Last year's Spurs and this year's Warriors show that a team full of great role players beat a team with one or two superstars. Even Miami's Big 3 needed a ton of good role players to win two rings. The Warriors are hard to beat because you can't just game-plan for one single player. When teams trapped Curry, they shifted to other options and are still highly efficient. When teams game-planned against Harden, we still kept ISO-ing him.
huh? since when the definition is changed to "most significant game changer"? if that's the case, then horry or kerr should've both won it. look at the list of all the fmvp's here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Russell_NBA_Finals_Most_Valuable_Player_Award now tell me which ones were merely game "changers". admit it. it's almost always the best player of the winning team. and the thing is, most of the times, that best player on the better team usually had the best performance or at least on par with the best guy on the losing team. things only get grey when it aint so...
agree. gsw won on their depth. most of their bench players could easily be starters on just about every nba team. keeping iso your best wingman isnt gonna work. it doesnt work even for a great player like lebron. and harden isnt as good as lebron.
Game changer while being the most consistent on both ends. Didn't know I had to add that as well. I assumed that was a given. Regardless I thought iggy deserved it and glad the media didn't just give it to curry like so many assumed here.
the clueless people arguing that iggy didnt deserve the mvp award because Lebron put up historic numbers overall seemed to missed the important detail that Lebron was subpar when actually guarded by Iggy.
a fmvp is the target of hack-a strategy by the opposing team, and missed 9 str8 ft's in a game? (was that a first in history too? did shaq ever miss 9 in a row? ) that alone to me doesnt smell right.
then delly should at least be the co-fmvp, then? what's mvp curry's # when guarded by the aussie? do we have that stats? why no one even mentioning his name?
That doesn't take anything away from his performance throughout the series. Interesting why it's hard for people just to give a little credit where it's due I don't discredit what josh smith did for us against the clippers just bc he missed a ridiculous amount of ft's
This is dumb, imo. GSW can win the series without Iguodala. They can't without Curry...I'd still give it to Steph Curry
i am not arguing. i've always like iggy and i never denied his contribution in the series. but how could anyone make a case that the fmvp, if it has any meaning, should not be given to lebron in this series is beyond me. in my mind it's so clear. of course, some will say i am clueless. haha.
we cant know that for certain, can we. though you most likely is right. but the cavs cant win, heck, they wouldnt stand even a 1% chance to win w/o lebron. on the same token, doesn't that tell us he's more valuable? imagine that the cavs were playing w/o lebron and all their big 3, and got blown out by 30+pts each and every game. how you think the tv rating was going to be? would it still have been a historic high? i doubt it. from a pure logic perspective, why the fmvp award cannot be given to a player on a losing team? not that this award has a lot special meaning in it. but it's not like it's never been done before, either.
For me personally, I just don't give it to a player on the losing team. It's a reward for something being accomplished. Not a believer in rewarding a player who loses in the nba finals. He did everything he could and played amazing no doubt though. Very impressive to get 2 wins just mainly by him
Congratulations to Iggy: the no-stats finals mvp who also provided stats! What a great series for him....well deserved.
i understood where you came from. just have to disagree. some poster said it the other day that he thought there should never be any individual award in a team sport. i thought he had a point...
Iggy in the Finals: 24 assists to 6 TOs. 4 to 1 ratio. Entire Playoffs: 75 assists to 14 TOs. 5.4 to 1 ratio. Clearly a better decision maker with the ball than Steph. If there's one glaring area Steph needs to improve on it's his horrible lazy turnovers at crucial times.
well, #'s only tell part of the story. not to deny what you're saying, but iggy and curry face different defensive pressures.