More MVP debating

[AussieLakerFan]

I have been thinking about the MVP debate alot lately and all the standard lines the media use to try and justify their vote.

"Does he make his teammates better?" - This is a heavily used criteria, but has no real definition or substance IMO. PG's look better if they have good shooters around them. The shooters hit there shots, the PG's assist numbers go up. Shooters can also look better if they have a good PG finding them for open looks. But, who is actually the one making the other better?

eg. Nash is a great PG. No one doubts that. But, why wasn't he ever an MVP candidate on the Mavs? Is it because he didn't have the quality shooters and finishers that he does on the Suns team? Or did he just all of a sudden start making his teammates better?

I think they should be asking "Who is making him better?" and trying to look at it from the other side... They should watch games with a different point of view when considering MVP votes and really think about this question.

eg. Who is making Kobe better? Is there anyone that makes him better? He was great when he played alongside Shaq and was winning championships. No one would give him the vote because "He had Shaq", now, he doesn't have Shaq, he doesn't even have another All-Star playing along side him. He is playing incredible basketball this season, better than any other season in his already great career, but, why doesn't he recieve the vote now?

In sumary, you can debate all you want about players making other player better, therefore making them more worthy of an MVP vote, but, think about who is making THAT player better.

[Mark_in_Tulsa]

When it comes to MVP voting they take into account rebounds and assist.
Which is something a lot of people here think isn't important. Most people here, and most fans in general just care about how often you can put a ball through a hoop.

So saying that it's a lot easier for a big to win it than a guard. Now I do believe Nash deserved it last year. He really helped those guys. But at the time last year people didn't realise how good those guys were around Nash, so they thought it was all Nash was their reason for success.

Now most of the NBA think out side of the KB the Lakers suck, so if the Lakers can make some noise this year then he will increase his chance as a guard to win the MVP, just as Nash did last year.

Now saying all of that, go look at AI's stats from 2000. How he won the MVP is anyones guess.

[KingKobeDubbz]

I don't care and I am not being biased............KOBE

[AussieLakerFan]

AI's MVP season stats

[eureca]

Um ill say it again Nash >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kobe in MVP voting. Kobe wont come close to winning give it up.

[Raptor2k]

Aussie, nice sig
_________________
"I accepted their challenge. I accepted the doubt of everyone who spoke on my downfall and used their words as fuel. I have a franchise to resurrect, a city of fans to uplift."

[JimRaynor55]

[AussieLakerFan]

[AussieLakerFan]

[sodapoppenski]

I still say the FIRST point of criteria should be this:

- Estimate how many wins the player's team would have with him, and
compare that to how many wins the player's team would have WITHOUT
him.

That's essentially why Nash is so universally praised. He came to the
Suns and made them great.

But with Kobe it's not as obvious, because he's been with the Lakers for
years.

Pretend the Lakers had no Kobe all of last season, then got him this
year.

That's how you should compare him to Nash, and other great players in
the MVP race.

Last year we had 34 wins. Without Kobe? Gimme your guesses!

Point is, had we ACTUALLY just gotten Kobe this year, our 45ish wins
this season would make him an INSTANT candidate.

But instead, writers are jaded towards his continuing presence with the
Lakers and don't think logically enough to avoid comparing it to the years
with Shaq in the middle.

I happen to think Nash deserves it.

But I think Kobe should be a close second.

A player whose presence gives his team 25-30 extra wins to squeak
them into the playoffs is more valuable than a player whose presence gets
his team 10-15 extra games to move up to a higher seed.

I agree team-success should matter, but more as a tie-breaker.

For instance, if you argued that Kobe and Nash both give their teams
an extra 25-30 wins with their presence (I happen to think that roughly),
then the tie-breaker becomes team-success... which is why I'm ok with
Nash winning it.

I'm just not ok with people acting like Kobe isn't even in the discussion,
or barely makes their top-5.

That's crap.

[sodapoppenski]

[OX1947]

MVP of the NBA!!!!

Most Valuable Player of the NBA!!!!

Who is the MOST VALUABLE PLAYER of the NBA!!!?

It says it right there

I dont know when these morons decided to give an award that is suppose to go to the best BASKETBALL PLAYER in the League, to a guy who they feel is deserving because its convienant. Like I said before, Barkley and Malone got MVPs in MJ's prime. That goes to show you that the MVP is horsebleep. MVP belongs to the BEST BB player in the NBA. Who is a better basketball player in the league this year?

[AussieLakerFan]

[Colby Briant]

somebody start a petition at petitiononline to stop the media from voting for the MVP. Lets give the power back to the players vote and maybe even the coaches/players/gms combined.

i bet if we spread the petition link to all the bb boards it would gain some strength cause its not only laker fans who are pissed about how the media votes for MVP. hey its a start. time for a change.

viva la resistance!

[sodapoppenski]

Coaches, Players, GMs.

Can't vote for anyone on your own team/franchise.

[AussieLakerFan]

[Colby Briant]