I basically agree. You can make very good arguments for both. I think a lot of us just resent how biased BSPN has been about the whole thing. "Look, Curry is good in practice! Look, an expose with Curry's sweet sister! Oh, meanwhile, look at selfish harden. we'll take quotes out of context when he's asked by a network-affiliated show if he should win MVP, he supports himself." It really is biased, but whatever. I would much rather the Rockets have a great playoff run than Harden get MVP and lose in the first round.
Harden had a great season, but Curry helped carry his team to the number one seed in the West. Plus, he is beasting in the playoffs. He will win it. The bottomline counts. Harden is yet to prove that he can take it to another level when it matters most. Beating up on Eastern teams or non playoff teams is great but playoffs are where HOF careers are made.
Guess you misunderstood my post. Obviously it's all done at the same time. What I was trying to say was that-I believe the media members that voted for Bud and Kawhi most likely voted for Curry (At the same time). They probably felt that Bud-Kerr was close but they'd give their votes to Bud and then give their MVP vote to Curry. Same w/Kawhi-Draymond. My point wasn't that "now" they will just vote for Curry but rather during the voting process, if the majority of their votes went to Bud and Kawhi then perhaps they gave Curry their MVP votes. Obviously no real way to find out until after MVP voting is released and if someone with too much time on their hands chooses to analyze which and how many media members voted for Budd-Kawhi-Curry as their award selections as opposed to any other combination.
Have you ever been to the internet before? There will be whining either way. You'll see what you see, and if you don't like it, you'll have to ignore it.
Something got me thinking. If the season played out how it did and both the Warriors and Rockets finished with the same record lets say 59 wins, would Curry still be the favorite among the general consensus for MVP? Curry is great but the 1st point people bring up for him being the MVP and his teams record
harden would win no doubt, but 67 wins and 56 wins differ too much, in fairness 3 other teams basically achieved houston's records 67 wins is tied for best win % in post jordan era
IF they still had the same teams same injuries and had the same records, then of course Harden should win. The Warriors clearly have better and healthier talent. If both teams finished with the same records, Harden would have more credit. The OP's argument is that since Curry has better support, he's not as worthy. But he conveniently ignore the fact that while Curry has a better team, they also win a lot more games.
Holy crap, did you see his highlights when he scored 40? He swished every shot, from crazy layups to clutch threes. Every shot... Never seen that before.
If you switch Harden and Curry on the Rockets & Warrior then the Rockets struggle to make the play-offs IMO while the Warriors still win the same number of games. This is why I think Harden should win the MVP. Curry on the Rockets would still be great but he would not be on a team that averages almost 40% 3pt shooting with both of his other 2 wing players hitting over 40% on 3s. It took Ariza getting hot after the all-star break just to reach 35% on 3's. DMo & Beverly were the 2 most consistent 3pt shooters outside of James for the Rockets and both of them were gone well before the end of the season. Jason Terry did hit 39% off of the bench so there's that. Much of the season, opposing teams were able to double Harden at the 3 point line and clog the paint to take away his shots. When that happened and none of the perimeter players were hitting their wide open 3s, James averaged over 10 free throw attempts a game to keep Houston in many games and win games. Curry only averages about 4 Free Throw Attempts a game, so when the entire defensive strategy is to prevent Curry from getting clean looks at the arc and packing the paint when he drives, how will he get his points? When teams double Curry at the arc he can pass the ball to Klay Thompson (.439 3pt%) or Harrison Barnes (.405 3pt%). If Curry drives to the paint he doesn't have to worry about teams packing the paint because he can always kick the ball back out to an elite 3pt shooter. If he were in Houston he would either have to find a way to get points when defenses pack the paint since Houston would have no elite 3pt shooters to receive his passes. Houston has very few above average 3pt shooters to receive his passes. Curry would not be on a team with a starting unit that only missed a combined 25 games, instead he would be on a team with a starting unit that missed 117 combined games. Curry would not even be on a team where he could count on his key back ups to be healthy throughout the season. Would Curry still have the same success when his starting back court running mate flip flopped back and forth between Patrick Beverly, Isaiah Canaan and Jason Terry all season? I think we can all agree that the answer to that would be a resounding NO. James Harden had to deal with 18 different starting line-ups through out the season. Also take into account that the Rockets were typically missing at least 2 starters and missed 3 in many games. The Rockets primary starting line-up only played 2 games together all season and won both. Over all James Harden led the Rockets to the 2nd seed in the West and a .683 winning percentage playing with 18 different starting line-ups. When you consider the lack of cohesion and the challenge of the West that is almost historically good. The Rockets lost the only game they played this season with out James Harden. In the 57 games that Curry played with his starting unit they only lost 7 games. In the few games that Curry played in with out all of his starting unit the team lost 6 games. Also take into account that Curry was never short more than 1 starter...ever. . The Warriors lost both games they played this season without Curry. Curry or Harden? Harden's season was more impressive to me.
Yeah, been saying this for awhile. I don't understand this "Who has worse teammates" argument when GSW won 11 more games, as well. That argument only makes sense when the records are the same (or close enough). Winning 11 more games than the Rockets offsets the simplistic arguments that Curry has better teammates. It would take substantially better teammates (like Aldrigde or a top PG) for Harden's Rockets to win 67 games...so then you're back to comparing the two on pure skills alone.
Both sides are making senseless arguments since we would need parallel universes to really determine this, but who *knows* how many games we would have won with a healthy Dwight Howard and a starting lineup as consistent as the Warriors have had. Nobody can say. Again, both candidates have great arguments, and if either Curry or Harden win MVP, I will think it was well-deserved. It is most probably Curry, and I guess we'll learn next week or the week after.
Maybe because Steph hits 3 pointers at a historic level? He beat Ray Allen's 3 point record not once, but twice. And well, he does other things too while also being ridiculously efficient. It's like a warriors fan asking why people are on harden's nuts for being able to hit a free throw.
