There's been so much debate over how to evaluate the MVP, it's really become foolish. Let me express my opinion on some fallacies of evaluating MVP. 1. Player that scores most points in that year. Nope, they have an award for that already...it's called NBA SCORING CHAMPION! 2. Player that scores the most points in the team with the best record. In 2004 Steve Nash wins MVP, with Amare scoring 26 points. 3. Player that is great individually on a bad team. Stats show that Indiana isn't that much better with Danny Granger, OKC IS better in wins w/o Durant, and NOH IS better w/o Chris Paul. Ok, my way of finding out the real MVP: Take a look at the following teams: which team should not be that high on that list with these players? That team has the MVP, the MOST VALUABLE PLAYER. (1) Phoenix (Hill/Stoudemire/Frye/Richardson) (2) LA Lakers (Artest/Gasol/Bynum/Fisher) (3) Orlando (Carter/Lewis/Pietrus/Williams) (4) Boston (Perkins/Allen/Rondo/Pierce) (5) Atlanta (Williams/Smith/Horford/Bibby) (6) Denver (Martin/Nene/Afflalo/Billups) (7) Dallas (Marion/Gooden/Beaubois/Kidd) (8) Cleveland (Hickson/Shaq/Parker/Williams) (9) Portland (Webster/Aldridge/Oden/Blake) (10) Miami (Jones/Beasley/J. Oneal/Chalmers) If these teams played 4v4, the teams that shouldn't rank that high with these four players are Phoenix, Orlando, and Atlanta. Steve Nash for MVP.
Why are you penalizing superstars with strong teams? Is it Kobe's fault he gets to play with one of the league's best all-around big men and the best coach of all time? IMHO the MVP should be the best over-all player in the league. That award should go to LBJ again or to DH this season. And even your logic is fail. I'd take Amare and J-Rich over Shaq and Cleveland's trash corps any day.
you don't see my logic do you? I'm not penalizing Kobe, im saying that that Lakers record would not be surprising if Kobe wasn't on the team. Now how would Kobe be the most valuable player on that team, if let's say he got injured for 3 months, and his team still keeps that record.
The MVP award is once again, a popularity contest. No matter how non-household players play, a household name will always win MVP. I predict it's either gonna be LeBron, Bryant, or Nash. Maybe Dwade and Melo if they can step up their game.
You know, for all the great stuff Melo is doing, and how strong Lebron looks, if there was a game with my life on the result, the first player I chose is Kobe. Its all great what the other players are doing, but Kobe is the best player in the NBA until such time as the other guys can step up and get the job done in the championship games.
The Lakers would crumble if they lost Kobe for 3 months or the rest of the season. He's not only their most talented player but he is the heart and soul of that team. They could lose any other player for the season and still have a great record, EXCEPT Kobe.
Best way to determine whether a player is an MVP is if you take him out of the line up and see how the team performs then. In that case, I see Kobe, Melo, and Wade as candidates. Lakers without Kobe look like the Nets to me.
Say what you want but Kobe was a tool when Shaq left all the way until he got Gasol. Ever since Nash really got a chance to lead a team his teams have always been good and that Phoenix team could have been great if they could have kept Joe Johnson. Personally, I think that the MVP is and always should be subjective just as it is now. That being said, I also feel that it should probably be Lebron or perhaps even Wade.
Noooo, the MVP is wot it says, the most VALUABLE player. However, this usually is the best all round. But i kinda agree with the person who posted this thread, which player on their respective team is the most valuable to them, i.e. which team would have the biggest difference in wins and losses wen that player is not playing. Who is vital to a team's success etc..
This is a joke. Amare Stoudemire: All-Star Grant Hill: Former All-Star Jason Richardson: All-Star caliber How would Phoenix struggle the most when other teams have absolute trash in their starting lineup?
I couldn't see the Lakers keeping their record without Kobe because then teams would start focusing in on Gasol and it would end up like the Memphis days for him. I don't care what anyone says but I think Bynum is mediocre and we all know how Artest acts as lead dog.
The MVP = most valuable player. A great player is more valuable on a bad team than on a great team, isn't he?
should always starts and ends with lebron james. 29.4 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 7.8 apg, 53% fg always has the best all-around stats; he is the player that controls the game the most in this league; and he has the least talent to work with among the elite teams in this league. eventually the cavs will play better, and lebron will take his game to another level. dirk, melo, kobe do deserve consideration. PS - what happened to wade btw? his fg% has dropped to 42.1% and he's killing my fantasy team. little points, rebounds, assists
C'mon - seriously? Orlando has low overall talent Vince Carter - all star Rashard Lewis - all star Jameer Nelson - all star Dwight Howard has the best 'supporting cast' in the league right now Guys like Pietrus, Barnes, J-Williams, Bass, Gortat, Anderson and Reddick are also competent contributors at NBA level. Then there's Foyle and Anthony Johnson - the vets who can bring it for short stretches. Orlando makes a PRETTY STRONG case for having the most stacked roster in the NBA. You accused someone else of not understanding your logic - please spell it out for us, because clearly it's gone missing somewhere!
