PDA

View Full Version : should the media be allowed to decide the mvp and other awards given to players?



kArSoN RyDaH
06-02-2010, 12:10 AM
simple question yes or no? or should it be a right that the players and coaches have?

RapOZo
06-02-2010, 12:22 AM
is good as it is
players and coaches are influenced by their personal sympathy to teammates and friends
and the media, is just stupid
maybe 1 vote from the fans should be considered, and taken from nba's website most voted players

_KB24_
06-02-2010, 12:34 AM
It should be coaches, GMs, and players IMO. The media just buys into hype at the time so they can profit.

RipVW
06-02-2010, 12:34 AM
They need to scrap the MVP award and go with Most Outstanding Player or Player of the Year. Too many people think the MVP is the best player and thats not what it is at all according to the way a lot of the media has voted for it over the years. A lot of times "most valuable" is interpreted as something other than "best player" and people fail to realize this.

ldc62
06-02-2010, 01:27 AM
They need to scrap the MVP award and go with Most Outstanding Player or Player of the Year. Too many people think the MVP is the best player and thats not what it is at all according to the way a lot of the media has voted for it over the years. A lot of times "most valuable" is interpreted as something other than "best player" and people fail to realize this.

then that award is given to the guy who has the best stats... am i correct?

RipVW
06-02-2010, 02:01 AM
then that award is given to the guy who has the best stats... am i correct?

Possibly. But "most valuable" really creates a vagueness that's too much for a lot of sports writers to handle. Its true in both baseball and basketball.

JasonJohnHorn
06-02-2010, 07:23 AM
The players used to vote on MVP. I think I like that better. The players are out there, they know better than anybody who the MVP is. The media should not be deciding every award, because I know a lot of guy in the media end up posting what their picks were as a means to generate readership, and in turn make a list that is meant to "shock" in order to garner attention/readership and in turn don't always reflect what which players are MVP, ROY, DPOY or any other awards.

Coaches should decided coach of the year.
Players should decide MVP
As for the other awards and All-NBA teams, I think it should be a combo of coaches, players and media.

Corey
06-02-2010, 07:34 AM
I don't think the media should have ANY say over awards. It should only be players and coaches.

GrumpyOldMan
06-02-2010, 08:57 AM
I would like to have the players vote with the stipulation that nobody can vote for a teammate. The players are more aware of on court talent than anybody else.

JordansBulls
06-02-2010, 08:58 AM
No. Just look at who the coaches put on some of this defensive teams and all NBA teams. For instance Ewing in 1995 finished 4th in MVP voting and didn't even make an all NBA team. How the hell do you finish 4th in MVP voting and not even make 1 of the 3 all nba teams?

hugepatsfan
06-02-2010, 11:21 AM
PSD should have a poll to decide.

Gibby23
06-02-2010, 11:27 AM
No. Just look at who the coaches put on some of this defensive teams and all NBA teams. For instance Ewing in 1995 finished 4th in MVP voting and didn't even make an all NBA team. How the hell do you finish 4th in MVP voting and not even make 1 of the 3 all nba teams?

Because David Robinson was the MVP and was a Center. Hakeem was MVP the year before and was also a center. How hard is that to understand.

maddBat
06-02-2010, 12:31 PM
PSD should have a poll to decide.

:clap: .... lol i dont think the media would decide awards. if it did whoever is in the bigger market will always win. its all about money.

Chronz
06-02-2010, 01:20 PM
Yes, they should have the most say


It should be coaches, GMs, and players IMO. The media just buys into hype at the time so they can profit.

How do they stand to profit?

Chronz
06-02-2010, 01:22 PM
The players used to vote on MVP. I think I like that better. The players are out there, they know better than anybody who the MVP is. The media should not be deciding every award, because I know a lot of guy in the media end up posting what their picks were as a means to generate readership, and in turn make a list that is meant to "shock" in order to garner attention/readership and in turn don't always reflect what which players are MVP, ROY, DPOY or any other awards.

