PDA

View Full Version : MVP standards...



mrs rose
04-08-2011, 01:32 AM
After,
Debating for days about who should be the MVP of the league and why i had to form a question. What are the standards to become the MVP. Many feel it should be the best player on the best team in the league. Some feel it should be done by the numbers because numbers doesnt lie. Other people feel its strickly PR whom ever is the golden boy of the league at the time.


Many years there have been discussions on players who have been robbed of the award.


Some people feel the MVP has to be the guy who's team is number #1 in the league.
To my knowledge there isnt a standard on what defines who the MVP is.




Many players have been (robbed) of the award and IMO it hasnt been a valid MVP since the MJ days when clearly it was him who was the MVP.

So i ask you guys what are the standards, or requirements to be named the MVP of the league.

D Roses Bulls
04-08-2011, 01:34 AM
standards change every year. there really isn't no clear cut standard on who should be voted mvp. if there was, jordan would have won every year. it goes year by year.

RZZZA
04-08-2011, 01:35 AM
Whoever brings me a spicy chicken sandwich can be MVP. Those are the standards.

kozelkid
04-08-2011, 01:35 AM
Well normally MVP is decided by "best story".
Imo, the MVP is the combination of statistical brilliance, value to respective team and being apart of one of the top teams (so record of that team).

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 01:36 AM
standards change every year. there really isn't no clear cut standard on who should be voted mvp. if there was, jordan would have won every year. it goes year by year.

ok,
can you give some examples of what you MAY think the standards are.

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 01:38 AM
Whoever brings me a spicy chicken sandwich can be MVP. Those are the standards.

Really thats how threads become...:offtopic:

ellesmeire
04-08-2011, 01:38 AM
like above, its a combination of Team Success, players statistical feats and the value said player has on his team

RZZZA
04-08-2011, 01:38 AM
I don't think theres any risk of this thread being derailed by a spicy chicken sandwich. Although they are quite delicious.

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 01:41 AM
I don't think theres any risk of this thread being derailed by a spicy chicken sandwich. Although they are quite delicious.

Oh trust me,
the smallest things turn things ugly, my intent is too keep this classy.. And just focus on the topic.

Iggz53
04-08-2011, 01:43 AM
I look at MVP as in who has carried his team the most (stats+team record+clutch factor - surrounding cast)

DROSE4MVP
04-08-2011, 01:43 AM
As we can see, RZZZA seems very disinterested in this so I'll start... lol.

I think MVP standards are based on how valuable, important you are to your team... statistics obviously... and of course you're team needs to be doing pretty good. I remember bringing up the past five MVP winners and their respective teams were all 1st or 2nd in their respective conferences.

D Roses Bulls
04-08-2011, 01:44 AM
ok,
can you give some examples of what you MAY think the standards are.

well I can't give specifics. they are the reasons they are. I mean I thought wade should of beat out lebron two years ago, but didnt, but i also think winning should have something to do with it as well. it's hard, i mean thats why they are they way they are. standards change every year. usually though mvp goes off by expectations the voters have of a player and whether they meet/exceed them or not.

abe_froman
04-08-2011, 01:45 AM
anyone but rose




Well normally MVP is decided by "best story".
Imo, the MVP is the combination of statistical brilliance, value to respective team and being apart of one of the top teams (so record of that team).

but seriouisly this.the standard is based on the individual voter,each having different ideas for what the award is/what the standard should be.so with such a diverse body there/will never be a one true standard.but as koz said it usually goes to whomever is "the story" weather that be best statistical year(they actually use to have a separate award for that called the ibm prize,but that a brief experiment that never caught on) ,and massive jump in wins for a team from one year to the next,or simply as a reward to the best team(giving to the best player on that team).

