PDA

View Full Version : Voter defends his Carmelo Anthony pick



Pages : [1] 2

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 10:47 AM
NEW YORK – A single voter kept LeBron James from making NBA history.

The Miami Heat's superstar fell one vote shy of being the league's first unanimous MVP winner when the Boston Globe's Gary Washburn, a sports writer who has covered the NBA for nine years, cast his ballot in favor of the New York Knicks' Carmelo Anthony. The award is determined by a group of 120 sportswriters and broadcasters, and an online fan vote.
"I just honestly felt that Carmelo Anthony lifted the Knicks to new heights this season – a No. 2 seed and their first division title in 19 years – with an aging roster, the team's second-best player [Amar'e Stoudemire] out most of the season and a myriad of other injuries," Washburn told Yahoo! Sports.

"LeBron James is unquestionably the best player in the league, but I felt this season Anthony had more value to his team."

Anthony, who finished third in the vote behind James and Oklahoma City's Kevin Durant, was appreciative of the support.
"I'll take that vote," Anthony said.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--voter-who-blocked-lebron-james-from-making-nba-history-defends-his-carmelo-anthony-pick-063805493.html

While he's wrong, at least he had the balls to admit he was the one who did it.

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 10:52 AM
are people from Miami gonna hang him now? :rolleyes:

LongIslandIcedZ
05-06-2013, 10:56 AM
Well obviously, Lebron should have been the pick. Props to this guy at least going public and defending his pick. This is the best year the Knicks have had in quite some time:

- Finished with the 2 seed
- Got the 6th man of the year
- Won a playoff series
- Got an MVP vote haha
- Hopefully Woodson gets some votes for coach of the year

bucketss
05-06-2013, 10:57 AM
are people from Miami gonna him now? :rolleyes:

gonna him what?

bucketss
05-06-2013, 10:58 AM
Well obviously, Lebron should have been the pick. Props to this guy at least going public and defending his pick. This is the best year the Knicks have had in quite some time:

- Finished with the 2 seed
- Got the 6th man of the year
- Won a playoff series
- Got an MVP vote haha
- Hopefully Woodson gets some votes for coach of the year

scoring title

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 10:59 AM
gonna him what?

keep typing too fast

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 11:02 AM
U mean someone else knows what Mvp means? Jordan should have 15 mvps according to these writers.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 11:05 AM
MVP = best player in the league

I hate when someone says, "Well, this guy was more important to his team." It's ****ing stupid on so many levels. The best player in the league is the most valuable to his team. So essentially this moron didn't vote for LeBron because he's not on the Knicks.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 11:05 AM
MVP = best player in the league

I hate when someone says, "Well, this guy was more important to his team." It's ****ing stupid on so many levels. The best player in the league is the most valuable to his team. So essentially this moron didn't vote for LeBron because he's not on the Knicks.

DallasTrilla23
05-06-2013, 11:09 AM
He made a solid point, Melo got the 2nd seed with JR Smith being the next best player on the team.

I'd still take Lebron as MVP over melo tho.

kswissdaf
05-06-2013, 11:15 AM
The argument that "if you take a certain player off a certain they would be terrible". Well no **** if you take Gerald Henderson off the Bobcats they still suck. If you take off Melo from the knicks and take Lebron off the heat of course the heat would be better but if put Lebron on the heat they are by far the best team in the league, if you put Carmelo on the Knicks they almost lose in the first round

kdspurman
05-06-2013, 11:15 AM
MVP = best player in the league

I hate when someone says, "Well, this guy was more important to his team." It's ****ing stupid on so many levels. The best player in the league is the most valuable to his team. So essentially this moron didn't vote for LeBron because he's not on the Knicks.

That's the problem.. That's your definition of it, but some, even voters think differently. It's not stupid to say a guy more important to his team is the MVP, because frankly the V stands for Valuable, not the Best Player in the World award. So you can see why some people have different outtakes on it.

And this guy is a Boston Globe writer, he has no affiliation with the Knicks at all, so not sure what the Lebron/Knicks comment was in regards to.

What he said was valid, people can disagree with it, as they have their own opinions. This guy has his own too, and he backed it up with valid reasoning. He's not saying Melo is the best player in the league... I'm not sure why people are so worked up over this

nycericanguy
05-06-2013, 11:16 AM
MVP = best player in the league

I hate when someone says, "Well, this guy was more important to his team." It's ****ing stupid on so many levels. The best player in the league is the most valuable to his team. So essentially this moron didn't vote for LeBron because he's not on the Knicks.

Few people look at it that way, nor should they. it's the MVP, not the "player of the year" award.

I understand the writers reasoning...

Slug3
05-06-2013, 11:17 AM
His vote, he can do what he wants with it.

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 11:18 AM
U mean someone else knows what Mvp means? Jordan should have 15 mvps according to these writers.

Yes, he should. That is if he actually played 15 seasons (I'm not including his Washington days for obvious reasons).

More importantly, he absolutely should have over 5 MVPs and Lebron absolutely deserves the MVP over Melo.

That said, I understand the writer's reasoning, but when you take into account all of Miami's achievements such as 27 game win streak as well as Lebron's ridiculous success as a player, it becomes evident that Lebron was the OBVIOUS choice.

JiffyMix88
05-06-2013, 11:19 AM
Well hopefully they take his votes away and give it to someone else who isn't biased

ManningToTyree
05-06-2013, 11:21 AM
At least nobody can cry about it being a NY writer. He is wrong but at least he had the balls to admit his vote and reasoning.

ManningToTyree
05-06-2013, 11:22 AM
How can anyone say he is bias? He writes for the Globe. Everyone in Boston hates The Knicks

archdevil84
05-06-2013, 11:23 AM
whatever melo got exactly what he deserved. the scoring title

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 11:23 AM
At least nobody can cry about it being a NY writer. He is wrong but at least he had the balls to admit his vote and reasoning.

I think thats what I was most shocked about. Lebron needs to retract his words about it being a New York writer.

John Walls Era
05-06-2013, 11:25 AM
Good for him. Doesn't mean hes right though.

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2013, 11:25 AM
I am not a Melo fan at all, or a NY fan, but there is a case to be made. The MVP voting depends heavily on how one defines valuable. I made a thread asking people how they defined the "valuable" in MVP, and there are a lot of different responses.

I personally would have voted for CP3 if I had a vote, and I stand by that even after the first round elimination. CP3 helped this team turn around two straight seasons and lead this franchise to it's best record ever and I believe it's first division title ever. The Clippers gave up a lot in the CP3 trade, so it wasn't like they just added a superstar to their roster, they lost some pieces to get him.

His first season with the Clippers, in a strike shortened season, CP3 lead them to an 8-game improvement despite having almost 20 fewer games to do it in. This year they earned 56 wins, which is nearly a 20-game improvement from where they were the season before they acquired CP3. On the court, off the court, in practice, CP3 drives this team. He makes players better and he does not have anybody as talented as Wade helping him out, nor does he have two all-stars on his team and a HOF shooting guard coming off the bench. Take CP3 off the Clippers and they are a lottery team, take LBJ off the Heat and they could still get home court in the first round.


Melo lead the Knicks to a division title with a depleted roster and aging stars. They rookies they had were the two oldest rookies in the league. There is no doubt that Melo did a lot for the Knicks this season and is deserving of a couple first place votes for his work.


I define MVP as the player who is most important to his team's success. Not the best player (though the two aren't mutually exclusive).

LBJ was a great choice for MVP, but I respect if somebody saw another player as more valuable as long as they have a good argument. I think there is a case to be made for KD, Melo and CP3 as MVPs this season, so if each of them had gotten a couple of first place votes I wouldn't have been upset or surprised.

There are a great many intangibles out there that stats can't gauge. LBJ is the best player on the planet, but his team can win games without him because they have so much talent on that team. The Clippers, Knicks and Thunder would have have struggled greatly to get into the playoffs without CP3, Melo and KD respectively. The Heat would not have struggled to get into the playoffs without LBJ. They are that good.

DR_1
05-06-2013, 11:27 AM
Well said JJH^^^

BigCityofDreams
05-06-2013, 11:29 AM
are people from Miami gonna hang him now? :rolleyes:

Probably just send him nasty comments on twitter

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2013, 11:30 AM
when you take into account all of Miami's achievements such as 27 game win streak as well as Lebron's ridiculous success as a player, it becomes evident that Lebron was the OBVIOUS choice.

The thing with Miami's success is that they have two other All-Stars on their roster and a HOF SG coming off the bench. Miami's success is not based entirely on LBJ (though it is a lot). LBJ deserves the award, I'm not saying he doesn't, but Miami doesn't rely on him the way NY relies on Melo or LAC relies on CP3 or the way OKC relies on KD. Miami is a great team with or without LBJ (though they are FAR better with him). For some people "valuable" means who is most important to their team's success. If this is how you define valuable, then there are arguments to be made for CP3, Melo and KD. If you are just going to base the MVP award on who has the best stats, then there is not need to have voters at all. Just give the award to the guy with the highest PER.

The Flash
05-06-2013, 11:41 AM
Take Curry off that Warriors team and tell me he's not the MVP

MSG34
05-06-2013, 11:42 AM
The thing with Miami's success is that they have two other All-Stars on their roster and a HOF SG coming off the bench. Miami's success is not based entirely on LBJ (though it is a lot). LBJ deserves the award, I'm not saying he doesn't, but Miami doesn't rely on him the way NY relies on Melo or LAC relies on CP3 or the way OKC relies on KD. Miami is a great team with or without LBJ (though they are FAR better with him). For some people "valuable" means who is most important to their team's success. If this is how you define valuable, then there are arguments to be made for CP3, Melo and KD. If you are just going to base the MVP award on who has the best stats, then there is not need to have voters at all. Just give the award to the guy with the highest PER.

100%, I was honestly a little surprised more didn't share this perspective.

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 11:45 AM
100%, I was honestly a little surprised more didn't share this perspective.

I think they just go with the safe pick (Lebron, now, Jordan back in the 90's) and say meh **** it.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 11:49 AM
Few people look at it that way, nor should they. it's the MVP, not the "player of the year" award.

I understand the writers reasoning...

The most valuable player is the best player in the league. There isn't a better player than LeBron right now. He brings more value to a team than anyone else.

According to this writer's logic, LeBron can't be the MVP because he's on the Heat but if LeBron was hypothetically a Knick, and the Knicks didn't have Melo, he'd vote for him. It's just stupid.

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 11:53 AM
The most valuable player is the best player in the league. There isn't a better player than LeBron right now. He brings more value to a team than anyone else.

According to this writer's logic, LeBron can't be the MVP because he's on the Heat but if LeBron was hypothetically a Knick, and the Knicks didn't have Melo, he'd vote for him. It's just stupid.

Well if the Heat didnt have the Big 3, he would have voted for Lebron.

And since you dont have a vote its not for you to interpret the meaning of MVP. MVP can mean the most VALUABLE player to a team.

Chronz
05-06-2013, 12:00 PM
I really wish there was some way to identify what a team would do without a player. Something like a +/- of some sort that can be assessed by those number crunchers that work for NBA teams.

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 12:01 PM
when you take into account all of Miami's achievements such as 27 game win streak as well as Lebron's ridiculous success as a player, it becomes evident that Lebron was the OBVIOUS choice.

The thing with Miami's success is that they have two other All-Stars on their roster and a HOF SG coming off the bench. Miami's success is not based entirely on LBJ (though it is a lot). LBJ deserves the award, I'm not saying he doesn't, but Miami doesn't rely on him the way NY relies on Melo or LAC relies on CP3 or the way OKC relies on KD. Miami is a great team with or without LBJ (though they are FAR better with him). For some people "valuable" means who is most important to their team's success. If this is how you define valuable, then there are arguments to be made for CP3, Melo and KD. If you are just going to base the MVP award on who has the best stats, then there is not need to have voters at all. Just give the award to the guy with the highest PER.

First of all, Miami does not differ that much considering how inconsistent and unreliable Wade can be with his injuries. I definitely disagree that Miami relies on Lebron any less than okc and Durant or LAC and Paul. Both offer better surrounding casts than Miami.

The difference between a Lebron and no Lebron is pretty much a historic team vs. your 2012-2013 Brooklyn Nets.

And let's not pull a jb argument by labeling Ray a hof sg. He is a far cry from that this season. Call him what he is, which is a quality shooter off the bench.

Now while Lebron has the better cast, he undoubtedly elevates it with a higher impact than Melo does for the Knicks.

Besides, using this argument, I'd argue that Harden would have a better case than Melo.

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 12:03 PM
lol he made a solid point but when i said every reason he did all year i was trolling according to most

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 12:04 PM
thats the whole point u should never be a mvp with a embrassment of riches around u

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 12:08 PM
Well if the Heat didnt have the Big 3, he would have voted for Lebron.

And since you dont have a vote its not for you to interpret the meaning of MVP. MVP can mean the most VALUABLE player to a team.

And that's how I'm interpreting it. LeBron brings superior defense and he's a more efficient offensive player. How exactly does Carmelo bring more "value" when he's a lesser player?

astrosmaniac
05-06-2013, 12:08 PM
the best player in the league is the most valuable player to any team, stacked or no

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 12:09 PM
thats the whole point u should never be a mvp with a embrassment of riches around u

Why is that?

Sounds like you're adding an arbitrary label.

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 12:11 PM
because if ur team is still a contender without u u are not mvp

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 12:14 PM
Well if the Heat didnt have the Big 3, he would have voted for Lebron.

And since you dont have a vote its not for you to interpret the meaning of MVP. MVP can mean the most VALUABLE player to a team.

And that's how I'm interpreting it. LeBron brings superior defense and a more efficient offensive player. How exactly does Carmelo bring more "value" when he's a lesser player?

Pretty much this.

Even for anyone who wants to take away Lebron's impact offensively cause he plays alongside Wade and Bosh, what he does defensively, single handedly as a wing player I might add, is unheard of aside from maybe 93-94 season with Pippen.

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 12:15 PM
because if ur team is still a contender without u u are not mvp

What's your evidence that they're a contender without him?

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 12:16 PM
werent heat like 4 and without lebron and wade. For this guy to be uttered as mvp is embrassing. Is he the best player yes is he mvp hell NO

Sandman
05-06-2013, 12:16 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--voter-who-blocked-lebron-james-from-making-nba-history-defends-his-carmelo-anthony-pick-063805493.html

While he's wrong, at least he had the balls to admit he was the one who did it.

it's the Dwyane Wade defense, basically the only reason Rose won an MVP.

LongIslandIcedZ
05-06-2013, 12:19 PM
It's so hard to quantify the "most valuable" thing.

Without Carmelo, the Knicks would probably struggle to make the playoffs.

However, without Lebron, I think the Heat would probably be a 4 or 5 seed.

Either way, it should have been Lebron.

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 12:22 PM
What's your evidence that they're a contender without him?

Where would the Knicks be without Melo? :confused:

This should be an easy argument on this site given how many times Amare is called useless.

NYKalltheway
05-06-2013, 12:24 PM
The MVP is the league's MVP award. Not which superstar is more valuable to his team award. It' should be given to the best player of the team with the best record unless you're talking demi-god performances. And Melo put lots of those this season. He should have been a lot closer to the MVP award this season, but Lebron should have won it because its concept is to award the best player of the best team.

A hypothetical Player of the Year award on the other hand would mean that it should go to Carmelo. Took a 7th seed team with new yet aging roster to the division title and 2nd seed within a season while the 2nd best player was out injured.