Coaches should decided coach of the year.
Players should decide MVP
As for the other awards and All-NBA teams, I think it should be a combo of coaches, players and media.
Can you cite examples for your theories?

JasonJohnHorn
06-02-2010, 02:32 PM
No. Just look at who the coaches put on some of this defensive teams and all NBA teams. For instance Ewing in 1995 finished 4th in MVP voting and didn't even make an all NBA team. How the hell do you finish 4th in MVP voting and not even make 1 of the 3 all nba teams?

Easy, you finish fourth, behind David Robinson, Hakeem the Dream and Shaq :)
Although, that year he finished behind Robinson, Shaq and Karl Malone, Hakeem finished 5th though in a tight race. That is easily explainable. The center position was just deep that year. For of the top five MVP candidates were centers, and there are only three All-NBA teams.

I think the right three guys got on the All-NBA teams for the record ;-)

NBAfan4life
06-02-2010, 02:47 PM
Can you cite examples for your theories?

When I'm going somewhere on the bus or something like that I read sports Illustrated mobile. A lot of guys there post there picks before they make them and try to back up why they are picking that way, maybe that was what the guy was talking about.

I dont necessarily agree that they post controversial picks to gain more readers.

JasonJohnHorn
06-02-2010, 02:56 PM
No. Just look at who the coaches put on some of this defensive teams and all NBA teams. For instance Ewing in 1995 finished 4th in MVP voting and didn't even make an all NBA team. How the hell do you finish 4th in MVP voting and not even make 1 of the 3 all nba teams?

Oh, and if you think that was weird, in the 89/90 season, Barkley actually got the most first place votes, 11 more than that year's winner Magic Johnson, but still lost the award. Apparently it was a love/hate thing with Barkley, those that didn't have him at first, likely didn't have him on their top five MVP candidates at all. That is an odd polarization. In 88 Marck Jackson finished higher on the MVP voting than his teammate Ewing, who got no votes that year. And in 1989 the Jazz got Malone, Stockton AND Mark Eaton in on the MVP voting. That means that two people had Mark Eaton on their list instead of guys like Hakeem, Ewing and Daughtery (one of the most underrated centers in the history or the league). And in 96 Penny finished higher than his teammate Shaq?

The MVP voting sees some weird anomolies. Guys like Darrell Armstrong pop up on the list, Wallace pop up on the list in 08 when he averaged only 12 points and 6 rebounds a game. Buck Williams got on it one year as well with only 13 points and less than 10 rebounds a game. Makes you wonder.

JasonJohnHorn
06-02-2010, 03:13 PM
Can you cite examples for your theories?

Sorry Chronz, I don't book mark every article I have read over the internet over the last ten years, but as you can see by browsing this site, every week somebody posts a list of "greatest of all time" with "controversial" picks and it seems like everybody and their dogs posts a responce before a lock can be put on the thread.

If you read online sports, or SI or any major columns, you will see the sports writers who get to vote, often publish their votes and then write as to why they picked who they picked. Obviously their job as writers is to get readers. There is a conflict of interest there because what will get them readers is not always what will accurately reflect who the true MVP candidates are.

There are some guys writing out there who know what they are talking about, and the MVP voting is subjective so you can't reall say anybody is wrong. you could, in theory make a case that Sam Cassell was the MVP of 05/06 season because despite his reasonably humble numbers, his leadership in practice, on the court and in the locker room helped turn a perenial loser into a playoff team that was one basket away from the WCF. So one couldnt finitely say the sports writers dont know as much as players, but to me the players on the court know who makes the biggest imapct on the game. They know who plays hard, who plays dirty, and they know who the best defenders are because they have to play against them. Like in Game six of the ECF this year, when Nate Robinson came on he was actually playing BETTER defence than Rondo had been. Rondo had been having trouble with the pick and roll and was falling behind the pick and giving Nelson some room, but Robinson was able to fight through the pick and roll and keep on Nelson. Rondo is generally considered one of the best defensive PG in the league, and most wouldnt even think of suggesting that Robinson is a better defender, but on that night he was, and players in general have a better sense of the true impact other players make on the court.

