So who's MVP?

[PosImpos]

As a recent TrueHoop article noted, the MVP almost always goes to a player on one of the top 4 teams record wise, and the player is usually first or second in a couple of statistical categories.  The MVP is almost always a fairly prolific scorer, too.

Given those criteria, there's pretty much only one choice that makes sense....

LeBron.


Rose doesn't lead the league in any statistical category, and his team is most likely not going to finish with a top 4 record.  The Bulls are probably the 6th best team in the NBA.  Amare has no chance of winning because his Knicks will finish with fewer than 50 wins.  Dirk has a better chance, but I still think it's unlikely given the Mavs' inconsistency.

Honestly, LeBron deserves it.  The second most deserving player would be Wade, but because of LeBron that obviously isn't happening.  I would say Ginobili, since he really is the MVP for the best team in the league, but his numbers just aren't gaudy enough.

The Mavs were inconsistent because...?

Dirk was hurt.

That's a plus for him with the voters who's definition is "most valuable to his team".

By inconsistent I was also implying that they will be going forward.  I don't know if the Mavs will finish with a top 4 record.

[soap07]

Even though Lebron may deserve to get MVP I find it funny that he has pretty much the same record and numbers as he did with the Cav's last year considering he is on a team with "the greatest trio of all time"

Miami is going to have the same record or worse than the Cavs last year. He is basically doing the same thing he did last year but with better teammates. And before someone says how impressive it is to do with other all stars on your team, if he ends up losing more games with said all-stars than with his previous Cavs teams, how is that really impressive?

It is impressive because it is their first year together.

There hasn't been 5 years of building up to back to back 60 win seasons like in Cleveland.

I remember when our Big 3 came together and they hadn't proven anything yet, but still dominated that season and won the chip. KG was in the top 3 for MVP and he would have won the MVP if he had put up Lebron type numbers.

It's looking like with the C's mounting injuries, the Heat will be the top team out of the East with 60+ wins (I have the Heat with 65 Wins) and Boston will be 2nd in the East (too many injuries and minutes will be managed for our starters).

Lebron will win MVP no doubt about it.

I understand that for the most part but didn't that Celtics kind of prove that it doesn't take long to mesh? Give me a break the entire world would be shocked if the Heat were doing much worse than they are. The Cav's had new players coming and going all the time. Last year they added Shaq, Jamario Moon, Anthony Parker and Antoine Jamison. Also unlike Ray KG and Paul those 3 joined during the prime of there careers.

For years people have been making excuses for Lebrons Cav's teams saying that they don't have enough pieces they only have him  he needs more talent blah blah blah.

Now he is on a team with incredible talent and people are saying they need time to mesh? More excuses.

Excuses for what? The Heat have come together quite nicely and should finish around 65 wins, not bad considering its their first year playing together. After the Hornets' recent play, I think LeBron should definitely be the number one guy for MVP.

[CelticG1]

Even though Lebron may deserve to get MVP I find it funny that he has pretty much the same record and numbers as he did with the Cav's last year considering he is on a team with "the greatest trio of all time"

Miami is going to have the same record or worse than the Cavs last year. He is basically doing the same thing he did last year but with better teammates. And before someone says how impressive it is to do with other all stars on your team, if he ends up losing more games with said all-stars than with his previous Cavs teams, how is that really impressive?

It is impressive because it is their first year together.

There hasn't been 5 years of building up to back to back 60 win seasons like in Cleveland.

I remember when our Big 3 came together and they hadn't proven anything yet, but still dominated that season and won the chip. KG was in the top 3 for MVP and he would have won the MVP if he had put up Lebron type numbers.

It's looking like with the C's mounting injuries, the Heat will be the top team out of the East with 60+ wins (I have the Heat with 65 Wins) and Boston will be 2nd in the East (too many injuries and minutes will be managed for our starters).

Lebron will win MVP no doubt about it.

I understand that for the most part but didn't that Celtics kind of prove that it doesn't take long to mesh? Give me a break the entire world would be shocked if the Heat were doing much worse than they are. The Cav's had new players coming and going all the time. Last year they added Shaq, Jamario Moon, Anthony Parker and Antoine Jamison. Also unlike Ray KG and Paul those 3 joined during the prime of there careers.

For years people have been making excuses for Lebrons Cav's teams saying that they don't have enough pieces they only have him  he needs more talent blah blah blah.