So pretty much:
MVP award- best player of best team
Player of the year- best player of the season, given the situation he and his team have been through.

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 12:24 PM
What's your evidence that they're a contender without him?

Where would the Knicks be without Melo? :confused:

This should be an easy argument on this site given how many times Amare is called useless.

Never said otherwise. Hell, I don't think they're a contender with Melo. :shrug:

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 12:25 PM
So pretty much:
MVP award- best player of best team
Player of the year- best player of the season, given the situation he and his team have been through.

shouldnt that be reversed?

NYKalltheway
05-06-2013, 12:27 PM
shouldnt that be reversed?


No, it's the LEAGUE's MVP award. The player with most value in the league is the player who led his team to the #1 seed and best record. That means you take him off, his team doesn't go as far. The other scenarios that take Melo or Durant or whoever out of their teams mean nothing here as their teams didn't have the best record.

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 12:29 PM
No, it's the LEAGUE's MVP award. The player with most value in the league is the player who led his team to the #1 seed and best record.

then who cares about the player of the year award? its like a consolation prize :confused: :laugh:

gotoHcarolina52
05-06-2013, 12:29 PM
it's the Dwyane Wade defense, basically the only reason Rose won an MVP.

Not only does Wade get used as the scapegoat for denying LeBron a unanimous MVP vote, but now this (http://instagram.com/p/Y-gNIkEMtt/) greets him whenever he walks into a building that used to be his own and no one else's. Talk about rubbing salt on an open wound. lol

kenzo400
05-06-2013, 12:29 PM
MVP = best player in the league

I hate when someone says, "Well, this guy was more important to his team." It's ****ing stupid on so many levels. The best player in the league is the most valuable to his team. So essentially this moron didn't vote for LeBron because he's not on the Knicks.

Actually it translates to "most valuable player"

king4day
05-06-2013, 12:30 PM
They need to add 2 awards.

Best player in the league.
&
MVP (Player who's team would be nowhere near as good as it was without him)

It would dilute the MVP award but In that case, MVP might go to Harden or even Goran Dragic (I know, not seriously) since the Suns would be lucky to have gotten 10 wins without him and Houston wouldn't have come close to the post season without Harden.

2-ONE-5
05-06-2013, 12:31 PM
why do i see people keep saying the MVP is the best player the league? thats not true at all.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 12:33 PM
Never said otherwise. Hell, I don't think they're a contender with Melo. :shrug:

:laugh2:

I wanted to say the same thing. The only way the Knicks get to the finals is if they somehow trade for LBJ, the MVP of the league.

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 12:37 PM
:laugh2:

I wanted to say the same thing. The only way the Knicks get to the finals is if they somehow trade for LBJ, the MVP of the league.

Not to mention, we've seen Lebron carry a cast much like Melo's in the past. Only he managed to get that team to 60+ wins. And I'd argue those teams were inferior as well given that they didn't have a big quite as good as Tyson.

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 12:38 PM
I have no problem with his explanation, because quite frankly, there is no universally agreed upon definition of MVP. Therefore as long as you provide solid reasoning of your pick, so be it. And I do think the MVP has been given to the wrong player plenty of times, this year was for sure not one of them.

NYKalltheway
05-06-2013, 12:41 PM
then who cares about the player of the year award? its like a consolation prize :confused: :laugh:

No it's not. MVP = Most Valuable Player. The superlative 'most' should correlate with the superlative 'best'. Where most valuable player is the best player of the best team in that given season. Pretty much Rose should have won in 2012 as well (or Tony Parker whose team had the same record, but Bulls had the best h2h iirc).

The Season's Player of the Year award would go to the player that makes his team much much better than when he's out. It's far from a consolation prize. It'd pretty much be on the same level as the MVP.

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2013, 12:44 PM
First of all, Miami does not differ that much considering how inconsistent and unreliable Wade can be with his injuries. I definitely disagree that Miami relies on Lebron any less than okc and Durant or LAC and Paul. Both offer better surrounding casts than Miami.

The difference between a Lebron and no Lebron is pretty much a historic team vs. your 2012-2013 Brooklyn Nets.

And let's not pull a jb argument by labeling Ray a hof sg. He is a far cry from that this season. Call him what he is, which is a quality shooter off the bench.

Now while Lebron has the better cast, he undoubtedly elevates it with a higher impact than Melo does for the Knicks.

Besides, using this argument, I'd argue that Harden would have a better case than Melo.

You are right. Allen is not the player he was, but he's not expected to be, but his per36 min stats are only a basket off where he was when he first came to Boston and won an NBA championship as an All-Star, the difference largely due to the fact that they run plays for James, Wade and Bosh all before Allen where as on Boston Allen was the first or second option.

Does LAC have a better supporting cast? Does OKC? I think the Heat do. I may overestimate them, and there is a case to be made for each team, but Bosh is an All-Star PF as is BG. they basically cancel each other out. But what CP3 doesn't have is a guy like Wade. Wade is perhaps the best SG in the league (Harden and Kobe have a case as well). In OKC KD has Westbrook just as LBJ has Wade. Which is better? I think Wade, but let's say it is a wash. After Westbrook, KD does not have an All-Star like Bosh to play with or a shooter like Allen.

Again, I am not saying the LBJ doesn't deserve the MVP. I wouldn't argue with anybody who says he does. I agree he deserves it. I just believe that there are guys who are equally deserving despite the fact that their stats aren't as impressive.

Yo mention Harden. I agree with you. Harden is an MVP candidate. His team though was two losses away from being a lottery team, so with or without him they weren't great, just better. Their winning percentage wasn't much higher than it was last season, and last season's record (2 games over .500) would have gotten them in the playoffs this season as well, with the same seeding. Harden was extremely valuable, I agree. More valuable than Melo? I'm not sure I would agree with that, but I do think that Harden is a better player than Melo right now and if I were starting a team and had a pick between the two, I'd take Harden without flinching. There is perhaps a case for Curry as well (though I give a lot of credit to David Lee for what he did in GS this year).


Again, I have no problem with LBJ winning the award, he deserves it. I would have had CP3 above LBJ because I believe that he brings more wins to his team than LBJ does to the Heat, but there is no way to truly determine that.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 12:46 PM
The Bulls team was a three seed even with Jordan playing baseball. Were they a true contender? Some would say yes, others no. Very similar situation to what the Knicks are now.

Did Jordan deserve his MVP awards?

NYKalltheway
05-06-2013, 12:48 PM
The Bulls team was a three seed even with Jordan playing baseball. Where they a true contender? Some would say yes, others no. Very similar situation to what the Knicks are now.

Did Jordan deserve his MVP awards?

Of course he did. If you've watched Jordan play, you don't ask these type of questions...

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2013, 12:49 PM
They need to add 2 awards.

Best player in the league.
&
MVP (Player who's team would be nowhere near as good as it was without him)

It would dilute the MVP award but In that case, MVP might go to Harden or even Goran Dragic (I know, not seriously) since the Suns would be lucky to have gotten 10 wins without him and Houston wouldn't have come close to the post season without Harden.

They used to have this award. It was called the IBM Award. It was essentially a different version of PER. The player with the best numbers would get the IBM award based on the formula and then voters would vote for the MVP award. Check it out here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Award

It ran from 84-02. Not sure why they dropped it. I liked the award. Oddly enough, Jordan only won the award once. Barkley won it 3- straight seasons. Robinson won it 4 times. Magic won twice as did Shaq. Grant Hill is the only player to win the IBM award and not win an MVP.


But yeah... I liked having that award.

Jarvo
05-06-2013, 12:52 PM
He ****ed up lol

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 12:52 PM
Of course he did. If you've watched Jordan play, you don't ask these type of questions...

Well, according to some people in this thread the MVP can't go to a player with a good supporting cast...

BALLER R
05-06-2013, 12:54 PM
I swear the meaning on MVP changes every season.

TeamSeattle
05-06-2013, 12:54 PM
why do i see people keep saying the MVP is the best player the league? thats not true at all.

Exactly.

BigBlueCrew
05-06-2013, 12:56 PM
No it's not. MVP = Most Valuable Player. The superlative 'most' should correlate with the superlative 'best'. Where most valuable player is the best player of the best team in that given season. Pretty much Rose should have won in 2012 as well (or Tony Parker whose team had the same record, but Bulls had the best h2h iirc).

The Season's Player of the Year award would go to the player that makes his team much much better than when he's out. It's far from a consolation prize. It'd pretty much be on the same level as the MVP.

:confused:

I think you misunderstand what the award is supposed to be for or hypothetically supposed to be for. According to you there should be two awards, one for a player who adds the most VALUE to his team and one who is the best statistically in the league. So what award does the player who adds the most VALUE get? the player of the season award :confused: and the player who is statistically the best gets the MVP? :confused:

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 12:57 PM
Exactly.

This is all I got off of Wiki:


The National Basketball Association Most Valuable Player (MVP) is an annual National Basketball Association (NBA) award given since the 1955–56 NBA season to the best performing player of the season. The winner receives the Maurice Podoloff Trophy, which is named in honor of the first commissioner (then president)[a] of the NBA who served from 1946 until his retirement in 1963.

Does anyone have an official write up from the NBA? I know that all but one voter agrees with me and the Wiki page.

FYL_McVeezy
05-06-2013, 12:57 PM
The most valuable player is the best player in the league. There isn't a better player than LeBron right now. He brings more value to a team than anyone else.

According to this writer's logic, LeBron can't be the MVP because he's on the Heat but if LeBron was hypothetically a Knick, and the Knicks didn't have Melo, he'd vote for him. It's just stupid.

That's totally your opinion....DRose just won the MVP w/o being the best player in the league 2 years ago...

In this instance the best player in the league just so happened to be the Most Valuable Player in the league.....those 2 things don't necessarily go hand in hand

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2013, 12:58 PM
No it's not. MVP = Most Valuable Player. The superlative 'most' should correlate with the superlative 'best'.


Most does not equal best. You are playing with words here. Just because somebody has the most hamburgers does not mean the sell the best hamburgers. McDonalds sells the most hamburgers in the world. Does that mean they are the best?

Most does not mean the same as best. Melo got the most points this year. Was he the best offensive player? No. KD and LBJ were both better offensive players, not only because they shot higher percentages, but also because they got more assists.

Aside from the word "best" and "most", the word "valuable" is where people differ. How do you define value? Does a guy who posts the best PER in league history get labelled most valuable even if his team only got an 8th seed? Or was in the lottery? Does the most valuable player make his teammates better? and if so, how do you measure that?

There is not static application of the word "valuable". It means different things to different people because people put a different value on different things. For some people rebounding is most important. Others say defence, others say shooting percentage. Because people have different values what they perceive as valuable is going to be different.

When having a conversation about who deserves the "MVP" award, there is not finite answer. There is not quantifiably correct answer. It doesn't exists. There are too many intangibles. There are too many "what ifs" and too many questions that cannot be answered.

Just accept the fact that there is more than one right argument.

kozelkid
05-06-2013, 12:59 PM
Does LAC have a better supporting cast? Does OKC? I think the Heat do. I may overestimate them, and there is a case to be made for each team, but Bosh is an All-Star PF as is BG. they basically cancel each other out. But what CP3 doesn't have is a guy like Wade. Wade is perhaps the best SG in the league (Harden and Kobe have a case as well). In OKC KD has Westbrook just as LBJ has Wade. Which is better? I think Wade, but let's say it is a wash. After Westbrook, KD does not have an All-Star like Bosh to play with or a shooter like Allen.

Again, I am not saying the LBJ doesn't deserve the MVP. I wouldn't argue with anybody who says he does. I agree he deserves it. I just believe that there are guys who are equally deserving despite the fact that their stats aren't as impressive.


Even if you want to argue that Miami has better stars, their bench pales in comparison to those two teams. And bench is critical in an 82 season. Playoffs is another story of course.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, people too often point out the help Lebron may have on the offensive side of the ball. That still doesn't take into account the responsibilities he has to have as a defender. Again, how often have you seen a wing player be the anchor of his team defensively. It's absurd what he does. People seem to forget that the MVP is designed for overall play, not just offense. So even if you want to argue that Melo or Paul or Durant do as much offensively as Lebron (an argument I'd still have a hard time buying), what Lebron adds defensively is simply unheard of. Miami doesn't exactly have many players who can do help Lebron out. Aside from Bosh, their bigs are all borderline NBA players. Wade doesn't seem to care too much about that end consistently enough the past few years and Bosh has never been anything more than a solid defender at BEST. Thus, when you factor in the defense, it seems like a no brainer to me.



Yo mention Harden. I agree with you. Harden is an MVP candidate. His team though was two losses away from being a lottery team, so with or without him they weren't great, just better. Their winning percentage wasn't much higher than it was last season, and last season's record (2 games over .500) would have gotten them in the playoffs this season as well, with the same seeding. Harden was extremely valuable, I agree. More valuable than Melo? I'm not sure I would agree with that, but I do think that Harden is a better player than Melo right now and if I were starting a team and had a pick between the two, I'd take Harden without flinching. There is perhaps a case for Curry as well (though I give a lot of credit to David Lee for what he did in GS this year).

You can't just compare their winning %'s considering that the East is SIGNIFICANTLY inferior to the West.

I'm not convinced that Knicks would have a much better record (if at all), had they played in the West. In fact, their SRS is 7th, with Houston's only being 8th. So if you want to factor story-line or stats, Harden trumps Melo in both.



Again, I have no problem with LBJ winning the award, he deserves it. I would have had CP3 above LBJ because I believe that he brings more wins to his team than LBJ does to the Heat, but there is no way to truly determine that.

Sure there is. Look at their win-shares, PER, EWA.

Iggz53
05-06-2013, 12:59 PM
Well I respect that he decided to come out and defend himself. Could have easily just kept it anonymous, though it was clearly the wrong pick.

Krizzle88
05-06-2013, 01:10 PM
I would have voted for Durant just because I hate lebron

Hardaway Here
05-06-2013, 01:13 PM
Well people will get over it once the playoffs are over. At least he was a man about it. He probably is getting a nice share of hate mail from bitter fans though.

Quinnsanity
05-06-2013, 01:17 PM
I think he's lying. I think it's like baseball's unwritten rule of nobody making the Hall of Fame unanimously because Babe Ruth didn't. Michael Jordan never won a unanimous MVP (though how he didn't in '95-'96 is beyond me), so nobody ever will. I mean, if LeBron can't after the season he had, how is anyone else ever gonna do it?

Quinnsanity
05-06-2013, 01:20 PM
They used to have this award. It was called the IBM Award. It was essentially a different version of PER. The player with the best numbers would get the IBM award based on the formula and then voters would vote for the MVP award. Check it out here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Award

It ran from 84-02. Not sure why they dropped it. I liked the award. Oddly enough, Jordan only won the award once. Barkley won it 3- straight seasons. Robinson won it 4 times. Magic won twice as did Shaq. Grant Hill is the only player to win the IBM award and not win an MVP.


But yeah... I liked having that award.

I feel like to an extent that award valued players who were the only star on their team. I mean looking at it, besides Magic and Malone, most of those winners were at points in their careers where they had to carry either bad teams or declining teams. Jordan played with Pippen, which probably hurt his stats in that regard. Robinson was the only star on his team when he won, same goes for Barkley. Shaq won with Kobe which hurts the argument, but Duncan won when Robinson was basically a role player and Parker/Manu hadn't developed. I'd need to see the formula to determine any further.