And they dont need any whisltes and bells to get readership. If you can see the potential conflict of interest, then you simply aren't looking.

Look at the year-by-year voting and you will see almost every season there are people on that list who do not belong there. Mark Eaton. Buck Williams. Darrell Armstrong. Rasheed Wallace in 08? Yes, there is a case to be made for such players, because a team is only a strong as its weakest link, so yeah, Drexler and Porter depended on the rebounding of Buck Williams, much like Wade and Shaq depended on Udonis Haslem's rebounding, but Williams wasn't even the best player in the front court let alone the team! And the 08 Pistons quite honestly saw Rasheed Wallace be as much as a retarding weight on the team as he was a value, and Mcdysse was the better defender and better rebounder that year and displayed a better sense of shot selection.

tredigs
06-02-2010, 03:46 PM
simple question yes or no? or should it be a right that the players and coaches have?

Lebron was the MVP of the regular season, by a landslide, get over it.

tredigs
06-02-2010, 03:56 PM
I would like to have the players vote with the stipulation that nobody can vote for a teammate. The players are more aware of on court talent than anybody else.

Disagree completely. For myself, it's much easier to evaluate a players impact when I'm not mixed up in the action and can actually see the whole floor. Beyond that, these guys are playing games every night while all of their peers are playing their own games. You only get to see another player 2-3 times over the course of the year live, along with the handful of times you watch another players game at home when you aren't on the court.

I'd think that a person who watches the game for a living and gets to see multiple games every night would have a more objective take on the award. That said, there are obviously horrible analysts out there who make ill-informed picks, but if you leave it up to the players themselves (especially NBA guys? Let's be honest a lot of them don't know how to tie their shoes) then that's only going to be worse.

MVP voting isn't perfect, but it's probably good enough. I have rarely disagreed with a winner over the last 2 decades, personally.

Chronz
06-02-2010, 03:59 PM
When I'm going somewhere on the bus or something like that I read sports Illustrated mobile. A lot of guys there post there picks before they make them and try to back up why they are picking that way, maybe that was what the guy was talking about.

I dont necessarily agree that they post controversial picks to gain more readers.
Im just wondering how much do people really think it sways a writers opinion. Like I dont see too many people not pick Bron for MVP just for the sake of being controversial thereby attracting readers.

97NYer
06-02-2010, 04:08 PM
No. Players, coach's and GM's.

Chronz
06-02-2010, 04:23 PM
Sorry Chronz, I don't book mark every article I have read over the internet over the last ten years, but as you can see by browsing this site, every week somebody posts a list of "greatest of all time" with "controversial" picks and it seems like everybody and their dogs posts a responce before a lock can be put on the thread.
Im just asking for the time to back up your argument friend. Any example will do


If you read online sports, or SI or any major columns, you will see the sports writers who get to vote, often publish their votes and then write as to why they picked who they picked. Obviously their job as writers is to get readers. There is a conflict of interest there because what will get them readers is not always what will accurately reflect who the true MVP candidates are.
Im not seeing the conflict of interest, what gets them readers is the fact that they have a vote and are sharing it with us, its not like these guys are newbies trying to make a name for themselves. If theyve been given the gift of voting, then its because theyve already done so. I dont see whats wrong about publishing your votes, I wish everyone would.


