Not based on team record you don't. Why would they eliminate that as a criteria after they've used it for basically every MVP for the last 30 years?
Because no one has ever averaged a triple double before I suppose. I think Harden will win out if the Rockets win 60 games and OKC ends up with 50. I've said that before. But it's still early in terms of stats and team record.
Kenny: Rockets don't have enough "it"(Warriors 80 pts in a half). Rockets only have one. Warriors have four. Mike D'Antoni is a great, greatoffensive coach. Both Kenny & Charles agree he's COY. Charles: Harden is MVP. He's Steve Nash on steroids. More explosive player. He's changed his game. He's playing a fantastic PG.
And yet we're only 3 games behind the almighty Warriors. Just goes to show you how special Harden and this group are.
So Rockets have 1 star and are sitting In 3 place a few games behind the Warriors. Harden doing it all by himself? MVP?
Sure having DeAndre Jordan instead of Capela would be nice, but I think we match up well with the Warriors.
Oscar Robertson did it in the 60's. It's been done, and it's been done better. The Big O, like Harden, was a trendsetter.
If you're counting Green and Thompson as 2, then Harden is 2. Not a single Warrior can do what Harden is doing at this particular time. None of them alone would have this Rockets roster at 3 wins behind a Harden/Draymond/Thompson/CurryorDurant team right now. MDA is not necessarily a superior coach to Kerr. The Rockets do not have a better bench. Our front office is imo slightly better, but many here would argue that theirs is in fact better. They may each have superior specific qualities to Harden, but in terms of getting wins for his team, Harden can be compared to LBJ only. Harden can win 41 with his teammates being the 4 worst starters in the league if it was necessary. That's the kind of player he is, he changes everything. If you look objectively at his Rockets career, aside from last season's outlier debacle, we have exceeded expectations by 15+ wins routinely. That's not the basketball gods doing that. That's Harden. But in general I agree, we need one more player better than other 14 players on the team. Which means, Harden doesn't need to be on a team of 3 or 4 superstars to be considered ready for the crown.
Sure, but I really don't care about the MVP award. I want the championship. Harden is amazing - he's not flawless though. But he'll probably get the MVP. He and Westbrook are ironically beneficiaries of being the only star on the team. Curry and Durant don't have to do as much because well, they have each other.
Every time I see someone say they don't care about the MVP, it's like they are saying everyone who does care, doesn't also care about a Championship (I'm not saying that's the case with you @Sweet Lou 4 2). We can care about both.. we have the capacity to do that.
Sure, but I am saying what I really care about. The MVP is a nice to have, but my point wasn't that Harden is more or less worth because he lacks a second star, it's that it's hard to see us beating GS without said star.
Hard, but not impossible. Last year's GS team set the all time win record and, I would argue, didn't have any additional star power than the Rockets do this year: Harden (this year) > Steph (any year) Gordon >= Klay Ryno/Capella < Draymond/Bogut, but the gap is much narrower than anyone expected Ariza = Barnes (at least) Yes, the Warriors since added Durant, who is an infinite upgrade over Barnes, but frankly their team doesn't seem much better as a whole than the 73-win team that this year's Rockets match up fairly well against. And, either way, once you are in that vicinity, anything can happen.
When Oscar played the pace was much higher. The thunder win 80% of the games when he gets a triple double. The MVP usually goes to a top 2 or 3 seed so I think harden should get it, but you sound like an idiot for trying to minimize what Westbrook is doing. It's quite amazing.
Let me ask you, the points are comparable so why is 10 rebounds and 10 assists so much better than 12 assists and 8 rebounds when assists directly leads to points? Is it just a fascination with double digit numbers we have? It really doesn't make sense to me why Westbrook stars are infinitely better than Harden's 12/8
Apparently Robert Horry cares more about the MVP than his championships. I posted this 8 or so years ago. (note the link to the article no longer exists): Horry or Barkley : Whose career would you want?
They aren't. They are arbitrary stats, but lets not pretend Westbrook is some scrub. He has a legit case for the MVP too. I think Harden should win because his team is winning more.
I think Harden and Curry are a wash at best. Curry's MVP seasons were incredible. To say Harden is better than that smacks of homerism to be honest. Yes Harden is getting more assists, but his lower shooting percentage and higher turnover rate washes that out along with his higher FT rate. It's a wash. Curry is also by far the more dangerous late-game scorer as he shoots the 3 ball far better than Harden. But ok, you are also leaving out a lot of other good role players from last year. But I actually agree that the Warriors teams were all that great the last few years. I think the only reason they won their first ring was because Love and Irving were injured. And they barely got by OKC. I think everyone's record is a bit inflated in the NBA - GS, SA, Cavs, and Rockets - because the stars are concentrated in a few teams and there are a lot of bad teams. But to say that Warriors aren't better than last year is an eye-opening statement. They are SO MUCH better. I don't think people get it. Durant is a dangerous player and when you make Thompson your third best player you have an incredible offensive juggernaut unlike anything that's been seen in a very long time. And they also have the best defense. The best defense, the best offense and two MVP level stars with great role players. I think no one has a chance to beat them - they may not win 73 games, but I will be surprised if anyone takes them to 7 games this year.