Chronz
05-06-2013, 01:23 PM
lol he made a solid point but when i said every reason he did all year i was trolling according to most
That guy isn't exactly being hailed as a genius for it tho so whats your point?

He gave a 1st place vote to the guy whos coming a distant 3rd for MVP. Durant I can get, but Melo?

JordansBulls
05-06-2013, 01:24 PM
I really wish there was some way to identify what a team would do without a player. Something like a +/- of some sort that can be assessed by those number crunchers that work for NBA teams.

Only thing we have this season is how they did record wise without the player. For instance,
Miami was 5-1 without Lebron (only loss came against the Knicks and many of the games were without Wade and Lebron)

Knicks were 7-8 without Melo

Clippers were 6-6 without CP3

Thunder were 0-1 without Durant

tkshy
05-06-2013, 01:24 PM
The definition of MVP is and always will be the problem. Most valuable player to who or what?? To the league, to his team, to himself? If someone averages 40-10-10 is he MVP? What if his team goes 21-61 and miss the playoffs? If it is best player Lebron should have won if it is most valuable to his Melo, KD, and Kobe should have got some love. It can't be best because Magic,Bird, and MJ would have swept through the 80's and 90's.

It's time the NBA made it clear and set guild lines. Not just how someone feels about a player or team. For example (this can be weighted) rate your top 5 in each category.
-best overall player
-best offensive
-best defensive
-most valuable to team
Then add some stats
-highest PER
-points,rebounds,steals,blocks
-teams record

Add a point value system for each of categories and points for finishing 1-1000 of how ever many players are in the league. Do some math and there is your winner. It allows the writers to still be subjective and adds stats.

JordansBulls
05-06-2013, 01:28 PM
That guy isn't exactly being hailed as a genius for it tho so whats your point?

He gave a 1st place vote to the guy whos coming a distant 3rd for MVP. Durant I can get, but Melo?

Realistically I can see guys who:

1. Lead the league in scoring get a vote or 2 (depending on how good there team finishes)
2. Lead the league in assists get a vote or 2 (depending on how good there team finishes)
3. The guy who is voted DPOY to get a vote or 2
4. The guy who led the league in blocked shots get a vote or 2. (depending on how good there team finishes)
5. The guy who led the league in rebounding (depending on how good there team finishes)

Lebron pretty much led in the advanced metrics, but there wasn't any particular raw stat he led the league in. So in that you could always give a vote for someone who led in one of those raw stats.

Chronz
05-06-2013, 01:32 PM
Only thing we have this season is how they did record wise without the player. For instance,
Miami was 5-1 without Lebron (only loss came against the Knicks and many of the games were without Wade and Lebron)

Knicks were 7-8 without Melo

Clippers were 6-6 without CP3

Thunder were 0-1 without Durant

I was joking, we have alot more than that. Like how the team fared at ANY point that the player did not play and of course RAPM.

Chronz
05-06-2013, 01:33 PM
Realistically I can see guys who:

1. Lead the league in scoring get a vote or 2 (depending on how good there team finishes)
2. Lead the league in assists get a vote or 2 (depending on how good there team finishes)
3. The guy who is voted DPOY to get a vote or 2
4. The guy who led the league in blocked shots get a vote or 2. (depending on how good there team finishes)
5. The guy who led the league in rebounding (depending on how good there team finishes)

Lebron pretty much led in the advanced metrics, but there wasn't any particular raw stat he led the league in. So in that you could always give a vote for someone who led in one of those raw stats.
y?

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 01:35 PM
Hypothetically, let's put Lebron on the Knicks. Are the Knicks going to be a worse or better team? According to this writer they're going to be a worse team since Carmelo is more valuable than Lebron.

This sports writer's argument for Carmelo is so incredibly stupid. How is Carmelo more valuable than Lebron? Is it because Carmelo is on a team that relies more on him? If so you're basically taking the MVP out of the individual's hands and just basing it off what kind of team the player is on.

NYKalltheway
05-06-2013, 01:42 PM
They used to have this award. It was called the IBM Award. It was essentially a different version of PER. The player with the best numbers would get the IBM award based on the formula and then voters would vote for the MVP award. Check it out here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Award

It ran from 84-02. Not sure why they dropped it. I liked the award. Oddly enough, Jordan only won the award once. Barkley won it 3- straight seasons. Robinson won it 4 times. Magic won twice as did Shaq. Grant Hill is the only player to win the IBM award and not win an MVP.


But yeah... I liked having that award.

Thanks for posting this. Basically this sums up what I'm saying.
I never said there's one argument etc. The MVP award is vague and a popularity contest very often. But the existence of the award above shows that the definition of the MVP is what I've said and that there should be another award like the IBM award for players who were the most important in their team's season compared to other teams' players.

JesusNYY_Savior
05-06-2013, 01:46 PM
The argument that "if you take a certain player off a certain they would be terrible". Well no **** if you take Gerald Henderson off the Bobcats they still suck. If you take off Melo from the knicks and take Lebron off the heat of course the heat would be better but if put Lebron on the heat they are by far the best team in the league, if you put Carmelo on the Knicks they almost lose in the first round
I dont understand the argument the Heat have a better team then the Knicks we know that, what point are you making with your last statement.

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 01:47 PM
Hypothetically, let's put Lebron on the Knicks. Are the Knicks going to be a worse or better team? According to this writer they're going to be a worse team since Carmelo is more valuable than the Lebron.

This sports writer's argument for Carmelo is so incredibly stupid. How is Carmelo more valuable than Lebron? Is it because Carmelo is on a team that relies more on him? If so you're basically taking the MVP out of the individual's hands and just basing it off what kind of team the player is on.

agree 10000000%

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 01:49 PM
I dont understand the argument the Heat have a better team then the Knicks we know that, what point are you making with your last statement.

It's not worded very well but it's pretty easy to see what he's saying. Put Lebron on the Knicks and the Knicks are the best team in the league, but with Melo on the Knicks they almost lose in the first round to the Celtics.

Who's more valuable to have on your team? I'd say Lebron and it's not too hard to figure out.

smith&wesson
05-06-2013, 01:53 PM
Few people look at it that way, nor should they. it's the MVP, not the "player of the year" award.

I understand the writers reasoning...

+1

6cadi6
05-06-2013, 02:00 PM
What a moron. :facepalm:

29$JerZ
05-06-2013, 02:06 PM
If it was the best player in the NBA, MVP = LeBron
If it was the best season in the NBA, MVP = LeBron
If it's most valuable to their teams success in the NBA, MVP = 5-9 deserving winners.

MVP has no set criteria. Not a big deal.

SwatTeam
05-06-2013, 02:12 PM
Honestly, who cares? The MVP award is stupid anyways. You think Karl Malone would swap his for a series win against the Bulls? How fast do you think he does it? Is there a pause at the end of the question or does he immediately answer yes while I'm still asking it.

We all know Lebron is great. If he never wins an MVP award again it won't define his legacy as less than the other greats. His legacy, fair or not, is judged on the rings he wins from now on. Lebron says so himself. He doesn't really care about this award. Why should we? Lebron didn't win the award unanimously - boo hoo.

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 02:14 PM
If it was the best player in the NBA, MVP = LeBron
If it was the best season in the NBA, MVP = LeBron
If it's most valuable to their teams success in the NBA, MVP = 5-9 deserving winners.

MVP has no set criteria. Not a big deal.

Most Valuable Player in the NBA and Most Valuable to team's success are two different things.

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 02:18 PM
Honestly, who cares? The MVP award is stupid anyways. You think Karl Malone would swap his for a series win against the Bulls? How fast do you think he does it? Is there a pause at the end of the question or does he immediately answer yes while I'm still asking it.

We all know Lebron is great. If he never wins an MVP award again it won't define his legacy as less than the other greats. His legacy, fair or not, is judged on the rings he wins from now on. Lebron says so himself. He doesn't really care about this award. Why should we? Lebron didn't win the award unanimously - boo hoo.

This problem has been going on for years, I couldn't care less if Lebron doesn't win another MVP. I just want the right person to get the award in the future.

SwatTeam
05-06-2013, 02:20 PM
This problem has been going on for years, I couldn't care less if Lebron doesn't win another MVP. I just want the right person to get the award in the future.

The award lost its value with me when Shaq only has 1 award for his entire career and Nash has 2. It is what it is. I gauge Finals MVP awards to be more valuable anyways, but I understand your complaint.

SwatTeam
05-06-2013, 02:20 PM
double post. sheety internet.

BULLSFAN0810
05-06-2013, 02:32 PM
Let me put some logic to this. James played outstanding with 2 hof players, melo led league in scoring, with second in east with a injured roster. Also some historical effects such as Jordan year in and year out was the mvp playoffs and reg season but yet he didn't receive mvp due to dominance. It was looked as "yeah Jordan is the best, but give some one else a chance" ie when Malone would win, put when Barkley won. They had dominate years but Jordan was creme of crop... Basically if James is as good as stated someone else couldve won the Mvp. Imho this inflates his importance, not saying he isn't as important but others before him Jordan/Kobe/Shaq should easily have 5 MVP awards. This is called cooking the books.

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 02:43 PM
Let me put some logic to this. James played outstanding with 2 hof players, melo led league in scoring, with second in east with a injured roster. Also some historical effects such as Jordan year in and year out was the mvp playoffs and reg season but yet he didn't receive mvp due to dominance. It was looked as "yeah Jordan is the best, but give some one else a chance" ie when Malone would win, put when Barkley won. They had dominate years but Jordan was creme of crop... Basically if James is as good as stated someone else couldve won the Mvp. Imho this inflates his importance, not saying he isn't as important but others before him Jordan/Kobe/Shaq should easily have 5 MVP awards. This is called cooking the books.

You're not putting any logic into this, you're basically saying that you're okay with giving the award to someone less deserving.

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2013, 03:03 PM
Even if you want to argue that Miami has better stars, their bench pales in comparison to those two teams. And bench is critical in an 82 season. Playoffs is another story of course.

Also, as I mentioned earlier, people too often point out the help Lebron may have on the offensive side of the ball. That still doesn't take into account the responsibilities he has to have as a defender. Again, how often have you seen a wing player be the anchor of his team defensively. It's absurd what he does. People seem to forget that the MVP is designed for overall play, not just offense. So even if you want to argue that Melo or Paul or Durant do as much offensively as Lebron (an argument I'd still have a hard time buying), what Lebron adds defensively is simply unheard of. Miami doesn't exactly have many players who can do help Lebron out. Aside from Bosh, their bigs are all borderline NBA players. Wade doesn't seem to care too much about that end consistently enough the past few years and Bosh has never been anything more than a solid defender at BEST. Thus, when you factor in the defense, it seems like a no brainer to me.

You are right on all those things. That is why I said I agree. LBJ deserves the award. I'm not saying he doesn't, I'm only saying that there are arguments for other players as well.




You can't just compare their winning %'s considering that the East is SIGNIFICANTLY inferior to the West.

I'm not comparing NY's winning percentage to Houston's, I'm comparing Houston's winning percentage last season without Harden to Houston's winning percentage this with with Harden. At the end of the day, the Rockets would have had the same seeding in this year's playoffs with last season's record. Yes, I agree that Harden is EXTREMELY valuable, and I would agree that there is a case to be made that he is more valuable to the Rockets than Melo is to the Knicks, but I would also agree that this isn't a clear cut case.






Sure there is. Look at their win-shares, PER, EWA.

Win-shares and PER and EWA are not quantifiable stats. They try to quantify aspects of the game that cannot be quantified. I don't agree with the formula for PER. I don't think they weigh defensive stats enough, or rebounding and assists, nor does it give proper weight to turnovers and personal fouls. A person, or a group of persons came up with the PER formula and that was that. To go with PER is to accept another person's interpretation of how much weight should be given to rebounds and assists, and turnovers and personal fouls. Everybody views them differently. PER is a great guide, but it is not definitive, and it does not measure intangibles. The same can be said about win-shares. The stats for win-shares can be skewed by a great number of things. Who the coach runs the plays through, who the coach runs the plays for, who the coach gives minutes to, ect, ect. These stats are guidelines and help a lot, but at the end of the day, they do not tell you if LBJ makes the players around him better. It is clear that LBJ makes the team better, but does he do what Magic and Bird did, and what Stockton and Nash and Duncan did, or what CP3 does: make the guys around him better. Those things do not show up on the stat lines.

Anybody who goes strictly off of stats is as much as of a fool as a person who completely ignores them.


Again, I say, LBJ deserves the MVP award. I am not saying he doesn't. All I am saying is that there are other guys who are no less valuable to their team, and perhaps more valuable. No method you use can determine how many wins LAC would have gotten without CP3, and not formula will tell you how many wins Miami would have gotten without LBJ. If that was possible, there would be no gambling because people would just plug in the formula and make their bets based on that.

Slug3
05-06-2013, 03:12 PM
lol he made a solid point but when i said every reason he did all year i was trolling according to most

There were 120 other people who voted for Lebron yet you want to stick to every single word on why this guy didnt? Just like how you dont believe Lebron was MVP there are going to be some people who didnt either. But just like here, the majority is going to vote correctly and vote for Lebron.

BULLSFAN0810
05-06-2013, 03:15 PM
You're not putting any logic into this, you're basically saying that you're okay with giving the award to someone less deserving.
what I'm saying is... The league is cooking the books. I think James could be Mvp, so can Durant and so can Melo... So I choose by importance to team. All are important, all had great years but if MJ didn't win MVP like they're giving the award to james, maybe the same logic applied to Jordan should be applied to James..... If he is that good.

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 03:15 PM
the fact that bosh led a bum raptors team to 46 wins by himself and the fact that wade is a proven champion with a washed up shaq and little talent. the fact that battier is the best role playe rin the league and ray allen is still probably the best shooter

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2013, 03:16 PM
Hypothetically, let's put Lebron on the Knicks. Are the Knicks going to be a worse or better team? According to this writer they're going to be a worse team since Carmelo is more valuable than Lebron.

This sports writer's argument for Carmelo is so incredibly stupid. How is Carmelo more valuable than Lebron? Is it because Carmelo is on a team that relies more on him? If so you're basically taking the MVP out of the individual's hands and just basing it off what kind of team the player is on.

I agree, LBJ is better than Melo. But that writer isn't saying that Melo is better, he's saying that Melo is more valuable to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat. He's saying that that Melo got the Knicks more wins than LBJ got the Heat. That may be right, it may be wrong. If you take Melo away from the Knicks and LBJ away from the Heat, whose record drops lower?

You are confusing the argument by simply implying a trade demonstrates your point, because the writer is not saying that Melo is better. If that's what he was saying, then yes, your argument would make sense, but it's not.

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 03:17 PM
the defintion is in the award m v p. Its not called player of the year

Avenged
05-06-2013, 03:18 PM
Who cares. Lebron still won. That is what matters.

Sandman
05-06-2013, 03:18 PM
If it was the best player in the NBA, MVP = LeBron
If it was the best season in the NBA, MVP = LeBron
If it's most valuable to their teams success in the NBA, MVP = 5-9 deserving winners.

MVP has no set criteria. Not a big deal.

there's your answer

BULLSFAN0810
05-06-2013, 03:19 PM
the fact that bosh led a bum raptors team to 46 wins by himself and the fact that wade is a proven champion with a washed up shaq and little talent. the fact that battier is the best role playe rin the league and ray allen is still probably the best shooter
Washed up Shaq ? Prior to Shaq, wade was on an 8 seed. Prior to wade Shaq was in the finals 3 years. He didn't wash up until the next year.