What?
04-08-2011, 01:45 AM
The criteria imo

-Have to be at least a top 3 seed with even 2&3 being tough
-Not a criteria but it helps alot to exceed expectations
-Your team needs to be considered a contender
-Your stats have to be pretty to the eye of the average fan at least
-your team can't go below expectations
-the media needs to like your story


Obviously if someone does great in all but one category they fail then they can still win mvp the criteria aren't absolute. But the more criteria you fall under the better our chances are.

chicago lulz
04-08-2011, 01:46 AM
Well normally MVP is decided by "best story".
Imo, the MVP is the combination of statistical brilliance, value to respective team and being apart of one of the top teams (so record of that team).

sounds right

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 01:48 AM
well I can't give specifics. they are the reasons they are. I mean I thought wade should of beat out lebron two years ago, but didnt, but i also think winning should have something to do with it as well. it's hard, i mean thats why they are they way they are. standards change every year. usually though mvp goes off by expectations the voters have of a player and whether they meet/exceed them or not.

agreed...

i just think it can be more PR then anything. When in the NBA went to the "NBA CARES" and trying to repair the imagine that things like the fight at the palace did.

They went more PR instead of giving it to the most deserving player.

D Roses Bulls
04-08-2011, 01:51 AM
agreed...

i just think it can be more PR then anything. When in the NBA went to the "NBA CARES" and trying to repair the imagine that things like the fight at the palace did.

They went more PR instead of giving it to the most deserving player.

call me a homer, but they are giving it to the right person. sorry but rose is a beast. i dont care what "efficiency" says and his team is winning with missing boozer and noah as much as they have.

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 01:52 AM
The criteria imo

-Have to be at least a top 3 seed with even 2&3 being tough
-Not a criteria but it helps alot to exceed expectations
-Your team needs to be considered a contender
-Your stats have to be pretty to the eye of the average fan at least
-your team can't go below expectations
-the media needs to like your story
Obviously if someone does great in all but one category they fail then they can still win mvp the criteria aren't absolute. But the more criteria you fall under the better our chances are.

^ i think that is one of them for sure..

Seems like a lot of guys where robbed because the media didnt like their story

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 01:54 AM
call me a homer, but they are giving it to the right person. sorry but rose is a beast. i dont care what "efficiency" says and his team is winning with missing boozer and noah as much as they have.

This isnt about this year,


Im speaking in general.. My views on who should be the MVP wont be even shared.. I dont want to turn this into a comparsion, just trying to get a overview on what some of you guys really think the standards are to be named MVP

NetsPaint
04-08-2011, 02:18 AM
The player whom's team wins so much more because of him. LeBron proved why he deserved the award those years he won it. Winning over 60 games too.

iggypop123
04-08-2011, 02:40 AM
its a media's vote. its the standards that suit them. one year its player that makes his team the best. one time its best player in leage. one player who is taken off his team its a lottery team. it doesnt matter its whoever they want.

D Roses Bulls
04-08-2011, 02:50 AM
This isnt about this year,


Im speaking in general.. My views on who should be the MVP wont be even shared.. I dont want to turn this into a comparsion, just trying to get a overview on what some of you guys really think the standards are to be named MVP

thats why i say it various from year to year and it kind of should

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 02:55 AM
thats why i say it various from year to year and it kind of should

well i dont want too,
ive witness many threads here turn UGLY and lot of good posters get banned or infractions due to BAIT THREADS.. most people are very loyal to their teams and favorite players.. and the last thing i want to do is add on to the drama that happens on here by bringing this years MVP discussion to this...


this is about wanting to know what the standards are to achieve this award.

D Roses Bulls
04-08-2011, 03:08 AM
well i dont want too,
ive witness many threads here turn UGLY and lot of good posters get banned or infractions due to BAIT THREADS.. most people are very loyal to their teams and favorite players.. and the last thing i want to do is add on to the drama that happens on here by bringing this years MVP discussion to this...


this is about wanting to know what the standards are to achieve this award.

well my opinion was made and I believe it so. it just depends on whats happening year to year. wade should of won it two years ago. he took a 18 win team without him to almost 50 wins by himself pretty much. rose took a team who probably should of not even made the playoffs if he wasn't on the team with noah and boozer injured half the year to a number 1 seed while putting up 25 and 8. if the standard was best player in the nba every year than MJ would of won it every year pretty much. so like i said, it just depends on expectations and such and some what winning. stats are not the most important thing for the mvp. I mean if it was lebron or wade would would win but how you gonna give it to him when he plays with another HOF and they wont even win the conference when some said they would break the 95-96 bulls record? you cant give it to the person with the best stats sometimes. thats why i say, no exact standards, let things play out.

