Can this really happen again? Can Kobe win the MVP if the Celtics win?

[Who]

This year, the C's players have all been either rather ordinary, or incredibly inconsistent.  Let's break down their resumes.

Rondo has been the most consistent of the C's candidates, however, the Lakers have done a great job of limiting his effectiveness.  He has not had any really terrible games, but he also has not completely dominated like an MVP should.  I think if he has a big clinching game, he has the strongest argument on the C's.  But he still needs that big game (I know, I know, he had a triple double, but it really was not a dominating performance, and was greatly overshadowed by Ray's shooting that game).

Pierce has been the second most consistent candidate for the C's.  He had an incredibly efficient, and close to dominating game 5 (when the C's needed it most), but he also was a bit of a no-show in games 2 and 3.  He also needs a big clinching game.

KG...his first two games disqualify him IMO.  He was beyond attrocious, and this series could be over alraedy if he had shown up in game 1. 

Ray...complete no-show in game 3, and below average in 4 and 5.  1 game does not make an MVP.

This is not the same as 2008, when guys were stepping up all over the place, and really, 3 different guys on the C's deserved it. So far, no one on the C's really deserves it. 

This pretty much sums up my thoughts on the situation. I don't think any Celtics player has a strong enough claim for the award ... although there is still time.

I thought it was a close call between Kobe and Gasol early but Pau's last two games have weakened his claim considerably. Kobe hasn't even played that well ... but I do think he has played better than anyone else so he would be my choice, at this point in time, for the Finals MVP.

That said, I think that Pierce or Rondo could overtake Kobe (Garnett? Maybe, not Ray though) if either one has a dominating performance in a title clinching game for the Celtics.

[Ersatz]

For a stats guy like Hollinger to completely ignore FG% in his arguement is rediculous.

For most of this series all we heard was how Pierce was struggling offensivley, when he really only had one bad game and the Celtics barely went to him in that game anyway cause Ray was so hot.  Yet Pierce was shooting better than Kobe and we never heard a word about Kobe struggling.
ing as many shots as Kobe this series we wouldn't be talking about Kobe for MVP in a losing cause. 

Great post. TP. Hollinger pretends to be impartial on these things, but he's clearly not. Field goal percentage should be a stat geeks number-one indicator, but he's forgetting that because he luvs him some Kobe.

Another indicator, one that's less statistically verifiable, might be crunch-time, ie, fourth-quarter, play. Kobe has, well, sucked in the fourth-quarter of nearly every game, while Pierce clinched game 4 in the final two minutes with a bucket and free throws and game 5 by taking that rebound from Kobe and the great inbounds play.

If Hollinger insists on giving the MVP to a Laker, make it the deserving one at least: Gasol.

[Ersatz]

Kobe has had the better individual statistics, but it just wouldn't seem right to give it to him in the event that Boston wins this thing.

Kobe's stats are not good. Look it up. He just takes a ton of shots and so it looks like he's good.

Hollinger isn't an idiot. He's worse: he's a stooge.

[celticsclay]

Rondo or Pierce if we win....

[Ersatz]

Pierce has been the second most consistent candidate for the C's.  He had an incredibly efficient, and close to dominating game 5 (when the C's needed it most), but he also was a bit of a no-show in games 2 and 3.   

I disagree. Game 3 PIerce was not great, but he was okay, and way better than in game 3 of 2008. But in game 2 I thought he was really good. He couldn't hit a shot, but he played terrific defense, set some great screens, and made some clutch intangible/hustle plays. That's why I think at at this point if the Cs pull it out, he's the MVP.

[Papatrichs]

all that matters is the banner that will be raise up...

 can we give the MVP to Doc?

[Chris]

Kobe has had the better individual statistics, but it just wouldn't seem right to give it to him in the event that Boston wins this thing.

Kobe's stats are not good. Look it up. He just takes a ton of shots and so it looks like he's good.

Hollinger isn't an idiot. He's worse: he's a stooge.

Really?  I have looked them up.  30 points, 6 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 2 steals, and 1 block per game.  Sure, 42.5% shooting is not great, but its not terrible either.  And he is shooting 38% from 3, and 92% from the line.

Yes, those are not the most efficient numbers ever, but they are VERY good, especially when you consider how little help he has had.

[fairweatherfan]

KG...his first two games disqualify him IMO.  He was beyond attrocious, and this series could be over alraedy if he had shown up in game 1.  

I disagree - Gasol dominating KG was the most glaring issue in Game 1 but was a long way from the sole difference maker, as the whole team pretty much no-showed for the first half/3 quarters or so.  KG also was very solid in Game 2 when he was in the game, and made several key plays down the stretch.

KG would be my pick for MVP of the series so far as it's his steadily improving play, mirrored by the shrinking of the Laker bigs, that has personified this series so far.  His Game 5 was very underrated - his stat line was great but his contributions extended beyond that.

Pierce would win the MVP if nothing changed from here out though.  Media voters are suckers for the highest scorers, and Pierce's "duel" with Kobe in Game 5 got all the attention. 