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 03:21 PM
that is one of the dumbest things i ever heard. They would be better If u put lebron on the knicks and if u take Melo off. Since Lebron is better. The award is not based on if the players switched teams its based on there current situation. If Melo was in the east would he lose to the wizards in the first round while he was losing to lakers and spurs? If Melo was on the heat would he not win more then 54 games and have a much better chance of a chip with Bosh n Wade ratehr then Jr smith. If this if that

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2013, 03:21 PM
I'd need to see the formula to determine any further.

The forumla does favour guys who teams are heavily dependent on, but ti did factor in wins as well. The formula is on the WIKI page. Scroll down to the "Formula" heading and click on the "Show" on the right side of the screen.

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 03:22 PM
turth speaks I have been bringing this up over and over. Its a embrassment of riches how do u take of your to hofers and still win 5 of 6 games and have the nerve for this guy to even be mentioned as mvp

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 03:26 PM
How about wade leading the heat to 45 wins the year before shaq got there with haslem/chalmers and a dleague roster. This is a absolute disgrace iam not mad because i knew he would get since the award lost its real meaning. Lets just give it to the player with the best per on the team with the best record why vote?

Kobe2324
05-06-2013, 03:32 PM
My pick for MVP would have been Melo as well, so i have nothing against that vote, I actually didnt expect it to be unanimous at all, i expected votes to go to cp3, durant and Kobe, not a lot of votes but at least a few. I have no problem with lebron winning it, I figured he would anyways...

bucketss
05-06-2013, 03:32 PM
that is one of the dumbest things i ever heard. They would be better If u put lebron on the knicks and if u take Melo off. Since Lebron is better. The award is not based on if the players switched teams its based on there current situation. If Melo was in the east would he lose to the wizards in the first round while he was losing to lakers and spurs? If Melo was on the heat would he not win more then 54 games and have a much better chance of a chip with Bosh n Wade ratehr then Jr smith. If this if that

if melo was on the heat, he would be wades robin.

Kobe2324
05-06-2013, 03:35 PM
agreed! the mvp and DPY awards have become team awards which is crap, it's been that way for a little while now, perfect example Kobe 35.4 ppg and carried his team into the playoffs, highest average since jordan and didnt get mvp, kind of like your example of Wade but even worse, absolutely ridiculous...

BULLSFAN0810
05-06-2013, 03:37 PM
James imho is dick rode... One vote away from being unanimous with 2 or 3 other players getting NO vote? They imho need to take the vote out of writers hand, or have it 50/50 with ex players.

Kobe2324
05-06-2013, 03:39 PM
MVP should be if you remove that player from the equasion how much worse is the team, which shows how valuable you are. for example, remove lebron from the Heat and they finish no worse than 2nd. had you removed Kobe from that lineup they would have the first pick in the draft. If you remove melo i think they struggle to make the playoffs or finish at a high seed, its the east so im assuming they get in. Take out cp3 and the clippers probly dont make the playoffs. Now I realize that's not the only way to judge it but that's a good start, stats of course play a factor

BklynKnicks3
05-06-2013, 03:44 PM
Disagree it would be 1a 1b and they would have a ring n Melo would be a great winner

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 03:47 PM
MVP should be if you remove that player from the equasion how much worse is the team, which shows how valuable you are. for example, remove lebron from the Heat and they finish no worse than 2nd. had you removed Kobe from that lineup they would have the first pick in the draft. If you remove melo i think they struggle to make the playoffs or finish at a high seed, its the east so im assuming they get in. Take out cp3 and the clippers probly dont make the playoffs. Now I realize that's not the only way to judge it but that's a good start, stats of course play a factor

1. Almost all of that is just speculation.

2. The 93-94 Bulls won 55 games without Jordan. Based on your logic Jordan wasn't a worthy MVP candidate because his team was still good without him.

bucketss
05-06-2013, 03:48 PM
MVP should be if you remove that player from the equasion how much worse is the team, which shows how valuable you are. for example, remove lebron from the Heat and they finish no worse than 2nd. had you removed Kobe from that lineup they would have the first pick in the draft. If you remove melo i think they struggle to make the playoffs or finish at a high seed, its the east so im assuming they get in. Take out cp3 and the clippers probly dont make the playoffs. Now I realize that's not the only way to judge it but that's a good start, stats of course play a factor

so kobe didn't deserve mvp in 2008?

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 03:55 PM
that is one of the dumbest things i ever heard. They would be better If u put lebron on the knicks and if u take Melo off. Since Lebron is better. The award is not based on if the players switched teams its based on there current situation. If Melo was in the east would he lose to the wizards in the first round while he was losing to lakers and spurs? If Melo was on the heat would he not win more then 54 games and have a much better chance of a chip with Bosh n Wade ratehr then Jr smith. If this if that

The award should be based on which player brings the most VALUE to any team. That would be LeBron. Any team, including the Thunder if you swap him with Durant, NY if you swap him with Melo, LAC if you swap him with Paul, and so on, is better because of LeBron.

That is the MVP

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 04:04 PM
I agree, LBJ is better than Melo. But that writer isn't saying that Melo is better, he's saying that Melo is more valuable to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat. He's saying that that Melo got the Knicks more wins than LBJ got the Heat. That may be right, it may be wrong. If you take Melo away from the Knicks and LBJ away from the Heat, whose record drops lower?

You are confusing the argument by simply implying a trade demonstrates your point, because the writer is not saying that Melo is better. If that's what he was saying, then yes, your argument would make sense, but it's not.

Do you know what MVP of the league means? It's pretty easy to understand actually. It's the Most Valuable Player in THE LEAGUE. Is Carmelo more valuable than Lebron?

When you start factoring what kind of team surrounds a player, it's not an individual award anymore. You're pretty much saying the MVP can't have other good players on his team. If that's what you think the MVP award is, then have at it and continue to give this award to undeserving players :shrug:

dtmagnet
05-06-2013, 04:07 PM
The Heat without Lebron would be worse than the Knicks without Melo, ergo Lebron is clearly more valuable than Carmelo.

IKnowHoops
05-06-2013, 04:11 PM
Few people look at it that way, nor should they. it's the MVP, not the "player of the year" award.

I understand the writers reasoning...

But its the LEAGUE MVP. Who is the MVP of the League, not who is the the most valuable player on his team. Who is the most valuable player in the league. Which is closer to who basically played the best ball in the league this year on a contending team. Which was Lebron, not Melo.

IKnowHoops
05-06-2013, 04:13 PM
League MVP is most valuable to the league/ best player in the league. By definition anyway.

koreancabbage
05-06-2013, 04:20 PM
League MVP is most valuable to the league/ best player in the league. By definition anyway.

and to his team.

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 04:25 PM
and to his team.

Where is that in the definition of MVP of the league?

KnickaBocka.44
05-06-2013, 04:50 PM
But its the LEAGUE MVP. Who is the MVP of the League, not who is the the most valuable player on his team. Who is the most valuable player in the league. Which is closer to who basically played the best ball in the league this year on a contending team. Which was Lebron, not Melo.

This doesn't really make sense. What determines value to the league? If anything that would be defined as whoever generates the most revenue. The Knicks generate the most revenue in the league and their best player is Carmelo so he must be the league's MVP, by your definition.

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 05:00 PM
This doesn't really make sense. What determines value to the league? If anything that would be defined as whoever generates the most revenue. The Knicks generate the most revenue in the league and their best player is Carmelo so he must be the league's MVP, by your definition.

He is referring to value in wins added, not revenue. Basically, which player has the most basketball value in the game? That is the MVP.

KnickaBocka.44
05-06-2013, 05:06 PM
He is referring to value in wins added, not revenue. Basically, which player has the most basketball value in the game? That is the MVP.

Right, I understand that. My point is: How can you define it like that when the NBA doesn't compete against anyone in the game of basketball? It would be irrelevant in comparative terms.

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 05:10 PM
Right, I understand that. My point is: How can you define it like that when the NBA doesn't compete against anyone in the game of basketball? It would be irrelevant in comparative terms.

Most Valuable Player: the man or woman judged to be the most outstanding player in a sport during a particular season or championship

Got this from the Free Online Dictionary. In other words, if you were to start a team and wanted to pick a player who would get you the most wins, who would you pick?

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 05:12 PM
The best player provides the most value. The worst player provides the least. It's a very simple concept.

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 05:14 PM
The best player provides the most value. The worst player provides the least. It's a very simple concept.

The pathetic thing is that they're are still people out there including sports writers who still can't grasp this concept. And until they do we're still going to get undeserving MVP's in the future.

sammyvine
05-06-2013, 05:15 PM
The Heat without Lebron would be worse than the Knicks without Melo, ergo Lebron is clearly more valuable than Carmelo.

Bosh, Wade, Allen, Battier, Chalmers is a great corse

that team will be top 3 at least.

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 05:18 PM
Bosh, Wade, Allen, Battier, Chalmers is a great corse

that team will be top 3 at least.

:sigh: Have you been reading the last couple pages?

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 05:21 PM
The pathetic thing is that they're are still people out there including sports writers who still can't grasp this concept. And until they do we're still going to get undeserving MVP's in the future.

I think this one voter was just being controversial to get his name out there. It's exactly why he admitted to being the one that did it. These guys should take their vote more seriously.

Guppyfighter
05-06-2013, 05:22 PM
If he wants to talk about new heights and importance to team success.

Chris Paul.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-06-2013, 05:36 PM
Bosh, Wade, Allen, Battier, Chalmers is a great corse

that team will be top 3 at least.

Yup. Durant should have been MVP.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-06-2013, 05:36 PM
Bosh, Wade, Allen, Battier, Chalmers is a great corse

that team will be top 3 at least.

Yup. Durant should have been MVP.

zn23
05-06-2013, 05:40 PM
Just revoke his voting privileges.

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 05:42 PM
Right, I understand that. My point is: How can you define it like that when the NBA doesn't compete against anyone in the game of basketball? It would be irrelevant in comparative terms.

as I said, the MVP should be the player who would bring the most value to any team he played for. LeBron fits that to a tee. You take the top player off every other team in the NBA, put LeBron there, and that team becomes better. That is the MVP.

SportsFanatic10
05-06-2013, 05:44 PM
he's wrong but i respect his opinion, he can vote for whoever he feels deserves it. that's how the system works...

Kashmir13579
05-06-2013, 05:45 PM
I don't think 'Melo would've been a worse pick than Rose or Nash.

--23--
05-06-2013, 05:48 PM
Wish these voters was around when was Jordan playing he would have at least 10 MVP's, and Shaq would have won about 4 of them bad boys.

On topic who care's who he picked, he don't have to explain his self on why he voted for Melo.

Twins Fanatic
05-06-2013, 05:56 PM
KD and CP3 were more deserving of that one vote (I see the Thunder and Clips having a hard time making the playoffs in the west without these guys respectively), with that said imagine how much better the Knicks would be with LeBron over Melo.

SportsFanatic10
05-06-2013, 05:58 PM
I don't think 'Melo would've been a worse pick than Rose or Nash.

probably not (off the top of my head without checking the numbers), but lebron was just too good this year. it's a tough sell justifying going in another direction this season.

JC_
05-06-2013, 06:03 PM
I don't think 'Melo would've been a worse pick than Rose or Nash.

I do. Both Rose and Nash atleast wow'd peoples socks off the years they won it.

jayjay33
05-06-2013, 06:09 PM
MVP = best player in the league

I hate when someone says, "Well, this guy was more important to his team." It's ****ing stupid on so many levels. The best player in the league is the most valuable to his team. So essentially this moron didn't vote for LeBron because he's not on the Knicks.

No the hell he ain't. Analogy you got two m-16 and a 50 cal. I got 1 m-16. Now is that 50 cal worth more to you than my one m-16 is to me? No it's not even close. Cause without that 50 you still can hold yo ground with two m-16's with. But without my m-16. I might as well just give up. Cause I got no way to fight back. Same exact concept. no I do agree with you that the MVP "should" be the best player. But I disagree with you that it = the best player. And what I mean by that is, It's left open to interpretation. The league could easily say the MVP is for the best player that year. And there would be no disagreement. But they purposely leave it open to interpretation. So you can't just say it is meant for the best player when in fact it is not. So while I think lebron was the MVP. I also know that going by who is most valuable to their team is a legitimately recognized way of doing it. It seems to me that this is exactly what the league wants.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 06:17 PM
No the hell he ain't. Analogy you got two m-16 and a 50 cal. I got 1 m-16. Now is that 50 cal worth more to you than my one m-16 is to me? No it's not even close. Cause without that 50 you still can hold yo ground with two m-16's with. But without my m-16. I might as well just give up. Cause I got no way to fight back. Same exact concept. no I do agree with you that the MVP "should" be the best player. But I disagree with you that it = the best player. And what I mean by that is, It's left open to interpretation. The league could easily say the MVP is for the best player that year. And there would be no disagreement. But they purposely leave it open to interpretation. So you can't just say it is meant for the best player when in fact it is not. So while I think lebron was the MVP. I also know that going by who is most valuable to their team is a legitimately recognized way of doing it. It seems to me that this is exactly what the league wants.

Gilbert Arenas?

LBJ was a better in every aspect when compared with Melo this season. How anyone could consider Melo to be more "valuable" is just silly.

Mell413
05-06-2013, 06:40 PM
I think the voter defended his point well enough where I wont criticize him for it. I don't agree with his vote but I can respect his opinion.

jayjay33
05-06-2013, 06:44 PM
Gilbert Arenas?

LBJ was a better in every aspect when compared with Melo this season. How anyone could consider Melo to be more "valuable" is just silly.



Dp

alexander_37
05-06-2013, 06:44 PM
Too much :laugh: :laugh: to handle. My stomach hurts.

Kashmir13579
05-06-2013, 06:46 PM
I do. Both Rose and Nash atleast wow'd peoples socks off the years they won it.

'Melo played at a "wow" level for most of the season and did it without the roster support either Rose or Nash had.

dtmagnet
05-06-2013, 06:50 PM
Wish these voters was around when was Jordan playing he would have at least 10 MVP's, and Shaq would have won about 4 of them bad boys.

On topic who care's who he picked, he don't have to explain his self on why he voted for Melo.

English mother ****er, do you speak it?

pedrofan45
05-06-2013, 06:52 PM
Too much :laugh: :laugh: to handle. My stomach hurts.

I don't know what your opinion is but if you're going to post at least have some contribution.

jayjay33
05-06-2013, 06:55 PM
Gilbert Arenas?

LBJ was a better in every aspect when compared with Melo this season. How anyone could consider Melo to be more "valuable" is just silly.




No value is based on necessity. You think it's silly because you a little confused. Your still arguing who is better. No one can argue More valuable and better are two different terms with to different meanings. My example clearly showed you the difference. Value is based on necessity. So what the guy is saying is the Knicks NEED melo MORE than the heat need lebron. I don't think you would argue that. An that's what he means.

BULLSFAN0810
05-06-2013, 06:56 PM
We all know melo was robbed. He and James had very successful years team wise and individual. Its a shame no matter who won ,the votes didn't reflect it. That's the major indicator. Basically one sided, when we all know it wasn't.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 07:03 PM
No value is based on necessity. You think it's silly because you a little confused. Your still arguing who is better. No one can argue More valuable and better are two different terms with to different meanings. My example clearly showed you the difference. Value is based on necessity. So what the guy is saying is the Knicks NEED melo MORE than the heat need lebron. I don't think you would argue that. An that's what he means.