Jewelz0376
04-08-2011, 03:25 AM
It seems like the the mvp is usually the player most responsible for a title contending teams success...or to put it another way the player who is depending on the most to produce for their team game after game (on a title contender)...Their team also has to most likely exceed preseason expectations....

That imo is how it seems the voters vote..

Tarheels23
04-08-2011, 01:18 PM
I dont think team standings should play into the decision as long as the player's team is a playoff team. I know I will probably get creamed for this, but thats just how I feel.

It should go to the player who does the most with the least. The player who carries his team on both ends of the floor. The player that is clearly the backbone of his team. Sure, numbers should play a factor but not a HUGE factor. Points and fg% are important for all players. Blocks and rebounds for bigmen, assists and steals for guards, and a combo of everything for swingmen.

Cool007
04-08-2011, 01:52 PM
Well normally MVP is decided by "best story".
Imo, the MVP is the combination of statistical brilliance, value to respective team and being apart of one of the top teams (so record of that team).

This sums it up.

That's why Nash/Iverson etc won it and that's why Malone/Charles etc and so many more players that won MVP.

It's a combination of things not just stats or advanced stats or the best player in the NBA that year.

SteveNash
04-08-2011, 04:33 PM
MVP = Story of the year.

Like if that ******** kid that hit all those threes a few years back were in the NBA, he'd probably win MVP.

Shmontaine
04-08-2011, 04:41 PM
MVP = Story of the year.

Like if that ******** kid that hit all those threes a few years back were in the NBA, he'd probably win MVP.

Maybe you should start practicing your shot... or maybe we all should discredit your boy's back to back awards.. considering he never won anything and the award was obviously a popularity contest which you didn't realize ended years ago..

wow, can you sense my bias towards your bias??

SteveNash
04-08-2011, 04:47 PM
Maybe you should start practicing your shot... or maybe we all should discredit your boy's back to back awards.. considering he never won anything and the award was obviously a popularity contest which you didn't realize ended years ago..

wow, can you sense my bias towards your bias??

Steve Nash didn't deserve either MVP award.

See how hard is that. I don't have to start propping up fake stars as MVP because my franchise hasn't done anything in 13 years.

redwhitenblue
04-08-2011, 04:54 PM
Specific criteria:
Has to play in the NBA
Has to play nearly every game of the season
Has to put up respectable numbers
Has to play North of St. Louis and South of Milwaukee
Has to play West of Detroit and East of St. Louis
Has to play in Illinois
Has to play at a height lower than NBA average
Has to play PG
Has to be 22 years old
Has to be good against the best teams.

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 05:04 PM
It seems like the the mvp is usually the player most responsible for a title contending teams success...or to put it another way the player who is depending on the most to produce for their team game after game (on a title contender)...Their team also has to most likely exceed preseason expectations....

That imo is how it seems the voters vote..

agreed...


just seems bias over the past 10 years.

juno10
04-08-2011, 06:15 PM
well I can't give specifics. they are the reasons they are. I mean I thought wade should of beat out lebron two years ago, but didnt, but i also think winning should have something to do with it as well. it's hard, i mean thats why they are they way they are. standards change every year. usually though mvp goes off by expectations the voters have of a player and whether they meet/exceed them or not.

if you thought wade should of beaten out lebron that year than you must also think dwight should beat rose this year because its almost the same situation.

John Walls Era
04-08-2011, 06:37 PM
Specific criteria:
Has to play in the NBA
Has to play nearly every game of the season
Has to put up respectable numbers
Has to play North of St. Louis and South of Milwaukee
Has to play West of Detroit and East of St. Louis
Has to play in Illinois
Has to play at a height lower than NBA average
Has to play PG
Has to be 22 years old
Has to be good against the best teams.

