PDA

View Full Version : 2015-16 Kia MVP Results: Who got snubbed?



JasonJohnHorn
05-11-2016, 07:42 AM
2015-16 Kia MVP Results:
Player, Team, Total Points

Stephen Curry, Golden State, 1,310
Kawhi Leonard, San Antonio, 634
LeBron James, Cleveland, 631
Russell Westbrook, Oklahoma City, 486
Kevin Durant, Oklahoma City, 147
Chris Paul, L.A. Clippers, 107
Draymond Green, Golden State, 50
Damian Lillard, Portland, 26
James Harden, Houston, 9
Kyle Lowry, Toronto, 6


I'm cool with Leonard finishing second, though my first place vote would have went to LBJ because I'm a firm believer that 'MVP' means 'most valuable' and not 'the best'. Curry was the best, but as the first two rounds have shown, Curry is on a deep amazing team, and though the best, may not be the 'most valuable' (as demonstrated by the fact that teammate Draymond Green - who led the team in rebounds and assists) also finished in the top ten.

No issue with Curry winning, though... totally deserving.

However, I was bummed to see Chris Paul get so few votes. I thought he was a top-3/4 candidate for sure. I would have voted LBJ, CP3, and Curry, in that order. What players were ranked lower or didn't get a vote that you thought should have made it onto the ballot? Or made it higher on the ballot?

Thoughts?


EDIT: People who have responded so far seem to be of the mind that this thread is questioning whether somebody else should have gotten MVP. It is not. It's questioning the voting process and where other players ranked in that voting process. For example, should Lowry have ranked higher? Or not at all? Should CP3 have gotten a higher ranking? Or Draymond? Or LBJ? It's not meant to question whether Curry was deserving: obviously he was. It's meant to look at other guys on the list and how they were ranked, or guys who didn't even make it on the list that you might have thought deserved mention.

ghettosean
05-11-2016, 07:59 AM
To me it's pretty much impossible to say anyone got snubbed with Steph Curry being the best player in the NBA and also being part of making history in multiple ways (so far) this season and post season.

In my opinion they got it right.

Raidaz4Life
05-11-2016, 08:03 AM
Not sure how you can argue Lebron was more valuable after Curry had arguably the greatest season of all time

Jetsguy
05-11-2016, 08:16 AM
you're overthinking the award and its meaning if you think anyone but Steph deserved it honestly.

lakerfan85
05-11-2016, 08:27 AM
Snubbed? Dude you make some of the most pointless threads.. Nobody got snubbed.. Curry had one of the greatest seasons in the history of the NBA!! As far as the rest of the players go, who cares how many votes they got and where they finished..

JasonJohnHorn
05-11-2016, 09:28 AM
Snubbed? Dude you make some of the most pointless threads.. Nobody got snubbed.. Curry had one of the greatest seasons in the history of the NBA!! As far as the rest of the players go, who cares how many votes they got and where they finished..

The 'snubbed' didn't mean 'didn't win', it meant in the context of the list of people who got votes. So CP3 finishes 6th seems like a snub to mean, because the Clippers were without Blake most of the season and still finished in the top four in the West. CP3 was hugely valuable to his team, as demonstrated by how easily they got demolished when he went out with injury.

I'm not putting an argument forward that Curry wasn't deserving, I'm talking about the rest of the voting.

Read what the question is before responding, and if you think a thread is pointless, then don't bother responding. If you have something to add, fine. If not.... move along.

Tony_Starks
05-11-2016, 09:39 AM
What unscrupulous person voted for the Kyle Lowrys and James Hardens of the world?

Scoots
05-11-2016, 09:52 AM
Why do people talk like the Cavs have no talent outside of LeBron?

ghettosean
05-11-2016, 11:17 AM
Why do people talk like the Cavs have no talent outside of LeBron?

I'm so sick of talking about it I took a break from the "What if Kyrie and Love have a great finals" thread.

To answer your question I believe it's Lebron apologists making excuses for him just in case he loses in the finals so they can claim he doesn't have enough help or talent.

Vee-Rex
05-11-2016, 11:19 AM
Why do people talk like the Cavs have no talent outside of LeBron?

Cavs are 4-14 without LeBron in the past 2 seasons.

The team would obviously play better if they game-planned for it but it still suggests that he's the ultimate cog. Kyrie/Love are good individual talents, but their impact on the team doesn't translate to wins as well as one would expect.

In the truest definition of "valuable", I would give it to LeBron. But still, for years the term "MVP" in the NBA was usually given to the best player on the best team, or the 'player of the year' who is having the best year on a winning team.

Regardless, I have no issue with Curry winning it for the 2nd year straight. He deserves it for sure.

HandsOnTheWheel
05-11-2016, 11:24 AM
Why do people talk like the Cavs have no talent outside of LeBron?

They really don't. Take Lebron off this team and all the spacing, double teams, and assists he brings/commands are gone and I'm no Lebron fan either. That team is simply a joke without him.

lakerfan85
05-11-2016, 12:06 PM
The 'snubbed' didn't mean 'didn't win', it meant in the context of the list of people who got votes. So CP3 finishes 6th seems like a snub to mean, because the Clippers were without Blake most of the season and still finished in the top four in the West. CP3 was hugely valuable to his team, as demonstrated by how easily they got demolished when he went out with injury.

I'm not putting an argument forward that Curry wasn't deserving, I'm talking about the rest of the voting.

Read what the question is before responding, and if you think a thread is pointless, then don't bother responding. If you have something to add, fine. If not.... move along.