It's simple, his opinion sucks. LeBron is a more efficient scorer, plays MUCH better defense, and makes his teammates better. In other words, he provides more value to the team. He is a more valuable player. It's not even close.

It's stupid to think that taking Carmelo off the Knicks would be as diminishing as taking LeBron off the Heat.

People make this ridiculous blanket statement, "If Melo wasn't a Knick they might miss the playoffs."

Oh yea? Well if you take LeBron off of the Heat they aren't a potential dynasty team anymore.

Iron24th
05-06-2013, 07:04 PM
Well obviously, Lebron should have been the pick. Props to this guy at least going public and defending his pick. This is the best year the Knicks have had in quite some time:

- Finished with the 2 seed
- Got the 6th man of the year
- Won a playoff series
- Got an MVP vote haha
- Hopefully Woodson gets some votes for coach of the year

Woodson should receive some credit, 2nd seed for a team who many predicted as 6-8 seed at best before the season and having way less talent than miami or okc.

naps
05-06-2013, 07:34 PM
Where would the Knicks be without Melo? :confused:

This should be an easy argument on this site given how many times Amare is called useless.


Where would the Cavs be without Kyrie? where would the warriors be without Curry? Where would the Rockets be without Harden? What's your point? MVP is the most valuable player in the LEAGUE, not TEAM. LeBron brings more to the table for his team than anybody else in the league. And then he has one of the greatest statistical seasons of all time along with by far the best record in the league. There's no debate at all. Get over it.

jayjay33
05-06-2013, 07:41 PM
It's simple, his opinion sucks. LeBron is a more efficient scorer, plays MUCH better defense, and makes his teammates better. In other words, he provides more value to the team. He is a more valuable player. It's not even close.

It's stupid to think that taking Carmelo off the Knicks would be as diminishing as taking LeBron off the Heat.

People make this ridiculous blanket statement, "If Melo wasn't a Knick they might miss the playoffs."
Oh yea? Well if you take LeBron off of the Heat they aren't a potential dynasty team anymore.



Well, unless your about make some kind of crazy Garbage team>>>>>>>>>>>Good team statment. So you just debunked your own argument.

KnickaBocka.44
05-06-2013, 07:47 PM
as I said, the MVP should be the player who would bring the most value to any team he played for. LeBron fits that to a tee. You take the top player off every other team in the NBA, put LeBron there, and that team becomes better. That is the MVP.

That was pretty much just a long winded way of saying that Lebron is the best player and that is why he deserves the MVP. It doesn't prove anything, we already know that.

alexander_37
05-06-2013, 07:47 PM
I don't know what your opinion is but if you're going to post at least have some contribution.

Melol for MVP? That is beyond hilarious.

Lakers + Giants
05-06-2013, 07:48 PM
MVP = best player in the league

I hate when someone says, "Well, this guy was more important to his team." It's ****ing stupid on so many levels. The best player in the league is the most valuable to his team. So essentially this moron didn't vote for LeBron because he's not on the Knicks.

Then change the award name to Player of the Year.

Cuz MVP is Most Valuable Player. Being more valuable is completely different than being better than another player. Just saying.

jayjay33
05-06-2013, 08:07 PM
Where would the Cavs be without Kyrie? where would the warriors be without Curry? Where would the Rockets be without Harden? What's your point? MVP is the most valuable player in the LEAGUE, not TEAM. LeBron brings more to the table for his team than anybody else in the league. And then he has one of the greatest statistical seasons of all time along with by far the best record in the league. There's no debate at all. Get over it.




The most valuable player "to their team" in the LEAGUE? The reason Your wrong on this because the meaning of the award is "purposely" subjective, so that other players will get votes. Therefore If the NBA is equally fine with either interpretation (which we know they are). An actually wants different views on what it means. Then your right there can be no debate what so every. Your basically trying to argue something that is in fact legit is not. A more reasonable arugment would be that the NBA just needs to just make it for the best player. But as long as most valuable to their team is an acceptable answer. It is what it is.


Thats like saying there is no hitting below the belt, in an anything goes fight. lol

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 08:19 PM
'Melo played at a "wow" level for most of the season and did it without the roster support either Rose or Nash had.

I will give you Rose, and I thought Nash didn't deserve an MVP, but at least he played in a conference that had some competition.

Look, there is no way anyone should even be brought up this year outside Bron.

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 08:20 PM
The most valuable player "to their team" in the LEAGUE? The reason Your wrong on this because the meaning of the award is "purposely" subjective, so that other players will get votes. Therefore If the NBA is equally fine with either interpretation (which we know they are). An actually wants different views on what it means. Then your right there can be no debate what so every. Your basically trying to argue something that is in fact legit is not. A more reasonable arugment would be that the NBA just needs to just make it for the best player. But as long as most valuable to their team is an acceptable answer. It is what it is.


Thats like saying there is no hitting below the belt, in an anything goes fight. lol

I interpret it to mean Most Valuable Player in the league. Meaning, picking the one player who is not only the best, but would make any team better, regardless of who you took off that team to put said player on. LeBron fits this every MVP he has gotten.

nycericanguy
05-06-2013, 08:22 PM
The most valuable player is the best player in the league. There isn't a better player than LeBron right now. He brings more value to a team than anyone else.

According to this writer's logic, LeBron can't be the MVP because he's on the Heat but if LeBron was hypothetically a Knick, and the Knicks didn't have Melo, he'd vote for him. It's just stupid.

That is your definition, not mine. Like JJH said, if you're going to just give it to the best player then it should be the PER award or something. Jordan would have 8-10 MVP's if that was the criteria, Shaq would have more than 1, and LBJ would win it just about every year. Rose was nowhere near the best player in 2010. The way you interpret MVP is clearly not the way others interpret it.

And if you join a super team those are things that come with the territory. Arod had some amazing years in NY, but didn't always get the MVP because he was hitting in a stacked lineup.

LBJ wanted alot of help, and he got it. Other guys are not as fortunate.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 08:24 PM
Then change the award name to Player of the Year.

Cuz MVP is Most Valuable Player. Being more valuable is completely different than being better than another player. Just saying.

Almost everyone interprets it the way I do.

If you want it your way why don't you rename it, "Really good player on a mediocre team award."

The whole point of this thing is to give credit to the best player in the league.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 08:29 PM
Well, unless your about make some kind of crazy Garbage team>>>>>>>>>>>Good team statment. So you just debunked your own argument.

I have no idea what you're talking about. LeBrons's insane value elevates his team from potential division winnet to a potential dynasty.

Is that not a lot of value?

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 08:31 PM
Put Melo on the Heat and remove James. They aren't nearly as dangerous. Not even close.

nycericanguy
05-06-2013, 08:35 PM
Put Melo on the Heat and remove James. They aren't nearly as dangerous. Not even close.

They are still a 60+ win team.

And that's not even really fair because that team was built around LBJ.

Ray Allen's role has diminished in MIA, but you can make the argument that he'd be a better 2nd scorer than Melo has right now. That's how much help LBJ has in comparison.

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 08:36 PM
They are still a 60+ win team.

And that's not even really fair because that team was built around LBJ.

Ray Allen's role has diminished in MIA, but you can make the argument that he'd be a better 2nd scorer than Melo has right now. That's how much help LBJ has in comparison.

They don't win 60 games. Their defense drops immensely, Wade is forced to play more minutes hurting him, and their interior gets even more exposed as their SF is now a black hole, versus an efficient scoring machine that involves everyone and optimizes their game.

nycericanguy
05-06-2013, 08:39 PM
They don't win 60 games. Their defense drops immensely, Wade is forced to play more minutes hurting him, and their interior gets even more exposed as their SF is now a black hole, versus an efficient scoring machine that involves everyone and optimizes their game.

I disagree... and I don't see why Wade would be forced to play more min. He already played 35mpg, more than JR who fills that role now in NY.

Chalmers is the perfect PG to play with Melo, Bosh is a great fit at PF/C. Then you have Ray allen and Battier off the bench. Are you kidding me? Melo won 54 games with JR as the 2nd guy, with every single starter missing 15 games +.

Chalmers
Wade\Allen
Battier
Melo
Bosh\Anderson

that's a big upgrade over a supporting cast of JR, Chandler, Felton & SHump.

would their defense be worse? Of course, but that's still a top 3 team in the NBA, and still the #1 seed in the east.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 08:45 PM
I disagree... and I don't see why Wade would be forced to play more min. He already played 35mpg, more than JR who fills that role now in NY.

Chalmers is the perfect PG to play with Melo, Bosh is a great fit at PF/C. Then you have Ray allen and Battier off the bench. Are you kidding me? Melo won 54 games with JR as the 2nd guy, with every single starter missing 15 games +.

Chalmers
Wade\Allen
Battier
Melo
Bosh\Anderson

that's a big upgrade over a supporting cast of JR, Chandler, Felton & SHump.

would their defense be worse? Of course, but that's still a top 3 team in the NBA, and still the #1 seed in the east.

Top 3 team? They need to be even better than what the Heat are right now if Melo is truly more "valuable".

You really think the Heat with Melo would he the hands down favorite to get a championship every year?

nycericanguy
05-06-2013, 08:47 PM
Top 3 team? They need to be even better than what the Heat are right now if Melo is truly more "valuable".

You really think the Heat with Melo would he the hands down favorite to get a championship every year?

I don't think a single poster said that Melo was more valuable.

What I did say is to me, and alot of people MVP is not just " the best player" as you say.

But yes I still think they'd be the favorites.

Melo playing with all that talent, you'd see more of the Olympics Melo.

fingerbang
05-06-2013, 08:50 PM
I don't think a single poster said that Melo was more valuable.

What I did say is to me, and alot of people MVP is not just " the best player" as you say.

But yes I still think they'd be the favorites.

Melo playing with all that talent, you'd see more of the Olympics Melo.

Lots if people are saying Melo is more valuable. Hence him deserving the "most valuable player" award.

Hawkeye15
05-06-2013, 09:36 PM
I disagree... and I don't see why Wade would be forced to play more min. He already played 35mpg, more than JR who fills that role now in NY.

Chalmers is the perfect PG to play with Melo, Bosh is a great fit at PF/C. Then you have Ray allen and Battier off the bench. Are you kidding me? Melo won 54 games with JR as the 2nd guy, with every single starter missing 15 games +.

Chalmers
Wade\Allen
Battier
Melo
Bosh\Anderson

that's a big upgrade over a supporting cast of JR, Chandler, Felton & SHump.

would their defense be worse? Of course, but that's still a top 3 team in the NBA, and still the #1 seed in the east.

the big upgrade is Bron over Melo dude.

Chronz
05-06-2013, 09:54 PM
I disagree... and I don't see why Wade would be forced to play more min. He already played 35mpg, more than JR who fills that role now in NY.
What does JR have to do with this? Wade would have to play more minutes because Bron is no longer around. The offensive and most importantly, defensive decline would force him into carrying a bigger burden.


Chalmers is the perfect PG to play with Melo,
Nah, the reason Melo is surrounded by playmakers like Felton and excellent skip passers like Prig/Kidd is because Melo lacks that vision.


Bosh is a great fit at PF/C.
Bosh is great with anyone, but without LeBron and with Melo, his defensive shortcomings would be exposed to a greater degree and I doubt Melo would open up the game for him in the same manner.


Then you have Ray allen and Battier off the bench. Are you kidding me? Melo won 54 games with JR as the 2nd guy, with every single starter missing 15 games +.
I doubt JR Smith was the 2nd best player, Bron won 66 with Mo Williams so its not really just about naming names.


Chalmers
Wade\Allen
Battier
Melo
Bosh\Anderson

that's a big upgrade over a supporting cast of JR, Chandler, Felton & SHump.
Obviously, bit its also a big downgrade from LeBron


would their defense be worse? Of course, but that's still a top 3 team in the NBA, and still the #1 seed in the east.

Not sold, the defensive dropoff would be too profound, the lack of durability and added pressure on those older guys would get exposed. Melo would have nights where his offense isn't there, with no other way to impact the game, and the defense clearly diminished, they would lose more often.

jayjay33
05-07-2013, 06:49 AM
Well, unless your about make some kind of crazy Garbage team>>>>>>>>>>>Good team statment. So you just debunked your own argument.

I have no idea what you're talking about. LeBrons's insane value elevates his team from potential division winnet to a potential dynasty.

Is that not a lot of value?

Just quit dude, what your saying does not make sense from a logic stand point. 1 seed to division winner vs 2 seed to non playoff team? aka a team at the bottom of the league. Do you know the difference between better and value? Now I don't think it should be done that way because your basically punishing a guy for having better teammates. But it what it is.

jayjay33
05-07-2013, 06:49 AM
Put Melo on the Heat and remove James. They aren't nearly as dangerous. Not even close.

They are still a 60+ win team.

And that's not even really fair because that team was built around LBJ.

Ray Allen's role has diminished in MIA, but you can make the argument that he'd be a better 2nd scorer than Melo has right now. That's how much help LBJ has in comparison.

This

jayjay33
05-07-2013, 07:02 AM
I disagree... and I don't see why Wade would be forced to play more min. He already played 35mpg, more than JR who fills that role now in NY.
What does JR have to do with this? Wade would have to play more minutes because Bron is no longer around. The offensive and most importantly, defensive decline would force him into carrying a bigger burden.


Chalmers is the perfect PG to play with Melo,
Nah, the reason Melo is surrounded by playmakers like Felton and excellent skip passers like Prig/Kidd is because Melo lacks that vision.


Bosh is a great fit at PF/C.
Bosh is great with anyone, but without LeBron and with Melo, his defensive shortcomings would be exposed to a greater degree and I doubt Melo would open up the game for him in the same manner.


Then you have Ray allen and Battier off the bench. Are you kidding me? Melo won 54 games with JR as the 2nd guy, with every single starter missing 15 games +.
I doubt JR Smith was the 2nd best player, Bron won 66 with Mo Williams so its not really just about naming names.


Chalmers
Wade\Allen
Battier
Melo
Bosh\Anderson

that's a big upgrade over a supporting cast of JR, Chandler, Felton & SHump.
Obviously, bit its also a big downgrade from LeBron


would their defense be worse? Of course, but that's still a top 3 team in the NBA, and still the #1 seed in the east.

Not sold, the defensive dropoff would be too profound, the lack of durability and added pressure on those older guys would get exposed. Melo would have nights where his offense isn't there, with no other way to impact the game, and the defense clearly diminished, they would lose more often.


you clearly have very little respect for melo as a basketball player. How much help does he need? Your basically saying he is not a superstar.

nycericanguy
05-07-2013, 08:19 AM
What does JR have to do with this? Wade would have to play more minutes because Bron is no longer around. The offensive and most importantly, defensive decline would force him into carrying a bigger burden.


Nah, the reason Melo is surrounded by playmakers like Felton and excellent skip passers like Prig/Kidd is because Melo lacks that vision.


Bosh is great with anyone, but without LeBron and with Melo, his defensive shortcomings would be exposed to a greater degree and I doubt Melo would open up the game for him in the same manner.


I doubt JR Smith was the 2nd best player, Bron won 66 with Mo Williams so its not really just about naming names.


Obviously, bit its also a big downgrade from LeBron


Not sold, the defensive dropoff would be too profound, the lack of durability and added pressure on those older guys would get exposed. Melo would have nights where his offense isn't there, with no other way to impact the game, and the defense clearly diminished, they would lose more often.