There are some guys writing out there who know what they are talking about, and the MVP voting is subjective so you can't reall say anybody is wrong. you could, in theory make a case that Sam Cassell was the MVP of 05/06 season because despite his reasonably humble numbers, his leadership in practice, on the court and in the locker room helped turn a perenial loser into a playoff team that was one basket away from the WCF. So one couldnt finitely say the sports writers dont know as much as players, but to me the players on the court know who makes the biggest imapct on the game. They know who plays hard, who plays dirty, and they know who the best defenders are because they have to play against them. Like in Game six of the ECF this year, when Nate Robinson came on he was actually playing BETTER defence than Rondo had been. Rondo had been having trouble with the pick and roll and was falling behind the pick and giving Nelson some room, but Robinson was able to fight through the pick and roll and keep on Nelson. Rondo is generally considered one of the best defensive PG in the league, and most wouldnt even think of suggesting that Robinson is a better defender, but on that night he was, and players in general have a better sense of the true impact other players make on the court.
You went off on a crazy tangent there but Ill chug along. Yes the MVP is subjective but comes with a pretty cut and dry criteria which is why you have only so many legit candidates (Unlike the MIP where theres like 50 contenders). The voting is pretty consistent, nobody is going to make really bold out of this world votes on their ballot just to attract attention. Not saying it doesnt happen, like when that Philly guy voted for AI during Shaqs obliteration, or the Dwight MVP votes all coming from Orlando, but the end result is that the collective mind of that group did a great job of recognizing the MVPs. I highly doubt the players could articulate why a certain guy is so valuable. I know there are a few dumb writers but there are way more dumb athletes. Why would you entrust NBA' history to them, plus they are more prone to personal bias and lack the time to truly study the game.

Take your example, if your a player and you see Nate Robinson play D like that, youd come away thinking Nate was a superior defender right? Well sadly you only saw Nate that 1 game and have no knowledge to the fact that Nate actually allowed players to score at a far more effective rate in PnR situations. They play against these guys so rarely that it shouldnt outweigh everything an analyst gets to watch, dissect, over and over.


And they dont need any whisltes and bells to get readership. If you can see the potential conflict of interest, then you simply aren't looking.
I question how much it should matter. No human is free from bias, players have their vendettas, just ask Rick Barry about it.


Look at the year-by-year voting and you will see almost every season there are people on that list who do not belong there. Mark Eaton. Buck Williams. Darrell Armstrong. Rasheed Wallace in 08? Yes, there is a case to be made for such players, because a team is only a strong as its weakest link, so yeah, Drexler and Porter depended on the rebounding of Buck Williams, much like Wade and Shaq depended on Udonis Haslem's rebounding, but Williams wasn't even the best player in the front court let alone the team! And the 08 Pistons quite honestly saw Rasheed Wallace be as much as a retarding weight on the team as he was a value, and Mcdysse was the better defender and better rebounder that year and displayed a better sense of shot selection.

I think there should be some changes done, like making the voting public, but in the big picture your examples did nothing to change the MVP balance. Besides are you sure they voted to attract attention, some evidence would help here. Without it your just listing voting mistakes, one could do the same for the coaches and players. In fact some players could list mistakes made by coaches and have attested to the notion that the Media does a better job of recognizing talent, of course that may be due to their own benefit.

amos1er
06-02-2010, 07:56 PM
Of course players and coaches should decide awards...its the fairest way to do it.

But that will never happen and we all know why....

I've said this many times over...the NBA is a business first and foremost and their main goal above all else is to maximize profits.

If the players and coaches decided the awards, that would be fair, but not profitable.

The media is much more corruptible, therefore it is in Sterns best interest to let them pick the winners. This is the very same reason Stern has the same bad refs officiate playoff games year after year after year. Its the same reason why there are so many conspiracy theories regarding the NBA above all other sports...other than boxing.

If it were truly fair, then a player of Kobe Bryants caliber would have more than just one MVP. But if they gave it to Kobe every year, than the league would be less profitable as it was in the 90's when they gave it to Jordan every year. They need to hype up other less deserving players so that they can attract a larger fanbase in order to boost jersey sales, ticket sales, sneaker sales, and gain more sponsership.

kArSoN RyDaH
06-02-2010, 08:30 PM
Lebron was the MVP of the regular season, by a landslide, get over it.

that has nothing to do with what im talking about.. :facepalm:

JasonJohnHorn
06-02-2010, 11:31 PM
I know there are a few dumb writers but there are way more dumb athletes. Why would you entrust NBA' history to them, plus they are more prone to personal bias and lack the time to truly study the game.

