if they are in a good enough TEAM setting, sometimes that ends in a championship. Focus on how individuals play.

Similarly, the Finals MVP is an individual award bestowed on the most valuable in one series (4-7 games). It doesn't say anything too large about contributions over the course of the season or who is historically better than someone else.

[richboy]

People realize that Finals MVP is only a judge of what happened in 1 Playoff series. People get too caught up in trying to get extra meaning in those. You watch the games and god gave you a brain. I don't need anyone to tell me that Tim Duncan was the best player when Tony Parker won Finals MVP. Fact is though Cleveland had no one that could guard Tony Parker.

People are looking for this Finals MVP to kind of dictate who team this is. Wade and Lebron are very close to that argument is stupid. The whole Batman and Robin theory is garbage. Lebron was the best player on the Heat during the year. He was the best player on the Heat during the first 3 rounds. If Wade gets finals MVP Its not like anyone but Skip Bayless is going to be thinking Lebron was just a long for the ride.

People make the Shaq Kobe comparison. I never understood why Shaq got all the credit because he won Finals MVP. Its like if you win Finals MVP the rest of the playoffs don't matter. There was a lot of series that Kobe would have won MVP that was actually more competitive than the Finals. Pretty much championship 2 and 3 I never looked as Shaq 1 and Kobe 2. I looked at it as Shaq 1A and Kobe 1B.

I'm amazed how things have changed since the MJ era. One thing that it seems is if you don't win Finals MVP somehow it doesn't count. It isomehow now has to be Ring with Finals MVP.

Championships should be measured by Circumstances. If Wade wins this title I won't put it equal to when Hakeem took a team with Otis Thorpe as his sidekick to a ring. Same thing with Lebron. Expectations are higher now that you have 2 great players. What if Bosh has 2 great games and he wins Finals MVP. Does that mean Lebron and Wade were a long for the ride. To much made about that award.

[Vinsanity420]

The championship ring should have zero value on where a player is ranked... Dirk isn't going to be a better player if the Mavs win and it was because Jason Terry decided to be clutch. And Finals MVP, just like the majority of accolades, is just as meaningless.

I am suddenly sounding like Gongxi. Oh boy.

[magic1fan]

people say look at how individuals play and that is true to a point,but aren't stats and things about circumstances just as much as rings? i mean doesn't every star put up great stats when they don't have alot of help?

[mopper8]

The problem is you aren't correctly evaluating a championship ring in the first place. It's a team accomplishment, not an individual one. Players don't have "Ring Shares" when they retire, they just play a certain level of basketball, and if they are in a good enough TEAM setting, sometimes that ends in a championship. Focus on how individuals play.

Similarly, the Finals MVP is an individual award bestowed on the most valuable in one series (4-7 games). It doesn't say anything too large about contributions over the course of the season or who is historically better than someone else.

Legler made the point that if you look back 30-40 years all the multiple title winners had more than 1 Finals MVP save Jordan's Bulls. KAJ had Magic, Magic KAJ and Worthy, Bird Maxwell, Shaq Wade, Kobe Shaq, Duncan Parker, etc etc. The Jordan " win every single one" precedent is the exception, not the rule. That speaks to the point about a good enough TEAM setting, that no matter how great a guy is he's almost always going to need very good help, good enough to even possiboy outshine him over the course of a playoff series, AND the player has to be unselfish enough to let his teammate outshine him bc he is committed to the team success.

[IndyMac]

I think the real question is what's the value of a finals MVP without a championship.

[ThaRegul8r]

I'm amazed how things have changed since the MJ era. One thing that it seems is if you don't win Finals MVP somehow it doesn't count. It isomehow now has to be Ring with Finals MVP.

I don't see why you're amazed. Since Jordan's held up as the standard by "most people," and he won Finals MVP for all six of his championships, that's become the measuring stick. It's not really difficult.

[mopper8]

I'm amazed how things have changed since the MJ era. One thing that it seems is if you don't win Finals MVP somehow it doesn't count. It isomehow now has to be Ring with Finals MVP.

I don't see why you're amazed. Since Jordan's held up as the standard by "most people," and he won Finals MVP for all six of his championships, that's become the measuring stick. It's not really difficult.

But it is irrational.

[italianleather]

Winning as 1st option is more impt than Finals MVP.