The year before LBJ came Wade played 36mpg, this year he played 35mpg. That's just him aging more so than him playing less because LBJ is here.

Felton is not exactly a great playmaker, neither was Billups and Melo had his best years with him. CHalmers alongside Melo would be more than fine, he's a very good outside shooter, much better than Felton. Melo needs to be surrounded by shooters, not playmakers. He struggled to play with Lin.

JR was the Knicks 2nd best scorer, but if we're talking for 1 year, I'd take a more efficient Ray Allen over JR.

If you don't think MIA supporting cast would add at least 6 more wins I don't know what to tell you. I don't think people realize just how little help Melo had, and how much LBJ had.

And not just in terms of sheer talent, but in terms of guys getting hurt. Melo won 54 games with no 2nd star and with one of the more injury riddled teams in the East.

Greet
05-07-2013, 08:24 AM
you clearly have very little respect for melo as a basketball player. How much help does he need? Your basically saying he is not a superstar.

That's because he's not a superstar. Not knocking Melo for it, but the term "superstar" is used too loosely. He isn't even top 2 in his own position.

BklynKnicks3
05-07-2013, 09:59 AM
Its so funny hwo i always hear lebron makes everyone better yet when he doesnt play heat still win mike miller has 20 battier has 15. I guess he made them better in practice. Obv you add a great player to a team they will win more. People need to stop giving this guy credit for everything. This heat team would win 55 games without him. Wade would avg 25-30. Bosh would avg 20-25.

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 10:40 AM
Just quit dude, what your saying does not make sense from a logic stand point. 1 seed to division winner vs 2 seed to non playoff team? aka a team at the bottom of the league. Do you know the difference between better and value? Now I don't think it should be done that way because your basically punishing a guy for having better teammates. But it what it is.

Better = more value. It's soooo simple. The better player provides more value to his team.

You're knocking him because the Heat are better. I said this several times earlier in the thread: The Bulls won 55 games without Jordan. Based on your logic, Jordan shouldn't have won MVP because his team still won a lot without him.

koreancabbage
05-07-2013, 10:50 AM
Its so funny hwo i always hear lebron makes everyone better yet when he doesnt play heat still win mike miller has 20 battier has 15. I guess he made them better in practice. Obv you add a great player to a team they will win more. People need to stop giving this guy credit for everything. This heat team would win 55 games without him. Wade would avg 25-30. Bosh would avg 20-25.

okay. Exhibit A: Cleveland after Lebron left. nuff said.

what we do know- Melo doesn't make teammates better and is an overrated and inefficient chucker. Taking more shots to get his points is his remedy to everything that was said about him in the last sentence. Woodson has been their best coach for New York in the last 10 years - and guess what - they made it to the second round. (and this is with Melo playing horribly)

JasonJohnHorn
05-07-2013, 10:53 AM
Do you know what MVP of the league means? It's pretty easy to understand actually. It's the Most Valuable Player in THE LEAGUE.

I think you are missing the entire point of this conversation. You are saying that there is one finite way to define the league MVP and there simply is not.

Read the following two sentences carefully and try to notice the difference.

Who is the most valuable player in the league?
Who is the most valuable player to the league?

Completely different. Who is most valuable to the league? Who is the best for league revenue? Either Kobe or LBJ. They are the top selling jerseys and they get the most ratings. If that is what you want to base the MVP on, knock yourself out. If that is the case you might as well have the fans vote for it.


who is most valuable in the league? There are a few ways to look at it. You could look at is as "who is most valuable to their respective teams.

Wait, you know what... I'm not even going to bother. If you haven't figured this out by now, chances are you never will. I don't normally go this route, but you seem like a tool, so I will not waste any more time explaining it to you.

PrettyBoyJ
05-07-2013, 10:55 AM
He makes a sound argument, obviously LeBron is the best player is deserved MVP, but Melo had case as being the most "Valuable Player"

JasonJohnHorn
05-07-2013, 10:55 AM
The Heat without Lebron would be worse than the Knicks without Melo, ergo Lebron is clearly more valuable than Carmelo.


The Heat are 5-1 without LBJ
NY is 5-6 without Melo.

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 10:58 AM
The Heat are 5-1 without LBJ
NY is 5-6 without Melo.

The Bulls were 55-27 without Michael Jordan.

JasonJohnHorn
05-07-2013, 11:00 AM
Almost everyone interprets it the way I do.

If you want it your way why don't you rename it, "Really good player on a mediocre team award."


Actually, no, they don't. If they did then Nash would not have won back-to-back MVP awards. So don't pretend like you speak on behalf of the majority.


MVP means different things to different people. The MVP is not the Best Player Award, if it was, that is what it would be called. If that is all the award was, there would be no voting and we would just let a compute calculate PER and give it to the guy with the best PER. But we don't. they use the word "valuable" because it speaks, in part, to intangibles. Making players better for example. Being a leader on the floor and motivating your teammates. The MVP is not simply about who puts up the best personal stats.

nycericanguy
05-07-2013, 11:01 AM
Better = more value. It's soooo simple. The better player provides more value to his team.

You're knocking him because the Heat are better. I said this several times earlier in the thread: The Bulls won 55 games without Jordan. Based on your logic, Jordan shouldn't have won MVP because his team still won a lot without him.

And based on YOUR logic, MJ should have 8-10 MVP's because he was the best player in the league for 8-10 years, if not more.

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 11:04 AM
Actually, no, they don't. If they did then Nash would not have won back-to-back MVP awards. So don't pretend like you speak on behalf of the majority.


MVP means different things to different people. The MVP is not the Best Player Award, if it was, that is what it would be called. If that is all the award was, there would be no voting and we would just let a compute calculate PER and give it to the guy with the best PER. But we don't. they use the word "valuable" because it speaks, in part, to intangibles. Making players better for example. Being a leader on the floor and motivating your teammates. The MVP is not simply about who puts up the best personal stats.

Lots of people really thought Nash was the best player in the league at that time and that's why he won 2 MVPs.

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 11:06 AM
And based on YOUR logic, MJ should have 8-10 MVP's because he was the best player in the league for 8-10 years, if not more.

What sounds more logical, Jordan with 8 MVPs or Jordan with none?

ewing
05-07-2013, 11:12 AM
And based on YOUR logic, MJ should have 8-10 MVP's because he was the best player in the league for 8-10 years, if not more.

He should have been

JasonJohnHorn
05-07-2013, 11:12 AM
It is odd how all these people are suddenly saying that the MVP = The Best Player when for years now people have been saying that the MVP has to be on a contender.


In 89 the Bulls won 47 games and Jordan averages 32 points, 8 boards and 8 assists and almost 3 steals. He did not win the MVP. I doubt that there was a player who played as well as he did that season. 1990 say him average almost 34 points a game with 6+ assists and 6+ rebounds and almost 3 steals a game. Nobody put up numbers that good and Jordan still didn't win the MVP award.

This award is not about personal stats, though they do play a factor.


Everybody who believes their is only one way to define MVP needs to shut up and acknowledge that MVP is not a quantifiable award. If it was, there wouldn't be people voting on it. There is room for this thing called "interpretation". To be honest, I am EXTREMELY surprised that LBJ got 120 out of 121 first place votes. CP3 and Durant were both deserving of the award (I think more so than Melo) and if the playoffs have proved anything, so to was Curry to be honest. None of those players are as good as LBJ, but they are all extremely valuable to their teams, perhaps more so than is LBJ, but certainly no less than LBJ.

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 11:14 AM
It is odd how all these people are suddenly saying that the MVP = The Best Player when for years now people have been saying that the MVP has to be on a contender.


In 89 the Bulls won 47 games and Jordan averages 32 points, 8 boards and 8 assists and almost 3 steals. He did not win the MVP. I doubt that there was a player who played as well as he did that season. 1990 say him average almost 34 points a game with 6+ assists and 6+ rebounds and almost 3 steals a game. Nobody put up numbers that good and Jordan still didn't win the MVP award.

This award is not about personal stats, though they do play a factor.


Everybody who believes their is only one way to define MVP needs to shut up and acknowledge that MVP is not a quantifiable award. If it was, there wouldn't be people voting on it. There is room for this thing called "interpretation". To be honest, I am EXTREMELY surprised that LBJ got 120 out of 121 first place votes. CP3 and Durant were both deserving of the award (I think more so than Melo) and if the playoffs have proved anything, so to was Curry to be honest. None of those players are as good as LBJ, but they are all extremely valuable to their teams, perhaps more so than is LBJ, but certainly no less than LBJ.

Well what is it based on then? How the hell can we define value without numbers?

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-07-2013, 11:22 AM
Then change the award name to Player of the Year.

Cuz MVP is Most Valuable Player. Being more valuable is completely different than being better than another player. Just saying.

This.

JayW_1023
05-07-2013, 11:23 AM
Durant had a better case than Anthony.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-07-2013, 11:25 AM
I will give you Rose, and I thought Nash didn't deserve an MVP, but at least he played in a conference that had some competition.

Look, there is no way anyone should even be brought up this year outside Bron.

Why not? Lebron is on a top 3 team all time, No way he should be MVP. Durant has carried his team to a great record in a real conference, not the high school league they call the East.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-07-2013, 11:26 AM
They don't win 60 games. Their defense drops immensely, Wade is forced to play more minutes hurting him, and their interior gets even more exposed as their SF is now a black hole, versus an efficient scoring machine that involves everyone and optimizes their game.

The Heat would still be battling for the number one seed without Bron.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-07-2013, 11:28 AM
Its so funny hwo i always hear lebron makes everyone better yet when he doesnt play heat still win mike miller has 20 battier has 15. I guess he made them better in practice. Obv you add a great player to a team they will win more. People need to stop giving this guy credit for everything. This heat team would win 55 games without him. Wade would avg 25-30. Bosh would avg 20-25.

+1

bucketss
05-07-2013, 11:32 AM
+1

lebron > kobe

umad?!

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-07-2013, 11:36 AM
lebron > kobe

umad?!

Right now, yeah. 5>1* UMAD?

bucketss
05-07-2013, 11:40 AM
Right now, yeah. 5>1* UMAD?

yeah the lakers have won more championships since 2000 than the heat/cavs combined but whats your point?

KnickaBocka.44
05-07-2013, 11:49 AM
Well what is it based on then? How the hell can we define value without numbers?

Try watching a few games.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-07-2013, 12:01 PM
yeah the lakers have won more championships since 2000 than the heat/cavs combined but whats your point?

Well, I think you just proved how my franchise is much better than yours ;)+ Our franchise player is one of the Goats for leading us there so often.

bucketss
05-07-2013, 12:13 PM
Well, I think your just proved how my franchise is much better than yours ;)+ Our franchise player is one of the Goats for leading us there so often.

you don't have a franchise you're a kobe fan.

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 12:31 PM
Who actually believes Melo has more value than Lebron? Isn't that what the award stands for? Most Valuable Player of the League? Knicks fans, if you want to continue to support this nonsense that the award is about how much a team needs a player, then you're going to continue to hand out the award to undeserving players ala Steve Nash.

I see some people saying that the award is meant to have some vagueness to it or whatever word that person used. That it's not all about being the best player, it's about being a good player that carries a terrible team. Which in this case, makes the award become less of an individual award.

If people really want the award to be like this, it's going to continue to be the most problematic MVP given out to the four major sports.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-07-2013, 12:31 PM
you don't have a franchise you're a kobe fan.

Well if Kobe got traded, I would want to see the Lakers win a ship first. If that was off the table then I would like to see Kobes team win it. So technically I would consider myself a Laker fan First.

bucketss
05-07-2013, 12:34 PM
Well if Kobe got traded, I would want to see the Lakers win a ship first. If that was off the table then I would like to see Kobes team win it. So technically I would consider myself a Laker fan First.

sure you would.

atl_braves_fan
05-07-2013, 12:41 PM
Few people look at it that way, nor should they. it's the MVP, not the "player of the year" award.

I understand the writers reasoning...

Most Valuable Player is an objective measure (i.e. which player produces the most value). What player could possibly produce more value than the best player in the league?

What you seem to want the award to be for is Most Valuable Player (to his particular team in that team's particular circumstance). That would, admittedly, be a subjective measure and may actually favor Carmelo Anthony, but it is simply not what the award is for.

120 voters for the award understood that definition and distinction, 1 voter didn't understand it. Which side sounds like it is correct to you?

Put it another way, would anyone in the world trade Lebron James for Carmelo Anthony straight up? The answer is no ... because Lebron James is more valuable.

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 12:42 PM
deleted

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 12:42 PM
Try watching a few games.

It's pretty damn easy to see that LeBron is a more valuable player when watching the games. When I watch Melo I see a great offensive player that shoots too much. When I watch LeBron I see a great offensive player that backs it up with superior defense.

ChiTownPacerFan
05-07-2013, 12:43 PM
I don't understand why some people don't understand a simple concept. MVP is a league wide award! The most valuable player in the league is LeBron James! Carmelo certainly has a claim to the "most more valuable than any other player on his team" award. That is, the difference in value between Carmelo and the next most valuable player on his team is probably the biggest such gap in the league. That doesn't make him the most valuable player in the league though. I hate the "MVP = star player with the worst supporting cast argument". If that's really your argument, than James Harden should have been MVP, because the Rockets were a 25 win team without him.

JasonJohnHorn
05-07-2013, 12:50 PM
Lots of people really thought Nash was the best player in the league at that time and that's why he won 2 MVPs.

You are projecting your own interpretation onto the voters. There were people who claimed Nash wasn't even the best player on his team! His MVPs were extremely controversial because he was not the best player in the league. He was a weak defender. He had two aspects to his game: he was a great play maker and a great shooter. But people recognized that he was important to his team's success and they voted for him because they thought he was the most "valuable" not the "best". Valuable and best do not have the same definition.

I said it's not based entirely on stats. You said:

Well what is it based on then? How the hell can we define value without numbers?

It is based on a number of things. If this was a "stats" award, they WOULDN'T HAVE VOTERS!!! They would just hand it to the guy with the best PER.

What makes a guy an MVP is a great number of things. Does he make the players around him better (this is what Nash did, and Bird and Magic and Stockton and Duncan and CP3). Does he know how to motivate the players around him? Kidd was amazing at this. Kobe as well. CP3 as well. This DOES NOT SHOW UP IN THE STAT SHEET!!!!! But these are factors.

In 2005/2006 Sam Cassell ended up on the Clippers. That year they posted their best record ever (as far as I can remember at least) and for the first time EVER got into the second round of the playoffs. They guys on the team credited Cassell with the turn around. They said that in practice when the coach would call a break, Cassell would stay on the court and work on his shot or plays. Then other guys started doing the same and those breaks eventually turned into more practice. Cassell lead by example and motivated his teammates to take the game more seriously. The result? The most successful season in the history of the franchise. If you look at Cassell's numbers that year, they were good. But they weren't his best numbers ever. He didn't make an All-Star team, but in my book, the impact on his team was as valuable as any player in the league that year. He lead that team on and off the court. He motivated his teammates. He lead by example. And that team had the most successful season in the history of the franchise that season. If I was voting for the MVP that year, Sam Cassell would have been in my top-five for MVP. He wasn't even the best player on his team. He wasn't the best player at his position. He was a borderline All-Star player with a lot of experience on championship teams and teams that had deep playoff runs and he brought those lessons to the team and taught the guys how to win. That is VALUABLE. If you cannot see that the game goes beyond stats, then you frankly do not know the game. Period.