That part is redundant... why not just say he has to play in Illinois from the get go?
Or better yet, just say Rose.

PhillyFaninLA
04-08-2011, 06:39 PM
To me what makes the MVP is simple.

- you are on a playoff team
- you are the more important to your teams success then anyone else on a playoff team

Crackadalic
04-08-2011, 06:43 PM
Its really hard to define what really is a MVP because its the only award that isnt just about stats

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 10:08 PM
That part is redundant... why not just say he has to play in Illinois from the get go?
Or better yet, just say Rose.

lol

Emperor Kobe
04-08-2011, 10:23 PM
MVP Standard......cannot be a Los Angeles Laker.:facepalm::facepalm:

Emperor Kobe
04-08-2011, 10:27 PM
Specific criteria:
Has to play in the NBA
Has to play nearly every game of the season
Has to put up respectable numbers
Has to play North of St. Louis and South of Milwaukee
Has to play West of Detroit and East of St. Louis
Has to play in Illinois
Has to play at a height lower than NBA average
Has to play PG
Has to be 22 years old
Has to be good against the best teams.

Has to an East Coast or NON-Laker per ESPN ******** like Hollinger, Stein,Cowerd etc........The Bulls have been nothing since MJ and all of a sudden they are dynasty in the minds of the aforementioned humps. Where were all the Bulls fans in the since the 90's? oh yeah , hiding along with the Keltic fans.......Lakers in 6. Will make the Bulls into bull****:clap::clap:

Have a nice day

IamKaiserSoze
04-08-2011, 10:36 PM
it does have to do with winning. an mvp is nearly always on a team at or near the top of the standings. and it's usually that teams best player. and it never hurts to be a decent guy (meaning the media likes you)

but whomever said it is different every year just might be right. is it always the sports best player? no. although if the sports best player is on the best team it is automatic. sometimes it could be the best story. remember all the talk about durant? he may have been the pre-season favorite. they started out a little slow and many stopped paying attention.

and to the above post...i would have had a nice day, but my head hurts for reading your broken english rant. thanks for that

mrs rose
04-08-2011, 10:46 PM
it does have to do with winning. an mvp is nearly always on a team at or near the top of the standings. and it's usually that teams best player. and it never hurts to be a decent guy (meaning the media likes you)

but whomever said it is different every year just might be right. is it always the sports best player? no. although if the sports best player is on the best team it is automatic. sometimes it could be the best story. remember all the talk about durant? he may have been the pre-season favorite. they started out a little slow and many stopped paying attention.and to the above post...i would have had a nice day, but my head hurts for reading your broken english rant. thanks for that

:clap::clap::clap:

yangx620
04-08-2011, 10:55 PM
record, and crazy stats..and have your team in first place or atleast shock the world...not a bulls fan..but gotta say rose..no debate

yangx620
04-08-2011, 10:58 PM
or unless your number is legendary like 50 points and 20 rebounds and 10 assists on a losing team...i would pick him...put no one would ever put up stats like that ever...im not sure maybe osacar did it before or wilt

Ray_R
04-08-2011, 11:12 PM
Has to an East Coast or NON-Laker per ESPN ******** like Hollinger, Stein,Cowerd etc........The Bulls have been nothing since MJ and all of a sudden they are dynasty in the minds of the aforementioned humps. Where were all the Bulls fans in the since the 90's? oh yeah , hiding along with the Keltic fans.......Lakers in 6. Will make the Bulls into bull****:clap::clap:

Have a nice day

I dont know what exactly you are getting at Bulls have always been on top of attendance even through their horrific years.