I don't think this is a fair assessment at all. Don't have time to "truly study the game"? For real? It is their job! It is all they do. They go over video tape, they prepare for opponents in practice. I would agree if you suggested that players had to say start so many games, or play so many minutes to be eligible to vote, and yes there would be biases, but there are always biases even (and perhaps most clearly) among sports writers.

I'm not of the mind either that it should entirely be the players, I would prefer coaches get to vote (and I would include assistant coaches here) because those guys go over game tapes more than anybody and study the game more than anybody outside of dedicated players.

And yes, most guys in the media do a good job, and most don't let personal biases impact their voting. I know guys like Kenny Smith and Mark Jackson have talked about their votes, and those guys are level headed, smart guys who studied the games, played the game and know the game, but in tight MVP votes when sports writers start throwing in guys who aren't even the best players on their at their position, let alone the most valuable, that just dilutes the value of the process.

I personally think the awards are pointless. They are subjective and there fore useless. And promise you that James, Barkley, Dirk, Malone and Iverson would all trade their MVP awards for a championship.

I mean the MVP award doesnt even have a clear definition of what an MVP is. Is it the best player? And if so what makes a players the best? Defence? Scoring? All around game? Ability to facilitate for other players? Leadership in practice and in the locker room? Ability to handle high pressure situations and hit clutch shots? Or is it a team that is most valuable to his team? And what makes a guy valuable? Is James the MVP because he gets his team 60+ wins? Or is he holding them back because he dominates the ball? Does Kobe hold back his team because he cant faciliate like Nash and Duncan do?

As subjective as the award is, I'd rather have a guy on the court or on the sidelines who in invloved in the process decide, rather than some pencil pusher with a spare tire and a agenda, even if that is only 1 out of twenty voters.

I respect what you are saying, and you are right, there hasnt been an MVP winner that wasnt deserving of the award in my memory of the award so the media gets it right for the most part, but I do feel that there were players who were equally or perhaps more deserving who were skipped over.


Bill Russell and Kareem have both spoken about this, and both played when the players voted and they seemed to believe that it was better that way. I have a great respect for the way those two played the game and think that they are right. The people on the court in the trenches know better than the guy sitting at home watching on the couch.

GSW Hoops
06-03-2010, 12:15 AM
They need to scrap the MVP award and go with Most Outstanding Player or Player of the Year. Too many people think the MVP is the best player and thats not what it is at all according to the way a lot of the media has voted for it over the years. A lot of times "most valuable" is interpreted as something other than "best player" and people fail to realize this.

:clap: I couldn't agree more. :clap:

I remember a few years back when T-Mac only played about 30 games. Houston was something like 22-2 with T-Mac in the lineup, and around .500 when he wasn't. So I joked to my buddy that T-Mac should be the league MVP because he was clearly the "most valuable player" to his team.

Chronz
06-03-2010, 12:34 PM
I don't think this is a fair assessment at all. Don't have time to "truly study the game"? For real? It is their job! It is all they do. They go over video tape, they prepare for opponents in practice. I would agree if you suggested that players had to say start so many games, or play so many minutes to be eligible to vote, and yes there would be biases, but there are always biases even (and perhaps most clearly) among sports writers.
Their job is to PLAY the sport, not every NBAer takes their job as seriously as a Kobe/Pierce type. Have you ever heard a really great player talk ball and sound like he doesnt know the game at all? It happens alot man, far more often than people whos job is to attract readers, but do so in a matter that makes them credible enough to commit to. Im all for assigning a panel of experts where we take the best in every field.


I'm not of the mind either that it should entirely be the players, I would prefer coaches get to vote (and I would include assistant coaches here) because those guys go over game tapes more than anybody and study the game more than anybody outside of dedicated players.
Thats the best idea, but you have to include reputable scouts, analysts, GM's as well.