Honestly though I don't care if they give it to Sasha Vujacic so long as we're holding up the big trophy at the end.

[Chris]

KG...his first two games disqualify him IMO.  He was beyond attrocious, and this series could be over alraedy if he had shown up in game 1.  

I disagree - Gasol dominating KG was the most glaring issue in Game 1 but was a long way from the sole difference maker, as the whole team pretty much no-showed for the first half/3 quarters or so.  KG also was very solid in Game 2 when he was in the game, and made several key plays down the stretch.

KG would be my pick for MVP of the series so far as it's his steadily improving play, mirrored by the shrinking of the Laker bigs, that has personified this series so far.  His Game 5 was very underrated - his stat line was great but his contributions extended beyond that.

Pierce would win the MVP if nothing changed from here out though.  Media voters are suckers for the highest scorers, and Pierce's "duel" with Kobe in Game 5 got all the attention. 

Honestly though I don't care if they give it to Sasha Vujacic so long as we're holding up the big trophy at the end.

How is his play "steadily improving"?  He was handily beat in game 1, played one of the worst games of his career in game 2, was dominant in game 3, and has leveled out in games 4 and 5.

I can certainly understand the argument for him as MVP, and I wouldn't have a huge problem if he won it after a huge clinching game.  But I personally could not vote for him, given his complete no-show in the first two games.  MVP's do not disappear like that.

[Rondo2287]

KG...his first two games disqualify him IMO.  He was beyond attrocious, and this series could be over alraedy if he had shown up in game 1. 

I disagree - Gasol dominating KG was the most glaring issue in Game 1 but was a long way from the sole difference maker, as the whole team pretty much no-showed for the first half/3 quarters or so.  KG also was very solid in Game 2 when he was in the game, and made several key plays down the stretch.

KG would be my pick for MVP of the series so far as it's his steadily improving play, mirrored by the shrinking of the Laker bigs, that has personified this series so far.  His Game 5 was very underrated - his stat line was great but his contributions extended beyond that.

Pierce would win the MVP if nothing changed from here out though.  Media voters are suckers for the highest scorers, and Pierce's "duel" with Kobe in Game 5 got all the attention. 

Honestly though I don't care if they give it to Sasha Vujacic so long as we're holding up the big trophy at the end.

How is his play "steadily improving"?  He was handily beat in game 1, played one of the worst games of his career in game 2, was dominant in game 3, and has leveled out in games 4 and 5.

I can certainly understand the argument for him as MVP, and I wouldn't have a huge problem if he won it after a huge clinching game.  But I personally could not vote for him, given his complete no-show in the first two games.  MVP's do not disappear like that.

Chris, I respectfully gotta disagree, I think KG was amazing last game.  18-10 while shooting a good percentage and getting to the line.  I also thought his defense was huge, his steals lead to a couple of fast breaks down the other end.

[Jaycelt]

KG...his first two games disqualify him IMO.  He was beyond attrocious, and this series could be over alraedy if he had shown up in game 1.  

I disagree - Gasol dominating KG was the most glaring issue in Game 1 but was a long way from the sole difference maker, as the whole team pretty much no-showed for the first half/3 quarters or so.  KG also was very solid in Game 2 when he was in the game, and made several key plays down the stretch.

KG would be my pick for MVP of the series so far as it's his steadily improving play, mirrored by the shrinking of the Laker bigs, that has personified this series so far.  His Game 5 was very underrated - his stat line was great but his contributions extended beyond that.

Pierce would win the MVP if nothing changed from here out though.  Media voters are suckers for the highest scorers, and Pierce's "duel" with Kobe in Game 5 got all the attention. 

Honestly though I don't care if they give it to Sasha Vujacic so long as we're holding up the big trophy at the end.

How is his play "steadily improving"?  He was handily beat in game 1, played one of the worst games of his career in game 2, was dominant in game 3, and has leveled out in games 4 and 5.

I can certainly understand the argument for him as MVP, and I wouldn't have a huge problem if he won it after a huge clinching game.  But I personally could not vote for him, given his complete no-show in the first two games.  MVP's do not disappear like that.

Chris, I think you're greatly undervaluing Garnetts performance in game 5.  He was very good, effecient on both ends of the court and although I would say without hesitation that Pierce has been our MVP in this series for his play on both ends, I think Kevin has been extremely important and would probably be my second choice as of today.

[misha]

Kobe has had the better individual statistics, but it just wouldn't seem right to give it to him in the event that Boston wins this thing.

Kobe's stats are not good. Look it up. He just takes a ton of shots and so it looks like he's good.

Hollinger isn't an idiot. He's worse: he's a stooge.

Really?  I have looked them up.  30 points, 6 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 2 steals, and 1 block per game.  Sure, 42.5% shooting is not great, but its not terrible either.  And he is shooting 38% from 3, and 92% from the line.

Yes, those are not the most efficient numbers ever, but they are VERY good, especially when you consider how little help he has had.

plus 4.2 turnovers per game and 9 from 32 (28%) in 4th quarters over the series.

[fairweatherfan]

KG...his first two games disqualify him IMO.  He was beyond attrocious, and this series could be over alraedy if he had shown up in game 1. 

