James Harden is gonna get screwed over again in MVP Voting

it's like the criteria for the award keeps changing per season.
curry won it 2 years in a row because his team was #1 even though they could have been #1 without him. so best player on best team got it.
lebron won it because he truly is the most valuable player...the cavs were a lottery team without him. so best player in the league + most valuable player on a top seeded team

now this year...westbrook is not the best player in the league but averages 2 more rebounds than other candidates whose teams are much higher seeds.
hell i would rather have Isaiah Thomas win it.

it's all freaking ESPN. entire nba page was dedicated to russell and his stats. just brainwashing the masses.

 

You either go with the stats, so Westbrook 1, Harden 2, or you go with team success, so Harden/Kawhi/Lebron 1/2/3, Westbrook 4, or you go with a combination of them, and in no possible way can you conclude that Westbrook is 1st and Harden is 4th. Makes just zero sense if you're consistent with your criteria, unless you're just okay with saying you're biased. (and I do think Westbrook at 4 is dumb too. Lebron has no argument for being Top 3).

But Nate Duncan has admitted to not respecting Harden's game so this does make sense.

 

these are my man Jared Greenberg's last few tweets, he's still fighting the good fight

these are in response to a Westbrook supporter saying that Russ has OKC in the playoffs and no one thought that OKC could get close to 50 wins

 

I don't even think that the criteria changes every season, it's only changed this season. The MVP has always been given to 1 of the best players on 1 of the best teams. Curry fit that criteria both times that he won. Lebron fit that criteria in Cleveland because the Cavs won 66 and 61 games. This is the only time I can recall a dude on a 6th seed team actually being considered a favorite for the MVP.

 

He's one of two candidates being considered for the MVP. Isn't that an acknowledgement of his achievements?

Those preseason predictions were proven wrong. We have a much better supporting cast.

It's not just 2 rebounds. It's the fact that Westbrook is averaging a triple double for the season.

In any case, I think it's a lock for Harden. Has the MVP ever gone to a player from such a poorly seeded team?

 

Image wise, NBA will award MVP to Westbrook because there is no report that he wants to have this trophy. There are only reports that it does not matter to him. What he wants is to do whatever to win games for his team.

 

This is a list of recent MVP winners:

2016 - Curry(Warriors are 73-9; best record in the NBA....and of all-time for that matter)
2015 - Curry(Warriors are 67-15; best record in the NBA)
2014 - Durant(Thunder are 59-23; 2nd best record in the NBA)
2013 - James(Heat are 66-16; best record in the NBA)
2012 - James(Heat are 46-20; 3rd best record in the NBA in a lockout shortened season)
2011 - Rose(Bulls are 62-20; best record in the NBA)
2010 - James(Cavs are 61-21; best record in the NBA)
2009 - James(Cavs are 66-16; best record in the NBA)
2008 - Bryant(Lakers are 57-25; 3rd best record in the NBA)
2007 - Nowitzki(Mavs are 67-15; best record in the NBA)
2006 - Nash(Suns are 54-28; 3rd best record in the NBA)
2005 - Nash(Suns are 62-20; best record in the NBA)
2004 - Garnett(T'Wolves are 58-24; 2nd best record in the NBA)

I could go on, but you get the idea. At worst, every MVP winner in recent memory comes from a team that has the 3rd best record in the entire league, not just in their own conference. And in some of those cases(like Nash in 2006), they won the award due to low expectations being surpassed. If you'll recall, that was the year Amare underwent microfracture yet the Suns didn't really miss a beat without him thanks to Nash.

But ultimately, if you're gonna be the MVP, the standard has been that you have to be on a title contender. We can debate whether the Rockets this season are legit contenders(I think they're in that 2nd tier below the Warriors, Spurs, and Cavs), but there's no debating their record. They're a virtual lock for 3rd in the West and have a very good shot at 3rd best overall in the league. Meanwhile the Thunder are likely a 6th seed at best and could potentially slip to 7th(tonight's matchup with Memphis will go a long way toward deciding that). Plus they have no shot now at winning 50 games. Compare that to the list above. Again, the worst performance by a team with the MVP was Nash at 54 wins and that was sans Amare. LeBron's 46-20 Heat would've won 57 if you prorate that over a normal 82 game season.

 

You should have your vote taken away if you have Harden or Westbrook 4th on your ballot. Harden should be the unquestioned MVP but Lebron has literally no case on him at all. Westbrook is probably a legit number 3, anything below that doesn't really make sense.

 

LMAO

This is laughable

It literally is 2 rebounds! Like...that's literally what it is.

 

Correct. The criteria has never changed. It only changes if Westbrook gets MVP. I wouldn't agree with Leonard winning but it would actually historically make sense. Harden fits the criteria for MVP perfectly.

 

Agreed. Nate Duncan hates Harden's penchant for getting to the FT line and that colors his judgement on him. I haven't heard Nate's own podcast on the MVP (I will though), but from Locke's he basically undervalued Harden's achievements by saying 1) good supporting players and 2) good MDA system. Basically undercuts what Harden does.

Really a shame because Nate is a smart guy and has a great podcast. But he clearly views Houston in a negative light because of his bias against Harden.

Aside: Nate had Popovich for coach of the year.

 

then why isn't curry winning it again this season?

thunder is the 10th team in the league. smh.
http://www.espn.com/nba/standings/_/group/league

 

Harden has the best combination of stats and winning. He's having a historical season, and his team has the 3rd best record in the NBA. You can tell that the criteria hasn't really changed when you hear people saying that Westbrook wouldn't even be in the discussion if he was averaging 9 assists instead of 10. Why would 1 less assist per game have him going from a potential favorite to not even in the discussion? It's because he does not truly fit the criteria of an MVP candidate due to his team's record. The triple double narrative is just so strong that it seems that a lot of people are now willing to go against precedent and years of history. If your MVP case depends on you averaging 10 apg instead of 9 then u don't really have a case to begin with.

 

It hasn't. But then again, we haven't had anyone average a triple double in the modern era. Things like that can break precedent which is worrisome to me.

 

Curry isn't winning it again because the media isn't gonna give him 3 straight MVP's...especially after Durant joined the team. Voter fatigue and KD joining GS is why Curry never had a chance to win it this year. Curry was out of the running before the season even started.

 

This is just straight trolling by Royce Young.

BTW, I did tweet at Calvin Watkins to see if HE had a MVP vote. Didn't get a response.

Hey, @The Cat can you ask Calvin if he has a vote?

 

Yes, but those 2 rebounds are the difference between averaging a triple-double and not averaging a triple-double. That's kind of a big deal.

 

Guys Westbrook is going to AVERAGE a triple double for the season, something only done once ever, and never in the modern era....

That is why he is getting all the publicity it is a historic event - and will probably carry him to MVP - which is a popularity contest anyway.

It is not like Harden will lose to a guy who didn't do anything this is a Trip Dub for the year......which is amazing.

Harden is just as deserving, but that I think is what will carry the day.

DD

 

Question: What if Westbrook averaged 10pts, 10 rebs, and 10 asts for the season. Is he still your MVP?

 

Of course not. He's not even my MVP right now.