And yes, most guys in the media do a good job, and most don't let personal biases impact their voting. I know guys like Kenny Smith and Mark Jackson have talked about their votes, and those guys are level headed, smart guys who studied the games, played the game and know the game, but in tight MVP votes when sports writers start throwing in guys who aren't even the best players on their at their position, let alone the most valuable, that just dilutes the value of the process.
Agreed on everything except Mark Jackson being level headed. Guy is a walking cliche


I personally think the awards are pointless. They are subjective and there fore useless. And promise you that James, Barkley, Dirk, Malone and Iverson would all trade their MVP awards for a championship.

Rings matter but they can be even more subjective than the very awards your hating on. You know the whole this guy has 6 rings vs 3 rings argument. Of course every player wants to end their career with a ring, but no player would trade their individual greatness for a chip. Put it this way, would you rather be Fisher with all the rings, or a top 5 recognized player in the game?

I can promise you all of them would rather have both and that the value of one greater award doesnt take away from the significance of another.


I mean the MVP award doesnt even have a clear definition of what an MVP is. Is it the best player? And if so what makes a players the best? Defence? Scoring? All around game? Ability to facilitate for other players? Leadership in practice and in the locker room? Ability to handle high pressure situations and hit clutch shots? Or is it a team that is most valuable to his team? And what makes a guy valuable?
Even if you had your way and had a single definition for it, the process of measuring those abilities would be just as subjective. But really why would you want it that way? I know there have been some fishy MVP selections but I like the mystery in the debate.


Is James the MVP because he gets his team 60+ wins? Or is he holding them back because he dominates the ball? Does Kobe hold back his team because he cant faciliate like Nash and Duncan do?
Does Nash hold his team back for dominating the ball? Of course not, both he and James do it for the ultimate betterment of the team.


As subjective as the award is, I'd rather have a guy on the court or on the sidelines who in invloved in the process decide, rather than some pencil pusher with a spare tire and a agenda, even if that is only 1 out of twenty voters.
I know but why though? It just seems like your taking genetics over research. Players dont have the luxury of time and endless amount of information that most analyst do, dont have the know how that great GM's do. Just because you play the game doesnt mean your fit to preach on it, same gos for coaching, running a team. Havent you ever wondered why the games greatest defensive minds have come from people who lacked the genetics to make the league?


I respect what you are saying, and you are right, there hasnt been an MVP winner that wasnt deserving of the award in my memory of the award so the media gets it right for the most part, but I do feel that there were players who were equally or perhaps more deserving who were skipped over.
I just meant those ridiculous votes for Udonis Haslem or whatever didnt really change the balance, like looking back Im gonna notice who came in the top 5 before I notice who threw away a vote.

The media screws up the MVP alot, remember when Peja was an MVP candidate but the coaches and players would be worse is what Im saying. Coaches dont even give a crap about what they have on their table as it is. How else do you explain Wade making 2nd team the year he wasnt even the stopper on his own team. I think SVG was the coach at the time and couldnt understand it.


Bill Russell and Kareem have both spoken about this, and both played when the players voted and they seemed to believe that it was better that way. I have a great respect for the way those two played the game and think that they are right. The people on the court in the trenches know better than the guy sitting at home watching on the couch.
Again I disagree 100% with that last bit, I wish more players were like Kareem and Russell but we have far too many Amares (cliche-riffic) and Moses Malones (Couldnt formulate a thought process long enough to articulate his opinion) or Wilt Chamberlains (egotistical to a fault, exaggerations galore). Besides its funny that those guys happened to benefit the most from players selections, but what did Kareem say because I think the players screwed him one year.

JasonJohnHorn
06-03-2010, 12:57 PM
Agreed on everything except Mark Jackson being level headed. Guy is a walking cliche


lol. I can agree with this, but i find most announcers are full of clcihes (its hard to keep thigns fresh for 82 games a year), so I forgive Jackson for that.

Coaches for that matter are full of cliches. I love when we get to hear the "side line" speaches mid game, stuff like "you guys gotta get back on defence" after a 18-2 run. Umm... I think they know that.



Rings matter but they can be even more subjective than the very awards your hating on. You know the whole this guy has 6 rings vs 3 rings argument. Of course every player wants to end their career with a ring, but no player would trade their individual greatness for a chip. Put it this way, would you rather be Fisher with all the rings, or a top 5 recognized player in the game?


