2016-17 MVP Discussion Thread Pt 3 (season finale)

[K_chile22]

Harden apperently fell one point short of Tiny's points created record

Turns out ESPN tweeted out wrong info and graphic, Harden has actually now accounted for the most total points in a season, beating out Tiny by 19 points

[ckman]

I mean... The reason there's no name for this or the 2000 points/2000 assist points Club Harden founded is because its never been done before. Having a catchy name doesn't make something more important, impressive, or less arbitrary

Ok whatever, will enjoy your threads and posts when NBA announced the winner well ofcoz in case if someone you like didnt win it.

I really wouldn't mind one bit if Westbrook wins. He deserves it, as do a few others. But propping up his triple double and discounting other players accomplishments is really lame. If what Harden did is random and not important, triple doubles are even less so.

Discounting other players accomplishment? Really ? Check the general boards and all those threads created by your fellow fans or posts that brought up how overrated Westbrook in every game thread.If you and some of your fellow fans wouldn't mind abit if Westbrook wins, i'm sure there won't be so much threads created lately.
I for once not a fan of Westbrook or OKC , i don't really care who win MVP, both Harden and Westbrook performance would justify it, so would Kawhi probably. But all those threads lately is one of the reason i'm rooting against Harden , so that i would enjoy all those salty threads when it does.

[K_chile22]

Ok whatever, will enjoy your threads and posts when NBA announced the winner well ofcoz in case if someone you like didnt win it.

I really wouldn't mind one bit if Westbrook wins. He deserves it, as do a few others. But propping up his triple double and discounting other players accomplishments is really lame. If what Harden did is random and not important, triple doubles are even less so.

Discounting other players accomplishment? Really ? Check the general boards and all those threads created by your fellow fans or posts that brought up how overrated Westbrook in every game thread.If you and some of your fellow fans wouldn't mind abit if Westbrook wins, i'm sure there won't be so much threads created lately.
I for once not a fan of Westbrook or OKC , i don't really care who win MVP, both Harden and Westbrook performance would justify it, so would Kawhi probably. But all those threads lately is one of the reason i'm rooting against Harden , so that i would enjoy all those salty threads when it does.

Why am I responsible for what other Rockets fans post? Lol I'm an individual, sir
So basically you're allowed to discount it because "they did it first!". Nice.

[Teko]

Cherry pick stats.

In other news Westbrook is the only player in history to record 2500 pts 800 rebounds and 800 assists in a season.

See it's easy mine looks more impressive too

Are triple doubles not "cherry picked stats" then?

Too bad Westbrook couldn't cherry pick what actually matters - wins.

He can only cherry pick a MVP...

[ckman]

I really wouldn't mind one bit if Westbrook wins. He deserves it, as do a few others. But propping up his triple double and discounting other players accomplishments is really lame. If what Harden did is random and not important, triple doubles are even less so.

Discounting other players accomplishment? Really ? Check the general boards and all those threads created by your fellow fans or posts that brought up how overrated Westbrook in every game thread.If you and some of your fellow fans wouldn't mind abit if Westbrook wins, i'm sure there won't be so much threads created lately.
I for once not a fan of Westbrook or OKC , i don't really care who win MVP, both Harden and Westbrook performance would justify it, so would Kawhi probably. But all those threads lately is one of the reason i'm rooting against Harden , so that i would enjoy all those salty threads when it does.

Why am I responsible for what other Rockets fans post? Lol I'm an individual, sir
So basically you're allowed to discount it because "they did it first!". Nice.

And when did i discount Harden performance may i ask? As a matter of fact , please show me one post of mine that i discredit Harden saying he's overrated.

[K_chile22]

Discounting other players accomplishment? Really ? Check the general boards and all those threads created by your fellow fans or posts that brought up how overrated Westbrook in every game thread.If you and some of your fellow fans wouldn't mind abit if Westbrook wins, i'm sure there won't be so much threads created lately.
I for once not a fan of Westbrook or OKC , i don't really care who win MVP, both Harden and Westbrook performance would justify it, so would Kawhi probably. But all those threads lately is one of the reason i'm rooting against Harden , so that i would enjoy all those salty threads when it does.