Now he is on a team with incredible talent and people are saying they need time to mesh? More excuses.

Excuses for what? The Heat have come together quite nicely and should finish around 65 wins, not bad considering its their first year playing together. After the Hornets' recent play, I think LeBron should definitely be the number one guy for MVP.

The excuse "we need time to mesh". Wade said after the first game of the season, Lebron said it about a week ago saying they still need to build chemistry. It's all set up for when they lose, "oh it was our first year we didn't have enough time to play together". The media has been setting this up as well. There is always an excuse when it comes to Lebron. Whether his teammates aren't good enough, his elbow has a boo boo, or his team is still gelling.

Derrick Rose IMO has had a more impressive season considering what he's done and dealt with.

The case can obviously be made that Lebron deserves the MVP I'm just saying that it is not impressive whatsoever. What was impressive was what he was doing with those Cavs teams. Now he is put on a much much better team and basically isn't doing anything more. I don't think it has anything at all to do with this being Miami's first year together. The Heat could get knocked out of the playoffs every year and a few years down the road if Lebron is putting up the same numbers and wins is it any less impresssive?

[LB3533]

MVP shouldn't mean the player that performs well with least talent and thus results into more wins than projected.

MVP means best player in the league.

Who is the best player in the league?

Is that team still winning games? (Should be an after thought).

[Spilling Green Dye]

MVP shouldn't mean the player that performs well with least talent and thus results into more wins than projected.

MVP means best player in the league.

Who is the best player in the league?

Is that team still winning games? (Should be an after thought).

False, MVP means Most Valuable Player. 

If you want best player then have Best Player (BP) award. 

Most seasons the MVP is someone like Steve Nash whose value is the greatest to their team.  Or like Lebron last year.  Players whose VALUE makes a team go from irrelevant to playoff contender. 

[LB3533]

MVP shouldn't mean the player that performs well with least talent and thus results into more wins than projected.

MVP means best player in the league.

Who is the best player in the league?

Is that team still winning games? (Should be an after thought).

False, MVP means Most Valuable Player. 

If you want best player then have Best Player (BP) award. 

Most seasons the MVP is someone like Steve Nash whose value is the greatest to their team.  Or like Lebron last year.  Players whose VALUE makes a team go from irrelevant to playoff contender. 

It isn't the team MVP, it is the league MVP which means best player of the league.

It means this is the player that brings the league to a higher level.

It's either Lebron or Durant, and Lebron is leading by a country mile.

[barefacedmonk]

So who's MVP?

[Bahku]

There's thirty games left ... shouldn't we wait until the season's over to objectively assess the MVP, etc.?

[Moranis]

I think it is pretty clearly Lebron.

[nba is the worst]

MVP shouldn't mean the player that performs well with least talent and thus results into more wins than projected.

MVP means best player in the league.

Who is the best player in the league?

Is that team still winning games? (Should be an after thought).

False, MVP means Most Valuable Player.  

If you want best player then have Best Player (BP) award.  

Most seasons the MVP is someone like Steve Nash whose value is the greatest to their team.  Or like Lebron last year.  Players whose VALUE makes a team go from irrelevant to playoff contender.  

THIS is the exact point I was trying to make in my previous post.

Because the league hasn't defined what MVP "means", the voters who think it means "best player" vote that way, and those that think it means "most valuable to his team", vote that way, etc.

Then you add in the politics of who won the last few years, the "lifetime achievement" factor, etc...

So it largely comes down to being a popularity contest...

[soap07]

MVP shouldn't mean the player that performs well with least talent and thus results into more wins than projected.

MVP means best player in the league.

Who is the best player in the league?

Is that team still winning games? (Should be an after thought).

False, MVP means Most Valuable Player.  

If you want best player then have Best Player (BP) award.  

Most seasons the MVP is someone like Steve Nash whose value is the greatest to their team.  Or like Lebron last year.  Players whose VALUE makes a team go from irrelevant to playoff contender.  

THIS is the exact point I was trying to make in my previous post.

Because the league hasn't defined what MVP "means", the voters who think it means "best player" vote that way, and those that think it means "most valuable to his team", vote that way, etc.

Then you add in the politics of who won the last few years, the "lifetime achievement" factor, etc...

So it largely comes down to being a popularity contest...

I don't think it comes down to a "popularity" contest.