Example- http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/year/2001 Second

jzero
04-08-2011, 11:19 PM
I look at MVP as in who has carried his team the most (stats+team record+clutch factor - surrounding cast)

yeh i agree with you there
although you cant say rose has the clutch factor coz he hasnt got past the first round yet

mrs rose
04-09-2011, 09:40 AM
yeh i agree with you there
although you cant say rose has the clutch factor coz he hasnt got past the first round yet


i didnt even think about that... however i dont want this to turn into a thing on why rose should/shouldnt be MVP this season. this about what are the standards to get the award.. because people on here are so sure no matter who they choose that... rose deserve mvp.. lbj deserve it.. etc im just wondering how do you really know they deserve. because ive never seen a clear cut list as to the standards to achieve this award.

Knuckles
04-09-2011, 09:46 AM
MVP, is just what it stands for the Most Valuable Player. Which player had the most impact on their teams success. If you took that "one" player off their team, how would it impact their teams overall success.

Knuckles
04-09-2011, 09:47 AM
i didnt even think about that... however i dont want this to turn into a thing on why rose should/shouldnt be MVP this season. this about what are the standards to get the award.. because people on here are so sure no matter who they choose that... rose deserve mvp.. lbj deserve it.. etc im just wondering how do you really know they deserve. because ive never seen a clear cut list as to the standards to achieve this award.

Playoffs are not factored into MVP voting

mrs rose
04-09-2011, 09:57 AM
MVP, is just what it stands for the Most Valuable Player. Which player had the most impact on their teams success. If you took that "one" player off their team, how would it impact their teams overall success.

so should have kobe won when nash won his second back to back, should shaq won the year nash won his first mvp. should wade have won back in the 08-09 season.


and should paul have won the year that kobe won his first and only mvp.

Ray_R
04-09-2011, 10:04 AM
yeh i agree with you there
although you cant say rose has the clutch factor coz he hasnt got past the first round yet


Playoffs are not factored into MVP voting

Its kind of hard to predict the future.

mrs rose
04-09-2011, 11:53 AM
Its kind of hard to predict the future.


:confused:

IamKaiserSoze
04-09-2011, 12:22 PM
so should have kobe won when nash won his second back to back, should shaq won the year nash won his first mvp. should wade have won back in the 08-09 season.


and should paul have won the year that kobe won his first and only mvp.

every year there are qualified people who don't win. and every year there are fans who are upset that their favorite player (who were qualified) didn't win. but every single time, there is a valid argument for the guy who did win. you can deconstruct the qualifications all you like, it is what it is.

Ray_R
04-09-2011, 01:18 PM
:confused:

Sorry I was talking to the guys that said aplayer shouldn't get it because he hasn't been past the first round which is means he doesnt have a clutch factor. which means nothing because we are talking about this season and prior season aren't really brought into the discussion of the present MVP race.

theheatles
04-09-2011, 01:34 PM
Sorry I was talking to the guys that said aplayer shouldn't get it because he hasn't been past the first round which is means he doesnt have a clutch factor. which means nothing because we are talking about this season and prior season aren't really brought into the discussion of the present MVP race.

it isn't but it is...part of the pro rose argument is how much he and the team improved from last year...it shouldn't matter but thats a fact that just about everyone makes, the bulls have 8 new players from last year and a new coach but rose gets all the credit

IamKaiserSoze
04-09-2011, 07:32 PM
it isn't but it is...part of the pro rose argument is how much he and the team improved from last year...it shouldn't matter but thats a fact that just about everyone makes, the bulls have 8 new players from last year and a new coach but rose gets all the credit

sure he gets all the credit. the celtics had 4 all-stars this year. the heat had 3. the bulls?...just one.

rose has exceeded all expectations. he is better in nearly every aspect of his game than he was last year. but he isn't the only reason the team is playing well. they have a team full of role players that do their job well, not great, but well. some go on about he has deng. and deng is having a good year. but earlier this year when the bulls were looking to trade up (melo? or SG?) they were offering deng to just about anyone and no one was interested. and when we signed boozer, people laughed because he wasn't bosh or amare.

strong team play with one superstar. and defense. a swarming team defense helps a whole lot. and they got that from thibs...(but i will stay on topic, this isn't a COY thread)