I agree players would rahter be great and not win than be Fisher and win, but I think Barkley would be content to have traded his MVP award for a ring, and Malone, Iverson (well maybe not Iverson) and Dirk likely feel the same way. The award is nice, but those guys were already established before they won. Most guys i think would trade an MVP award for a ring, but most arent willing to trade a max contract to sign for the MLE on a contender.




I know but why though? It just seems like your taking genetics over research. Players dont have the luxury of time and endless amount of information that most analyst do, dont have the know how that great GM's do. Just because you play the game doesnt mean your fit to preach on it, same gos for coaching, running a team. Havent you ever wondered why the games greatest defensive minds have come from people who lacked the genetics to make the league?


I just meant those ridiculous votes for Udonis Haslem or whatever didnt really change the balance, like looking back Im gonna notice who came in the top 5 before I notice who threw away a vote.





Again I disagree 100% with that last bit, I wish more players were like Kareem and Russell but we have far too many Amares (cliche-riffic) and Moses Malones (Couldnt formulate a thought process long enough to articulate his opinion) or Wilt Chamberlains (egotistical to a fault, exaggerations galore). Besides its funny that those guys happened to benefit the most from players selections, but what did Kareem say because I think the players screwed him one year.

Yeah, Moses had a little trouble with interviews (fo, fo, fo) but the ballot doesnt require you to be articulate, just to know who is the best on the floor. And you are right about Amare and Wilt. As for Kareem, he did come away with 6 MVPs, so I think he did alright with the voting, and he won it one year with the Lakers and they weren't even a .500 club that year (and he won it the year after that. Of course, the numbers he put up could have justified an MVP award every season for the first 12 years of his career.

I'm not too upset about the media doing it, part of me i just curious to see how the players would vote. I'd be curious to see who guys like Jason Kidd and Steve Nash would vote, or Kobe or Shaq or how some coaches like Greg Popovich, Sloan and Jackson would vote (all of course under the pretence that they weren't allowed to vote for their own players).

kArSoN RyDaH
07-01-2010, 04:50 AM
No. Players, coach's and GM's.

exactly what i think. :cool:

GOON MUSIC
07-01-2010, 05:03 AM
i like the idea of most outstanding and most valuable

kinda like MVP and Offensive Player of the year in the NFL

The Raven
07-02-2010, 05:08 AM
I don't think the media should have ANY say over awards. It should only be players and coaches.

id have to agree. How LJ has 2 MVP's while having zero rings all while Kobe has 1 MVP and 5 rings i consider pure crap.

Mochalman
07-02-2010, 06:43 AM
it shouldnt be players because itll have some serious voters then 1 vote for mbenga or 1 vote for darko

magichatnumber9
07-02-2010, 06:57 AM
I agree us PSD'ers should have the final say :nod:

Hindy27
07-02-2010, 07:04 AM
id have to agree. How LJ has 2 MVP's while having zero rings all while Kobe has 1 MVP and 5 rings i consider pure crap.
I agree that the media should have nothing to do with it but that statement is nonsense. By that reckoning Robert Horry should have won a few MVP awards, championships aren't the only indicator of how good a player is.

The media should have their own award to hand out, but the main award that the players would want to win is a players' player award. Give them all ballots where they can't vote for anyone on their own team, then we'd see a true MVP award.

PrettyBoyJ
07-02-2010, 08:50 AM
Regardless if players and coaches or the media vote, there's always going to be some kind of bias or favoritism... I think a requirement should be made what qualifies you to be a MVP.. Stats, impact to your team, popularity, there's really no qualifications anymore... the award usually goes to the best player on the best team, even it if others are more deserving.. (Kobe 05-06 Season).. Im not saying the winners dont deserve it but the media pick the people they like not based on what qualifies them.. I guarantee you if one voter doesnt like this player cuz over a comment in a press conference there not gonna vote for them.. that just how humans are..