The thing is - in most years, the MVP and best player in the league usually are the same, unless in exceptional instances - such as Nash's two MVPs.

[BballTim]

MVP shouldn't mean the player that performs well with least talent and thus results into more wins than projected.

MVP means best player in the league.

Who is the best player in the league?

Is that team still winning games? (Should be an after thought).

False, MVP means Most Valuable Player.  

If you want best player then have Best Player (BP) award.  

Most seasons the MVP is someone like Steve Nash whose value is the greatest to their team.  Or like Lebron last year.  Players whose VALUE makes a team go from irrelevant to playoff contender.  

THIS is the exact point I was trying to make in my previous post.

Because the league hasn't defined what MVP "means", the voters who think it means "best player" vote that way, and those that think it means "most valuable to his team", vote that way, etc.

Then you add in the politics of who won the last few years, the "lifetime achievement" factor, etc...

So it largely comes down to being a popularity contest...

I don't think it comes down to a "popularity" contest.

The thing is - in most years, the MVP and best player in the league usually are the same, unless in exceptional instances - such as Nash's two MVPs.

  It's a quite a stretch to claim that Nash has ever been the best player in the league.

[soap07]

MVP shouldn't mean the player that performs well with least talent and thus results into more wins than projected.

MVP means best player in the league.

Who is the best player in the league?

Is that team still winning games? (Should be an after thought).

False, MVP means Most Valuable Player.  

If you want best player then have Best Player (BP) award.  

Most seasons the MVP is someone like Steve Nash whose value is the greatest to their team.  Or like Lebron last year.  Players whose VALUE makes a team go from irrelevant to playoff contender.  

THIS is the exact point I was trying to make in my previous post.

Because the league hasn't defined what MVP "means", the voters who think it means "best player" vote that way, and those that think it means "most valuable to his team", vote that way, etc.

Then you add in the politics of who won the last few years, the "lifetime achievement" factor, etc...

So it largely comes down to being a popularity contest...

I don't think it comes down to a "popularity" contest.

The thing is - in most years, the MVP and best player in the league usually are the same, unless in exceptional instances - such as Nash's two MVPs.

  It's a quite a stretch to claim that Nash has ever been the best player in the league.

Did you read what I wrote?

[BballTim]

MVP shouldn't mean the player that performs well with least talent and thus results into more wins than projected.

MVP means best player in the league.

Who is the best player in the league?

Is that team still winning games? (Should be an after thought).

False, MVP means Most Valuable Player.  

If you want best player then have Best Player (BP) award.  

Most seasons the MVP is someone like Steve Nash whose value is the greatest to their team.  Or like Lebron last year.  Players whose VALUE makes a team go from irrelevant to playoff contender.  

THIS is the exact point I was trying to make in my previous post.

Because the league hasn't defined what MVP "means", the voters who think it means "best player" vote that way, and those that think it means "most valuable to his team", vote that way, etc.

Then you add in the politics of who won the last few years, the "lifetime achievement" factor, etc...

So it largely comes down to being a popularity contest...

I don't think it comes down to a "popularity" contest.

The thing is - in most years, the MVP and best player in the league usually are the same, unless in exceptional instances - such as Nash's two MVPs.

  It's a quite a stretch to claim that Nash has ever been the best player in the league.

Did you read what I wrote?

  I'll go with apparently not, followed by oops! and sorry...

[LB3533]

Nash had 2 great seasons right off the bat with Phoenix, but he was not league MVP. Nash was certainly worth of team and Suns franchise MVP, but not league MVP.

In 05-06: Lebron's 31/7/7 were league MVP type numbers. And Kobe's 35/5/5 with 81 points in a single game were league MVP type numbers.

In 04-05: Shaq's 23/10 were just as impressive for the East's best team in the Miami Heat as Nash's #s for the West's best Phoenix Suns.

The biggest reason Nash won his 2 MVP's was because voters looked at the "intangibles" not related to the sesasonal performance.

In 2004-2005 the Suns won 62 games, the year before they won 29 games with Stephon Marbury playing in 30 some games and Amare playing in only 55 games. Nash comes along and suddenly he makes the Suns that much better...not because the Suns got healthy and Joe Johnson got more playing time to season his own game and grow his own talent.

In 2005-2006, Nash won because the Suns still managed to win 54 games despite Stat only played in 3 games and the trade of Joe Johnson for Boris Diaw didn't back fire.