Do stats matter? Yes. But you do not base the MVP award strictly on stats. If you did, you would not need voters. Just a formula you plug into a computer.

BklynKnicks3
05-07-2013, 12:51 PM
i agree he should if he had 50 wins,

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 12:55 PM
You are projecting your own interpretation onto the voters. There were people who claimed Nash wasn't even the best player on his team! His MVPs were extremely controversial because he was not the best player in the league. He was a weak defender. He had two aspects to his game: he was a great play maker and a great shooter. But people recognized that he was important to his team's success and they voted for him because they thought he was the most "valuable" not the "best". Valuable and best do not have the same definition.

I said it's not based entirely on stats. You said:


It is based on a number of things. If this was a "stats" award, they WOULDN'T HAVE VOTERS!!! They would just hand it to the guy with the best PER.

What makes a guy an MVP is a great number of things. Does he make the players around him better (this is what Nash did, and Bird and Magic and Stockton and Duncan and CP3). Does he know how to motivate the players around him? Kidd was amazing at this. Kobe as well. CP3 as well. This DOES NOT SHOW UP IN THE STAT SHEET!!!!! But these are factors.

In 2005/2006 Sam Cassell ended up on the Clippers. That year they posted their best record ever (as far as I can remember at least) and for the first time EVER got into the second round of the playoffs. They guys on the team credited Cassell with the turn around. They said that in practice when the coach would call a break, Cassell would stay on the court and work on his shot or plays. Then other guys started doing the same and those breaks eventually turned into more practice. Cassell lead by example and motivated his teammates to take the game more seriously. The result? The most successful season in the history of the franchise. If you look at Cassell's numbers that year, they were good. But they weren't his best numbers ever. He didn't make an All-Star team, but in my book, the impact on his team was as valuable as any player in the league that year. He lead that team on and off the court. He motivated his teammates. He lead by example. And that team had the most successful season in the history of the franchise that season. If I was voting for the MVP that year, Sam Cassell would have been in my top-five for MVP. He wasn't even the best player on his team. He wasn't the best player at his position. He was a borderline All-Star player with a lot of experience on championship teams and teams that had deep playoff runs and he brought those lessons to the team and taught the guys how to win. That is VALUABLE. If you cannot see that the game goes beyond stats, then you frankly do not know the game. Period.

Do stats matter? Yes. But you do not base the MVP award strictly on stats. If you did, you would not need voters. Just a formula you plug into a computer.

We have voters because that is how America is ran.

If Sam Cassell had won MVP this would be the most bogus award in all of sports.

hugepatsfan
05-07-2013, 12:56 PM
MVP = best player in the league

I hate when someone says, "Well, this guy was more important to his team." It's ****ing stupid on so many levels. The best player in the league is the most valuable to his team. So essentially this moron didn't vote for LeBron because he's not on the Knicks.

That's a blanket statement that isn't always true. I agree that the MVP should go to the best player because it's an individual award but if you take the words "Most Valuable Player" literally it opens the door for other players. I think it's definitely true that the Knicks drop off more without Melo than the Heat do without Lebron.

JasonJohnHorn
05-07-2013, 12:59 PM
I don't understand why some people don't understand a simple concept. MVP is a league wide award! The most valuable player in the league is LeBron James! Carmelo certainly has a claim to the "most more valuable than any other player on his team" award. That is, the difference in value between Carmelo and the next most valuable player on his team is probably the biggest such gap in the league. That doesn't make him the most valuable player in the league though. I hate the "MVP = star player with the worst supporting cast argument". If that's really your argument, than James Harden should have been MVP, because the Rockets were a 25 win team without him.

Really? I didn't know that. Now this is completely cleared up. All I need from you is a link from NBA.com explaining that YOUR definition of what an MVP is, also happens to be the one they define in the voting process. Oh, wait. That doesn't exist.

This is not a "Who is most valuable to the league" award. If it was it would be between LBJ and Kobe. They sell the most merchandise and get the most ratings. They are the most important players to the league. Also, if this was the case, the award would be based on ratings and jersey sales and you might as well let the fans vote.

The NBA does not define "MVP". They let the voters define it themselves. Is it the most valuable player to the league? Or in the league? When a player steps onto the court, his concern is not "What can I do for the league today?" It is "How can I help my team win?" The guy who is most important to his team's success, in my book, is the most valuable player in the league. Is this the only way to define MVP? No. It isn't. I can recognize that there is more than one way to define "MVP", why can't you?

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 12:59 PM
You are projecting your own interpretation onto the voters. There were people who claimed Nash wasn't even the best player on his team! His MVPs were extremely controversial because he was not the best player in the league. He was a weak defender. He had two aspects to his game: he was a great play maker and a great shooter. But people recognized that he was important to his team's success and they voted for him because they thought he was the most "valuable" not the "best". Valuable and best do not have the same definition.

I said it's not based entirely on stats. You said:


It is based on a number of things. If this was a "stats" award, they WOULDN'T HAVE VOTERS!!! They would just hand it to the guy with the best PER.

What makes a guy an MVP is a great number of things. Does he make the players around him better (this is what Nash did, and Bird and Magic and Stockton and Duncan and CP3). Does he know how to motivate the players around him? Kidd was amazing at this. Kobe as well. CP3 as well. This DOES NOT SHOW UP IN THE STAT SHEET!!!!! But these are factors.

In 2005/2006 Sam Cassell ended up on the Clippers. That year they posted their best record ever (as far as I can remember at least) and for the first time EVER got into the second round of the playoffs. They guys on the team credited Cassell with the turn around. They said that in practice when the coach would call a break, Cassell would stay on the court and work on his shot or plays. Then other guys started doing the same and those breaks eventually turned into more practice. Cassell lead by example and motivated his teammates to take the game more seriously. The result? The most successful season in the history of the franchise. If you look at Cassell's numbers that year, they were good. But they weren't his best numbers ever. He didn't make an All-Star team, but in my book, the impact on his team was as valuable as any player in the league that year. He lead that team on and off the court. He motivated his teammates. He lead by example. And that team had the most successful season in the history of the franchise that season. If I was voting for the MVP that year, Sam Cassell would have been in my top-five for MVP. He wasn't even the best player on his team. He wasn't the best player at his position. He was a borderline All-Star player with a lot of experience on championship teams and teams that had deep playoff runs and he brought those lessons to the team and taught the guys how to win. That is VALUABLE. If you cannot see that the game goes beyond stats, then you frankly do not know the game. Period.

Do stats matter? Yes. But you do not base the MVP award strictly on stats. If you did, you would not need voters. Just a formula you plug into a computer.

1. Yes, the Nash MVP was controversial. Did I think he deserved the award? No, but a lot of people generally thought he was the best player in the league at that time.

2. You talk about stuff that doesn't show up on the stat sheet and I agree that it exists, however, you still look at the stat sheet! Everyone that votes on this crap looks at the stat sheet!

JasonJohnHorn
05-07-2013, 01:02 PM
Can I actually get one person in here to at least agree that there is more than one way to define what "MVP" means. Or one person that agree that the award is not based strictly on personal stats. Once that is accepted, then we can all agree that there is room for interpretation and that there is no answer that is quantifiable correct. Anybody who can acknowledge that is frankly an idiot who doesn't understand how to reason.

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 01:02 PM
Really? I didn't know that. Now this is completely cleared up. All I need from you is a link from NBA.com explaining that YOUR definition of what an MVP is, also happens to be the one they define in the voting process. Oh, wait. That doesn't exist.

This is not a "Who is most valuable to the league" award. If it was it would be between LBJ and Kobe. They sell the most merchandise and get the most ratings. They are the most important players to the league. Also, if this was the case, the award would be based on ratings and jersey sales and you might as well let the fans vote.

The NBA does not define "MVP". They let the voters define it themselves. Is it the most valuable player to the league? Or in the league? When a player steps onto the court, his concern is not "What can I do for the league today?" It is "How can I help my team win?" The guy who is most important to his team's success, in my book, is the most valuable player in the league. Is this the only way to define MVP? No. It isn't. I can recognize that there is more than one way to define "MVP", why can't you?

You really believe Melo has more value than Lebron?

KnickaBocka.44
05-07-2013, 01:02 PM
It's pretty damn easy to see that LeBron is a more valuable player when watching the games. When I watch Melo I see a great offensive player that shoots too much. When I watch LeBron I see a great offensive player that backs it up with superior defense.


No one is denying that Lebron is the better player. He is the best basketball player in the world. But how do you see value when you watch him play? You don't, it's impossible.


Value cannot be seen or quantified, it's understood and varies from person to person or team to team. An item at the store might have a greater value to me than it does to you for one of a number of different reasons. Rarity, however, is always a very critical factor in determining value.


Just like when any other market becomes saturated with a product, the product loses some of it's value. The Heat's team is saturated with talent, which brings the value of Lebron's talent down.

It doesn't make him less talented, and it doesn't mean he isn't the best player. Did anyone think Rose was a better player than Lebron when Rose won his MVP? No.

ChiTownPacerFan
05-07-2013, 01:03 PM
That's a blanket statement that isn't always true. I agree that the MVP should go to the best player because it's an individual award but if you take the words "Most Valuable Player" literally it opens the door for other players. I think it's definitely true that the Knicks drop off more without Melo than the Heat do without Lebron.

Not if you define valuable correctly.


valuable

val·u·a·ble
[val-yoo-uh-buhl, -yuh-buhl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
having considerable monetary worth; costing or bringing a high price: a valuable painting; a valuable crop.

If anyone wants to argue that, without a salary cap, any player would bring a higher price than LeBron, then I'll consider someone else more valuable.

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 01:05 PM
Can I actually get one person in here to at least agree that there is more than one way to define what "MVP" means. Or one person that agree that the award is not based strictly on personal stats. Once that is accepted, then we can all agree that there is room for interpretation and that there is no answer that is quantifiable correct. Anybody who can acknowledge that is frankly an idiot who doesn't understand how to reason.

Of course there are other ways to determine value, but the far most important thing is how good the player is and what he does on the court. Which translates to wins. That is what the most valuable player is, the person that can give any team in the NBA the most amount of wins.

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 01:05 PM
No one is denying that Lebron is the better player. He is the best basketball player in the world. But how do you see value when you watch him play? You don't, it's impossible.


Value cannot be seen or quantified, it's understood and varies from person to person or team to team. An item at the store might have a greater value to me than it does to you for one of a number of different reasons. Rarity, however, is always a very critical factor in determining value.


Just like when any other market becomes saturated with a product, the product loses some of it's value. The Heat's team is saturated with talent, which brings the value of Lebron's talent down.

It doesn't make him less talented, and it doesn't mean he isn't the best player. Did anyone think Rose was a better player than Lebron when Rose won his MVP? No.

Dude, stop typing.

atl_braves_fan
05-07-2013, 01:07 PM
That's a blanket statement that isn't always true. I agree that the MVP should go to the best player because it's an individual award but if you take the words "Most Valuable Player" literally it opens the door for other players. I think it's definitely true that the Knicks drop off more without Melo than the Heat do without Lebron.

How do you suppose the Knicks would do with Lebron instead of Carmelo? I would be willing to bet you think they would be better ... why do you think that is?

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 01:07 PM
No one is denying that Lebron is the better player. He is the best basketball player in the world. But how do you see value when you watch him play? You don't, it's impossible.


Value cannot be seen or quantified, it's understood and varies from person to person or team to team. An item at the store might have a greater value to me than it does to you for one of a number of different reasons. Rarity, however, is always a very critical factor in determining value.


Just like when any other market becomes saturated with a product, the product loses some of it's value. The Heat's team is saturated with talent, which brings the value of Lebron's talent down.

It doesn't make him less talented, and it doesn't mean he isn't the best player. Did anyone think Rose was a better player than Lebron when Rose won his MVP? No.

We can't put an exact number but we know what it is. A basketball players value is what he does on the court to help the team win. Shooting, rebounding, passing, defense, etc. The guy that brings the most value IS the most valuable player. That's why the best player is the MVP. It's the same damn thing.

FYL_McVeezy
05-07-2013, 01:09 PM
lots of opinions on what an MVP is....

the easiest answer is...the best player on the best team in the league....but it doesn't always go this way....

2013 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league
2012 Bron was the best player in the league...but not on the best team (OKC had a better record)
2011 DRose was the best player on the best team in the league (Chi was the #1 seed that season)
2010 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league (Cle was the #1 seed throughout the playoffs)
2009 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league (Cle was the #1 seed throughout the playoffs)
2008 Kobe was the best player but not on the best team (LA had the #1 seed, but Boston won 9 more games then LA)
2007 Dirk was the best player on the best team in the league (Dal had the #1 seed that season)

Notice the pattern here? NBA MVP =/= the best player in the league.....Rose was not the best player in the league when he won, neither was Dirk....usually your team has to finish 1st in the conference to win it....there have been plenty of times Kobe or Shaq or Jordan's teams didn't finish 1st and they didn't win the award....but those 3 players were the best players in the league in those respective times....

so let's kill that noise about MVP = best player in the league....it simply isn't true..

Lakers Ghost
05-07-2013, 01:11 PM
That's a blanket statement that isn't always true. I agree that the MVP should go to the best player because it's an individual award but if you take the words "Most Valuable Player" literally it opens the door for other players. I think it's definitely true that the Knicks drop off more without Melo than the Heat do without Lebron.

Agree with you there. Yes james is a very good player but the Heat can and did win when he was injure or out. without Anthony the knicks probably wouldnt win as much because he is the only star in their team. :cool:

atl_braves_fan
05-07-2013, 01:12 PM
lots of opinions on what an MVP is....

the easiest answer is...the best player on the best team in the league....but it doesn't always go this way....

2013 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league
2012 Bron was the best player in the league...but not on the best team (OKC had a better record)
2011 DRose was the best player on the best team in the league (Chi was the #1 seed that season)
2010 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league (Cle was the #1 seed throughout the playoffs)
2009 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league (Cle was the #1 seed throughout the playoffs)
2008 Kobe was the best player but not on the best team (LA had the #1 seed, but Boston won 9 more games then LA)
2007 Dirk was the best player on the best team in the league (Dal had the #1 seed that season)

Notice the pattern here? NBA MVP =/= the best player in the league.....Rose was not the best player in the league when he won, neither was Dirk....usually your team has to finish 1st in the conference to win it....there have been plenty of times Kobe or Shaq or Jordan's teams didn't finish 1st and they didn't win the award....but those 3 players were the best players in the league in those respective times....

so let's kill that noise about MVP = best player in the league....it simply isn't true..

You are correct - sportswriters vote on the award and they are often wrong.

By definition, the player that creates the most value (i.e. the Most Valuable Player) is the best player. If you can explain how an inferior player creates more value than a superior player, I would love to hear it.

JasonJohnHorn
05-07-2013, 01:13 PM
You really believe Melo has more value than Lebron?

No. I don't.

But firstly, let's talk about "more value" and "most valuable". LBJ has "more value" than Melo because he is the better player. But the question is: Is Melo more valuable to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat. This is about context. The reason Kobe and Shaq only have two awards between them is because neither was as valuable to the Lakers as other players were to their teams because they had two MVPs on the team. Take one away and that team is still great. LBJ is BETTER than Melo. YES. But Melo doesn't have two All-Stars on his team with him like Wade and Bosh. So anybody who suggests that Melo is more valuable to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat has an case.

That said. Here is how my MVP voting would have gone:
1. CP3
2. LBJ
3. Durant
4. I don't care.
5. I don't care.