Why am I responsible for what other Rockets fans post? Lol I'm an individual, sir
So basically you're allowed to discount it because "they did it first!". Nice.

And when did i discount Harden performance may i ask? As a matter of fact , please show me one post of mine that i discredit Harden saying he's overrated.

I said you discredited his performance of 2000-900-600, when did I say you said he's overrated?

[ckman]

Why am I responsible for what other Rockets fans post? Lol I'm an individual, sir
So basically you're allowed to discount it because "they did it first!". Nice.

And when did i discount Harden performance may i ask? As a matter of fact , please show me one post of mine that i discredit Harden saying he's overrated.

I said you discredited his performance of 2000-900-600, when did I say you said he's overrated?

Saying 2000-900-600 is a cherry pick stats is not discredit. I'm not saying it's not a great achievement. But you can't deny the number is purposely set up so that it become the only player in the history. I can understand if the number it's 1000-1000-1000 or 2000-500-500 etc.
But if you're going to use random number like 900-600 , 1100-450 , i'd bet you can come up with more "only player in the history" for other cases as well.

[BallerTalk]

Cherry pick stats.

In other news Wstbrook is the only player in history to record 2500 pts 800 rebounds and 800 assists in a season.

See it's easy mine looks more impressive too

Are triple doubles not "cherry picked stats" then?

Well it's have a name ,it's call triple double, it's been called that way for decades. Not some random stats where i can put in random numbers.

You do realize that is EXACTLY what a triple double is don't you?

[StepBackCrack]

Harden finishes strong but it's kinda too late for him now. Too late to change the momentum. Historic season from him nonetheless and I think his season is being underrated in terms of how historic it is. All the attention is on TDs this season.

[BallerTalk]

I've notice that lately there has been a lot more talk (in media MVP conversations) about the fact Durant left OKC and they were still able to make the playoffs.
While that was expected it is no less impressive. Losing a star hurts.

However, what I find even more interesting is that apparently James Harden's stellar play and his team's unexpected success has made most people forget Dwight Howard even played in Houston. Few seem to remember he left last summer too.

[ckman]

Are triple doubles not "cherry picked stats" then?

Well it's have a name ,it's call triple double, it's been called that way for decades. Not some random stats where i can put in random numbers.

You do realize that is EXACTLY what a triple double is don't you?

No i don't. In fact i don't even know what are you trying to say. There's a clear definition of what is triple double and it's something they've been officially recorded since 1979.
I have no idea why would you call it random stats.

In case you don't understand, random numbers mean instead of using a general measurement such as 100-100-100 , you adjust higher or lower in each category to 120-90-110 so that only one person fits the criteria.
That's the case in Feigen's tweet. Which why i call it cherry pick. I can come up with plenty more only player in history using such measurement.
Again, THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH DISCREDIT Harden, he had a great season, definitely MVP worthy, i just can't agree with the stats set up by Feigen so that he can call it only person in history .

[StepBackCrack]

I wonder how Durant stats would look like if he had the ultimate green light and freedom for a full season. We only saw that for half a season. No wonder he won the MVP that season. If Russ did not get injured, God mode Durant would not have been fully unleashed. Same for Russ this season and when Durant got injured. Obviously if Durant is there playing with him, Russ would not have as great of a season. Playing on different teams benefited all 3 (Durant, Westbrook and Harden). The TD record for example made Russ a legend to many this season. The 3 played their best basketball as the lone superstar on a team (Durant had that for a short period of time in OKC and made the most out of that opportunity). However, the special thing about Durant is that he can fit anywhere and you can still get his best production on a team like GSW where he has to share the ball a lot and play with other stars. Extremely portable. I think Harden proved this season that he also can be great player in a proper system that makes everyone on the team involved, empowered and optimized. I'm not sure Russ has it in him to allow a proper system running where everyone on the team is optimized or near optimized at least. I think (after he wins the MVP this season), next season he won't chase TDs and will share the ball more with his teammates, plays better D which would be better for the team. I could be wrong about that tho and he might go for the TDs next season as well.