I disagree - Gasol dominating KG was the most glaring issue in Game 1 but was a long way from the sole difference maker, as the whole team pretty much no-showed for the first half/3 quarters or so.  KG also was very solid in Game 2 when he was in the game, and made several key plays down the stretch.

KG would be my pick for MVP of the series so far as it's his steadily improving play, mirrored by the shrinking of the Laker bigs, that has personified this series so far.  His Game 5 was very underrated - his stat line was great but his contributions extended beyond that.

Pierce would win the MVP if nothing changed from here out though.  Media voters are suckers for the highest scorers, and Pierce's "duel" with Kobe in Game 5 got all the attention. 

Honestly though I don't care if they give it to Sasha Vujacic so long as we're holding up the big trophy at the end.

How is his play "steadily improving"?  He was handily beat in game 1, played one of the worst games of his career in game 2, was dominant in game 3, and has leveled out in games 4 and 5.

I can certainly understand the argument for him as MVP, and I wouldn't have a huge problem if he won it after a huge clinching game.  But I personally could not vote for him, given his complete no-show in the first two games.  MVP's do not disappear like that.

G3: 11-16, 25 pts, 6 reb, 3 ast, 0 stl, 1 blk, 3 to, 5 pf
G5: 6-11, 18 pts, 10 reb, 3 ast, 5 stl, 3 blk, 3 to, 4 pf

I'd take the second stat line over the first from KG any day, especially since we tend to do worse when he leads us in scoring.  Gasol's plummeting numbers also give support to his case. 

KG contributes beyond the stat line and the big story of the Finals has been the Laker bigs, especially Gasol, beginning to turtle up as the series went on.  KG's play on defense is the biggest factor in that trend.  He doesn't have to be your pick and he almost certainly won't be the media's, but he's mine at the moment.

[Hoops]

Kobe has had the better individual statistics, but it just wouldn't seem right to give it to him in the event that Boston wins this thing.

Kobe's stats are not good. Look it up. He just takes a ton of shots and so it looks like he's good.

Hollinger isn't an idiot. He's worse: he's a stooge.

Really?  I have looked them up.  30 points, 6 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 2 steals, and 1 block per game.  Sure, 42.5% shooting is not great, but its not terrible either.  And he is shooting 38% from 3, and 92% from the line.

Yes, those are not the most efficient numbers ever, but they are VERY good, especially when you consider how little help he has had.

To the same point, who in Green has had better stats than Kobe's? But I don't even think stats are the key component here. To those who don't think Kobe deserves Finals MVP, I again ask the question: Who has been more valuable over the course of the entire series? Kobe has been by far the most valuable player for the Lakers in every game of the series. If the Celtics had one player who was similarly valuable throughout the series, then you give it to the guy from the winning team. But Boston hasn't had one guy who's been consistently valuable, win or lose, throughout this series.

I will say that of all the Celtics, Rondo probably has the best shot at MVP, followed by Pierce. If Rondo has a huge game tonight (and we win) AND Kobe has an ordinary game, then Rondo could get it. Same thing if Pierce has a huge game while Rondo and Kobe are ordinary. But if nobody in Green stands out tonight (total team effort, which is just fine with me) and Kobe goes for 35+ with 6 boards and 5-6 assists and single-handedly keeps LA in the game, I'd be surprised if Kobe wasn't the MVP.

[Mike]

Kobe has had the better individual statistics, but it just wouldn't seem right to give it to him in the event that Boston wins this thing.

Kobe's stats are not good. Look it up. He just takes a ton of shots and so it looks like he's good.

Hollinger isn't an idiot. He's worse: he's a stooge.

Really?  I have looked them up.  30 points, 6 rebounds, 4.4 assists, 2 steals, and 1 block per game.  Sure, 42.5% shooting is not great, but its not terrible either.  And he is shooting 38% from 3, and 92% from the line.

Yes, those are not the most efficient numbers ever, but they are VERY good, especially when you consider how little help he has had.

To the same point, who in Green has had better stats than Kobe's? But I don't even think stats are the key component here. To those who don't think Kobe deserves Finals MVP, I again ask the question: Who has been more valuable over the course of the entire series? Kobe has been by far the most valuable player for the Lakers in every game of the series. If the Celtics had one player who was similarly valuable throughout the series, then you give it to the guy from the winning team. But Boston hasn't had one guy who's been consistently valuable, win or lose, throughout this series.

I will say that of all the Celtics, Rondo probably has the best shot at MVP, followed by Pierce. If Rondo has a huge game tonight (and we win) AND Kobe has an ordinary game, then Rondo could get it. Same thing if Pierce has a huge game while Rondo and Kobe are ordinary. But if nobody in Green stands out tonight (total team effort, which is just fine with me) and Kobe goes for 35+ with 6 boards and 5-6 assists and single-handedly keeps LA in the game, I'd be surprised if Kobe wasn't the MVP.

I would argue that Pierce, KG, and Rondo would all be more valuable to their team than Kobe if the Celtics win.  How valuable are you really if you can't lead your team to victory?