I'm not even a Melo fan. This is not about argueing that Melo is the MVP, it is about recognizing that there is more than one way to define MVP and that there are arguments for a number of players. There is a case to be made for Curry. Melo. Durant. CP3. Harden.

I would have went with CP3. The Clippers would have been a lottery team without him, likely in the bottom 10 of the league. CP3 makes players better. He motivates players. And he's got great stats. LBJ is a better player than CP3, but you take LBJ away from the Heat and CP3 away from the Clippers, the Clipper will face a greater decline. CP3's impact goes beyond stats. There is a reason this team had a 20-game turnaround after trading several key pieces for CP3 (pieces that included an former All-star center and all-star calibre guard). The Clippers gave up some important pieces to get CP3 and he helped them to a 20 game turnaround and back-to-back playoff appearances, their first division title EVER. CP3 has worked wonders in LAC. He's got my vote.

I'm not arguing for Melo. I'm arguing that there is more than one way to interpret the information and anybody who cant' recognize that is a fool.

I don't agree with the guy who voted for Melo, but I recognize that he has a case. It could be argued that Melo is more important to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat, and that is the basis of his vote. Of the guys in the top five for the MVP voting, Melo is the only one who didn't have a fellow All-Star on is team this season. There is something to be said for that.

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 01:16 PM
lots of opinions on what an MVP is....

the easiest answer is...the best player on the best team in the league....but it doesn't always go this way....

2013 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league
2012 Bron was the best player in the league...but not on the best team (OKC had a better record)
2011 DRose was the best player on the best team in the league (Chi was the #1 seed that season)
2010 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league (Cle was the #1 seed throughout the playoffs)
2009 Bron was the best player on the best team in the league (Cle was the #1 seed throughout the playoffs)
2008 Kobe was the best player but not on the best team (LA had the #1 seed, but Boston won 9 more games then LA)
2007 Dirk was the best player on the best team in the league (Dal had the #1 seed that season)

Notice the pattern here? NBA MVP =/= the best player in the league.....Rose was not the best player in the league when he won, neither was Dirk....usually your team has to finish 1st in the conference to win it....there have been plenty of times Kobe or Shaq or Jordan's teams didn't finish 1st and they didn't win the award....but those 3 players were the best players in the league in those respective times....

so let's kill that noise about MVP = best player in the league....it simply isn't true..

DRose shouldn't have won it and neither should have Kobe. We all know the MVP award needs fixing. Shaq only winning one is a complete joke. So what's your point?

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 01:17 PM
No. I don't.

But firstly, let's talk about "more value" and "most valuable". LBJ has "more value" than Melo because he is the better player. But the question is: Is Melo more valuable to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat. This is about context. The reason Kobe and Shaq only have two awards between them is because neither was as valuable to the Lakers as other players were to their teams because they had two MVPs on the team. Take one away and that team is still great. LBJ is BETTER than Melo. YES. But Melo doesn't have two All-Stars on his team with him like Wade and Bosh. So anybody who suggests that Melo is more valuable to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat has an case.

That said. Here is how my MVP voting would have gone:
1. CP3
2. LBJ
3. Durant
4. I don't care.
5. I don't care.

I'm not even a Melo fan. This is not about argueing that Melo is the MVP, it is about recognizing that there is more than one way to define MVP and that there are arguments for a number of players. There is a case to be made for Curry. Melo. Durant. CP3. Harden.

I would have went with CP3. The Clippers would have been a lottery team without him, likely in the bottom 10 of the league. CP3 makes players better. He motivates players. And he's got great stats. LBJ is a better player than CP3, but you take LBJ away from the Heat and CP3 away from the Clippers, the Clipper will face a greater decline. CP3's impact goes beyond stats. There is a reason this team had a 20-game turnaround after trading several key pieces for CP3 (pieces that included an former All-star center and all-star calibre guard). The Clippers gave up some important pieces to get CP3 and he helped them to a 20 game turnaround and back-to-back playoff appearances, their first division title EVER. CP3 has worked wonders in LAC. He's got my vote.

I'm not arguing for Melo. I'm arguing that there is more than one way to interpret the information and anybody who cant' recognize that is a fool.

I don't agree with the guy who voted for Melo, but I recognize that he has a case. It could be argued that Melo is more important to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat, and that is the basis of his vote. Of the guys in the top five for the MVP voting, Melo is the only one who didn't have a fellow All-Star on is team this season. There is something to be said for that.

It's the most valuable player of THE LEAGUE guy, not Most Valuable Player to their team.

fingerbang
05-07-2013, 01:18 PM
No. I don't.

But firstly, let's talk about "more value" and "most valuable". LBJ has "more value" than Melo because he is the better player. But the question is: Is Melo more valuable to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat. This is about context. The reason Kobe and Shaq only have two awards between them is because neither was as valuable to the Lakers as other players were to their teams because they had two MVPs on the team. Take one away and that team is still great. LBJ is BETTER than Melo. YES. But Melo doesn't have two All-Stars on his team with him like Wade and Bosh. So anybody who suggests that Melo is more valuable to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat has an case.

That said. Here is how my MVP voting would have gone:
1. CP3
2. LBJ
3. Durant
4. I don't care.
5. I don't care.

I'm not even a Melo fan. This is not about argueing that Melo is the MVP, it is about recognizing that there is more than one way to define MVP and that there are arguments for a number of players. There is a case to be made for Curry. Melo. Durant. CP3. Harden.

I would have went with CP3. The Clippers would have been a lottery team without him, likely in the bottom 10 of the league. CP3 makes players better. He motivates players. And he's got great stats. LBJ is a better player than CP3, but you take LBJ away from the Heat and CP3 away from the Clippers, the Clipper will face a greater decline. CP3's impact goes beyond stats. There is a reason this team had a 20-game turnaround after trading several key pieces for CP3 (pieces that included an former All-star center and all-star calibre guard). The Clippers gave up some important pieces to get CP3 and he helped them to a 20 game turnaround and back-to-back playoff appearances, their first division title EVER. CP3 has worked wonders in LAC. He's got my vote.

I'm not arguing for Melo. I'm arguing that there is more than one way to interpret the information and anybody who cant' recognize that is a fool.

I don't agree with the guy who voted for Melo, but I recognize that he has a case. It could be argued that Melo is more important to the Knicks than LBJ is to the Heat, and that is the basis of his vote. Of the guys in the top five for the MVP voting, Melo is the only one who didn't have a fellow All-Star on is team this season. There is something to be said for that.


No

FYL_McVeezy
05-07-2013, 01:22 PM
You are correct - sportswriters vote on the award and they are often wrong.

By definition, the player that creates the most value (i.e. the Most Valuable Player) is the best player. If you can explain how an inferior player creates more value than a superior player, I would love to hear it.

like I said...VALUABLE =/= BEST!

and this isn't necessarliy my opinion...The debate is why Melo got a vote for MVP....the answer is because the voter felt that Melo was the most VALUABLE to his team....I don't agree with this and the MVP went to the right person...but I'm tired of the whole "MVP is the best player in the league and that's the end of it"....if that was the case the only player who would have won the MVP since 1991 would be MJ, Olajuwon, Shaq, Kobe, then Lebron.....

Things change from year to year...you need to be evaluated for that current year, not off of reputation....If you are the best player on the team with the best record in the league....you should have a good shot at winning the award....

atl_braves_fan
05-07-2013, 01:22 PM
I'm not even a Melo fan. This is not about argueing that Melo is the MVP, it is about recognizing that there is more than one way to define MVP and that there are arguments for a number of players. There is a case to be made for Curry. Melo. Durant. CP3. Harden.



Of course there are a bunch of ways to define who is the MVP, but all of them revolve around who objectively produces the most value. If you can find a way to tell me who produces more objective value than the best player in the league, I am all ears.

FYL_McVeezy
05-07-2013, 01:26 PM
DRose shouldn't have won it and neither should have Kobe. We all know the MVP award needs fixing. Shaq only winning one is a complete joke. So what's your point?

your opinion....the sportswriters obviously think otherwise....

valuable =/= best.....

hugepatsfan
05-07-2013, 01:26 PM
How do you suppose the Knicks would do with Lebron instead of Carmelo? I would be willing to bet you think they would be better ... why do you think that is?

Because Lebron is better. That's not the point. Lebron plays on the Heat, Melo on the Knicks. So there is one school of though that to determine who brings more value to the team you project what each team would be without their respective star. Without Lebron, the Heat are probably still a strong playoff team in the East. Not the odds on prohibitive favorite for the title, but still a strong contender to come out of the East. Without Melo, the Knicks probably go back to being a bottom of the barrel lottery team.

Personally, I think that's a slippery slope to go down. I prefer to just vote based on best player for the season because there's too much subjective projections in determining what teams would be without a certain guy but there is an argument to be made for most valuable to their team =/= being the best player in the league. In real life, that's exactly how things are. I just think there's no good way to quantify it since it's all based on hypothetical so the vote should just go for best.

atl_braves_fan
05-07-2013, 01:28 PM
like I said...VALUABLE =/= BEST!

and this isn't necessarliy my opinion...The debate is why Melo got a vote for MVP....the answer is because the voter felt that Melo was the most VALUABLE to his team....I don't agree with this and the MVP went to the right person...but I'm tired of the whole "MVP is the best player in the league and that's the end of it"....if that was the case the only player who would have won the MVP since 1991 would be MJ, Olajuwon, Shaq, Kobe, then Lebron.....

Things change from year to year...you need to be evaluated for that current year, not off of reputation....If you are the best player on the team with the best record in the league....you should have a good shot at winning the award....

Please explain to me how anyone other than the best player could possibly be the most valuable (i.e. don't just restate your flawed conclusion, actually try to work your way through an objective explanation - I would like to hear it).

There are, of course, multiple methods of defining who is the best player in the league, but the only defensible position is that the best player and the most valuable player are the same person.

atl_braves_fan
05-07-2013, 01:30 PM
Because Lebron is better. That's not the point. Lebron plays on the Heat, Melo on the Knicks. So there is one school of though that to determine who brings more value to the team you project what each team would be without their respective star. Without Lebron, the Heat are probably still a strong playoff team in the East. Not the odds on prohibitive favorite for the title, but still a strong contender to come out of the East. Without Melo, the Knicks probably go back to being a bottom of the barrel lottery team.

Personally, I think that's a slippery slope to go down. I prefer to just vote based on best player for the season because there's too much subjective projections in determining what teams would be without a certain guy but there is an argument to be made for most valuable to their team =/= being the best player in the league. In real life, that's exactly how things are. I just think there's no good way to quantify it since it's all based on hypothetical so the vote should just go for best.

There are lots of incorrect arguments to be made ... it is a free country. That doesn't mean that all arguments have the same merit (or any merit at all, for that matter).

KnickaBocka.44
05-07-2013, 01:32 PM
Dude, stop typing.

Why? Because what I say actually makes sense? Or is it because that is the way the world actually works outside of basketball?

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 01:33 PM
your opinion....the sportswriters obviously think otherwise....

valuable =/= best.....

A sportswriter also voted for Carmelo Anthony this year when Lebron put up one of the best MVP seasons ever. Valuable = Brings the most wins to a team. You really think Lebron couldn't have given the Knicks more wins than Melo?

hugepatsfan
05-07-2013, 01:34 PM
Not if you define valuable correctly.


valuable

val·u·a·ble
[val-yoo-uh-buhl, -yuh-buhl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
having considerable monetary worth; costing or bringing a high price: a valuable painting; a valuable crop.

If anyone wants to argue that, without a salary cap, any player would bring a higher price than LeBron, then I'll consider someone else more valuable.

Valuable is also defined by that same source as "having qualities worthy of respect, admiration, or esteem." I think Jason Collins demonstrated great qualities in coming out. Is he an MVP candidate?

Moral of the story... stop using blanket statements and definitions and look at the words in the basketball context their being used in. There is a legitimate argument to be made for value being defined as what you add to the team vs. what they would be without you. The best player in the world on a loaded team isn't adding as much extra wins compared to a lesser player but on a worse team. That's common sense. The issue is that the process becomes completely subjective at that point. By that logic CP3, Durant and probably others are more valuable than Lebron. That's why I think the standards should uniformly be to vote for the best individual player, but since that isn't the case a reasonable argument can be made for guy like Melo over Lebron in these situations.

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 01:34 PM
Why? Because what I say actually makes sense? Or is it because that is the way the world actually works outside of basketball?

You're arguing that Carmelo Anthony should have gotten that MVP vote, how does that make sense?

pedrofan45
05-07-2013, 01:35 PM
Valuable is also defined by that same source as "having qualities worthy of respect, admiration, or esteem." I think Jason Collins demonstrated great qualities in coming out. Is he an MVP candidate?

Moral of the story... stop using blanket statements and definitions and look at the words in the basketball context their being used in. There is a legitimate argument to be made for value being defined as what you add to the team vs. what they would be without you. The best player in the world on a loaded team isn't adding as much extra wins compared to a lesser player but on a worse team. That's common sense. The issue is that the process becomes completely subjective at that point. By that logic CP3, Durant and probably others are more valuable than Lebron. That's why I think the standards should uniformly be to vote for the best individual player, but since that isn't the case a reasonable argument can be made for guy like Melo over Lebron in these situations.

This is why the MVP of the NBA is bogus.

Hawkeye15
05-07-2013, 01:36 PM
so let me get this straight. Some believe that a top level player whose front office didn't give him as much help as another, better top level player should be considered more valuable?

FYL_McVeezy
05-07-2013, 01:37 PM
Please explain to me how anyone other than the best player could possibly be the most valuable (i.e. don't just restate your flawed conclusion, actually try to work your way through an objective explanation - I would like to hear it).

There are, of course, multiple methods of defining who is the best player in the league, but the only defensible position is that the best player and the most valuable player are the same person.

I honestly don't owe you a long drawn out explanation on a topic I really don't care too much about...but I will just pose this question

Should Kobe have won the MVP award in 05-06 when he was clearly the best player in the league but his team barely made the playoffs?

According to your logic he should have....there are plenty of similar cases but I don't have the time and I don't care enough to find them.....

KnickaBocka.44
05-07-2013, 01:38 PM
You're arguing that Carmelo Anthony should have gotten that MVP vote, how does that make sense?

You assume that I'm arguing that because of my user name, but that is not my argument.

KnickaBocka.44
05-07-2013, 01:39 PM
so let me get this straight. Some believe that a top level player whose front office didn't give him as much help as another, better top level player should be considered more valuable?

It's not like he was there and then all of the help came. Lebron chose to go to Miami so I don't care if it's not fair to him.

atl_braves_fan
05-07-2013, 01:39 PM
Valuable is also defined by that same source as "having qualities worthy of respect, admiration, or esteem." I think Jason Collins demonstrated great qualities in coming out. Is he an MVP candidate?

Moral of the story... stop using blanket statements and definitions and look at the words in the basketball context their being used in. There is a legitimate argument to be made for value being defined as what you add to the team vs. what they would be without you. The best player in the world on a loaded team isn't adding as much extra wins compared to a lesser player but on a worse team. That's common sense. The issue is that the process becomes completely subjective at that point. By that logic CP3, Durant and probably others are more valuable than Lebron. That's why I think the standards should uniformly be to vote for the best individual player, but since that isn't the case a reasonable argument can be made for guy like Melo over Lebron in these situations.

The point is that the best player in the world would add more to any team than the second best player in the world (or 6th or 7th best player in the world in the case of Melo) would add to that same team.