[R-S-M]

hmmm.. Let's say Westbrook wins the MVP this year - we can all largely agree his triple double is holding a lot of weight as its historic. Hypothetically, if he averages a TD again next year and his team is again somewhere between 5 and 7. Does he continue to earn MVPs? What would be the voters thought process going forward if he did it again next two years?

[StepBackCrack]

hmmm.. Let's say Westbrook wins the MVP this year - we can all largely agree his triple double is holding a lot of weight as its historic. Hypothetically, if he averages a TD again next year and his team is again somewhere between 5 and 7. Does he continue to earn MVPs? What would be the voters thought process going forward if he did it again next two years?

I'll say this. If WB wins the MVP this season and then Harden and Westbrook go repeat their performances next season (with WB averaging TD), then Harden will be WAY more likely to win the MVP. It will be "his turn" for voters I guess since they give the MVP for Russ over him already due to TDs. In any case, I don't see Harden nor Westbrook winning back-2-back MVPs but it's not impossible of course. It can happen but I don't see it.

[ckman]

hmmm.. Let's say Westbrook wins the MVP this year - we can all largely agree his triple double is holding a lot of weight as its historic. Hypothetically, if he averages a TD again next year and his team is again somewhere between 5 and 7. Does he continue to earn MVPs? What would be the voters thought process going forward if he did it again next two years?

Well pretty safe to say he won't win it again if there's another players put up great number at the same time.
That's the way it works in this world. When you did it the 1st time, it's awesome, when you did it again and again, it's normal and they'll reward someone else.
That's also the reason why Jordan and Lebron didn't win more MVP.

[ckman]

And when did i discount Harden performance may i ask? As a matter of fact , please show me one post of mine that i discredit Harden saying he's overrated.

I said you discredited his performance of 2000-900-600, when did I say you said he's overrated?

Saying 2000-900-600 is a cherry pick stats is not discredit. I'm not saying it's not a great achievement. But you can't deny the number is purposely set up so that it become the only player in the history. I can understand if the number it's 1000-1000-1000 or 2000-500-500 etc.
But if you're going to use random number like 900-600 , 1100-450 , i'd bet you can come up with more "only player in the history" for other cases as well.

Just checked basketball reference. You know why it's 2000-900-600 instead of other number?
Because Big O had a season of 2000+ pts 899 assists 900+ rebounds.
So let's up the assists abit and lower the rebounds and it looks awesome as only person in the history who ever done it.

[Teckon]

then how about 2000+ points and 2000+ assisted points? not random numbers in this case? Harden is the first person to reach this milestone where Oscar is the first reach TD in a season.

[ckman]

then how about 2000+ points and 2000+ assisted points? not random numbers in this case? Harden is the first person to reach this milestone where Oscar is the first reach TD in a season.

Yes this is much more reasonable number to call it first person to reach the milestone.

Edit: awesome achievement

[laika]

So Curry has possibly the best season in NBA history from a winning perspective and no one even notices. Best Oncourt in history. Easily the best On/Off in the league. A much better On/Off than any of his teammates. Based on wins, Curry absolutely crushes the other MVP candidates this year.

Meanwhile, even if you completely ignore wins Westbrook might not have better box score stats than Harden and Lebron once you adjust for efficiency and usage.

If "helps a team win the most" is your criteria then Curry should be practically a lock for MVP. Instead, a lot of people don't even have Curry as an MVP candidate at all. The absolute disregard for winning is what is going to make this MVP race historic, not Westbrook getting the MVP.

[K_chile22]

I think Harden and Kawhi still have a better shot at the actual award than people realize. If Harden can get 2/5ths or so of the first place votes and gets most of the second place votes from Kawhi voter, he will win