for a second there, I thought you said "Harden and the Rockets can force the issue if we keep whining." my bad.
Im sick and tired of these 'analysts'. They should start to use their brain and think of efficiency other than tripple doubles. Ridiculous. Whatever. Rox are winning and will end up in 4th seed or higher while thunder will be 8th. I'll take that.
Then Tim Duncan should've never won any MVPs because that dude and the Spurs were boring as fu*k. Harden has 10 times better storyline than Duncan has ever had in his entire career. But you do have a point if we treat this as just some 'heat of the moment' column piece designed to draw more readers in, not the official MVP ranking.
Just wait until the season ends. Team record cannot be fully appreciated a third of the way through the season. It's like per 36 stats when a player plays 12 minutes per game. Would Harden's stat line be impressive if he were averaging 9.5p/2.6r/3.8a in 12 minutes? Yes, it would be incredibly impressive, but most people would not hold it in the same esteem as someone actually producing that for a full 36 minutes. If the Rockets are near 60 wins, Harden will win the MVP award.
If Rockets have the number 1 seed, Harden will get the MVP. If they are the number 2 seed, he still has a chance. Otherwise it will go to Durant or Westbrook.
Humm, Duncan was the best player on a team that won 5 titles. His storyline was no flash just result. And there was a cult like following in basketball purist. Mr. Fundamental... Geshhh.... And for as much as he affected his team's winning ways, he only got 2 MVP's.
i agree. to the coasts, houston (harden) is boring which in turn means less clicks, views $$ and so it goes.
This isn't a bit surprising to me one bit. Remember the media has been pushing hard for Westbrook to win MVP even before the season started. They all predicted him to win and I believe they are dead set on it. I've heard guys like Stein, Max Kellerman and even Chris Broussard stating that if Westbrook manages to average a triple double and his team is over .500 wins, he will win MVP. It's ridiculous how they said Harden is leaning on guys like Gordon and Beverly when Westbrook has around the same talent around him as well. Victor Oladipo in my opinion is an all star caliber player who's capable of putting up triple doubles. I always felt the media just look at the plain stats and based their opinions off of it. They don't realized that plain stats does not paint the whole picture. Westbrook only averages a few more rebounds than Harden. His PPG is higher but he also shoots way more and does not run his team anywhere near as efficient as Harden. I am sure they would also use Harden's defensive woes last season as an excuse for this season as well. Its absurd that the media changes the requirements needed to be MVP every season. In 2014-15 season, Curry won MVP because they said the best player on the best team wins and that even though Harden, had better all around stats to Curry and lead a much inferior team without Dwight Howard for half the season to the 2nd SEED, he could not be MVP because his team did not win as many games as Curry's team. This season, they continue to contradict themselves by saying that even if Westbrook's team does not win as much as Houston, he has better stats so he's the MVP. The NBA MVP award is watered down and no longer holds the same integrity as before. The MVP voting has now become the award that goes to players who make the best story line. It is a much better Cinderella Story if Russell Westbrook, a fiery player who's been betrayed by his Superstar teammate, goes out to prove to the world how great he is and takes home the MVP. Its much better than giving the MVP to a player that everyone assumes only flops, had defensive woes last year and have his stats inflated by D'Antoni because they play at a faster pace even though all NBA teams are copying D'Antoni's system today.
Why are we surprised? They couldn't choose Curry because he's been the MVP for the last two seasons so they have to choose Westbrook because he's averaging a triple double and doesn't have Kevin Durant to play with. They can sell that story line better over Harden who lost a lot of "fans" last season when he regressed defensively. I'm surprised Westbrook is able to average 10+ assists on the team he's playing but most of that is to his PF/C counterparts. MVP is a great award to win but Finals MVP is more rewarding...
Westbrook can't get it because he's not the best player on the best team. That's the MVP narrative pushed the past two years. It has to go to Durant in that case if GSW finishes first and KD keeps up his pace.
If they win 50+ games and he averages a triple double he will get it. The narrative doesn't mean anything.
If it doesn't mean anything then why didn't Harden get it over Curry? Better stats, took and injury ridden team to the 2nd seed with over 50 wins. But yet Curry gets it because he's the best player on the best team. The narrative does matter. Westbrook will need a top 2 seed to get the MVP.
It all matters by how far off the standings and stats are. If Houston wins 60 games then Harden is MVP (even if GS wins 68). If Westbrook averages a triple double but doesn't get to 55 wins then he is not MVP. GS winning 68 games would be too vast for Westbrooks 50 games.
Tired of this lame league...select the dam MVP candidates and make them 1v1 each other....then we'll see whos the best.