And maybe you should've read what I said about who finished where and how many votes they got.. I'm sure CP3 is upset about finishing sixth.. He's probably crying right now saying damn I finished sixth and I didn't even have Blake.. It doesn't really matter where you finish if you didn't win..

ghettosean
05-11-2016, 12:45 PM
Cavs are 4-14 without LeBron in the past 2 seasons.

The team would obviously play better if they game-planned for it but it still suggests that he's the ultimate cog. Kyrie/Love are good individual talents, but their impact on the team doesn't translate to wins as well as one would expect.

In the truest definition of "valuable", I would give it to LeBron. But still, for years the term "MVP" in the NBA was usually given to the best player on the best team, or the 'player of the year' who is having the best year on a winning team.

Regardless, I have no issue with Curry winning it for the 2nd year straight. He deserves it for sure.

If you are going by different criteria and I'm not sure how it still can't be Curry I'll just post what I put in another thread:


Chris Paul... Without him they are nothing IMO. If he was still in the line up it would be clippers vs Golden State right now and the series wouldn't be 3-1 for Golden State I can tell you that much.

SAS said it best... Lol... Without Chris Paul Deandre Jordan is Dikembe Mutombo!

Chronz
05-11-2016, 12:58 PM
Agreed OP, its hard to stomach 2 players on the same team being ranked above him but I guess thats just how much of a team game this is, its quite possible those 2 are both more valuable to their respective squads. CP3 had a great year and thats all I care about, I just hope next year he can rest going into the playoffs, not that it would've made a difference this year but its impossible for someone his size to carry this kind of load well into his 30's, I fear a quick decline if we dont get him on the Stockton regimen soon.

If Cleveland doesn't win it all this year, I would love to send him off so he can finally taste some deep playoff runs. We really dont deserve him

Wrigheyes4MVP
05-11-2016, 01:10 PM
MVP is not about being most valuable to his respective team (which would probably be Lebron). It's about being most valuable in the league, PERIOD. It's about raw value. Curry had a more valuable, productive season than Lebron. The fact that Lebron's team is less deep and relies more heavily on him is irrelevant. Curry was better and a more valuable player in the league. The MVP is about awarding the most valuable player in the league not the most valuable player to his specific team. It's an individual award. Lebron doesn't get to win the MVP because of the way his team was constructed. So I guess in a way it is about simply awarding the best player. But, it irks mean when people make that argument about what MVP means. Its never supposed to be about being more valuable to your specific team. Its about being more valuable in the league in general. It is a league wide MVP award, not just how well you do on your team and how your team's roster construction impacts your specific value to them. It is absolutely stupid to award a league MVP award based on that criteria.

Scoots
05-11-2016, 02:07 PM
It's like Most Improved isn't about most improved, it's really "breakout player". MVP means "best season".

Just out of curiosity I looked up their win shares (not that it is any kind of "answer") ... Curry is 18, LeBron is 14. If you took them away the Cavs would have had 43 wins and they'd have been on the cusp of making/missing the playoffs. The Warriors would have 55 wins and be the #2 seed in the West.

In total wins Curry was maybe more valuable. In a percentage of total wins the team achieved LeBron was more valuable.

It comes down to who had the best season on the best team by the biggest margin and it's Curry, but LeBron deserved to be high up in the voting ... and he was.

As far as the Cavs being a trash team ... LeBron's "supporting cast" has more talent than Curry's ... it's just that the Warriors make better use of the talent on the roster. The Cavs have a lot of talent, but they also have bad coaching and a system and team built around a singular player ... removing that player is going to make them look even worse than their talent.

Vee-Rex
05-11-2016, 02:35 PM
I've always been pretty open-minded on the MVP discussion. My vote would be Curry, but I'm cool with people that argue for Kawhi, LeBron, Durant, or even CP3.

Scoots
05-11-2016, 02:47 PM
I've always been pretty open-minded on the MVP discussion. My vote would be Curry, but I'm cool with people that argue for Kawhi, LeBron, Durant, or even CP3.

I agree. I'm confused with people who KNOW something as a FACT and there are no greys allowed.

aman_13
05-11-2016, 02:55 PM
What unscrupulous person voted for the Kyle Lowrys and James Hardens of the world?

Raptors had the 4th best record in the NBA. Lowry is a big reason why.

Bostonjorge
05-11-2016, 03:01 PM
Westbrook is the only guy that had anything close to a chance of stealing some 1st place votes. Broke Magics recored for triple doubles.

James was nothing close to being a MVP this year. Not even in the top 5 players this year. Playing on the best team in the east with or without James don't mean nothing.

numba1CHANGsta
05-11-2016, 05:12 PM
2015-16 Kia MVP Results:
Player, Team, Total Points

Stephen Curry, Golden State, 1,310
Kawhi Leonard, San Antonio, 634
LeBron James, Cleveland, 631
Russell Westbrook, Oklahoma City, 486
Kevin Durant, Oklahoma City, 147
Chris Paul, L.A. Clippers, 107
Draymond Green, Golden State, 50
Damian Lillard, Portland, 26
James Harden, Houston, 9
Kyle Lowry, Toronto, 6


I'm cool with Leonard finishing second, though my first place vote would have went to LBJ because I'm a firm believer that 'MVP' means 'most valuable' and not 'the best'. Curry was the best, but as the first two rounds have shown, Curry is on a deep amazing team, and though the best, may not be the 'most valuable' (as demonstrated by the fact that teammate Draymond Green - who led the team in rebounds and assists) also finished in the top ten.

No issue with Curry winning, though... totally deserving.

However, I was bummed to see Chris Paul get so few votes. I thought he was a top-3/4 candidate for sure. I would have voted LBJ, CP3, and Curry, in that order. What players were ranked lower or didn't get a vote that you thought should have made it onto the ballot? Or made it higher on the ballot?

Thoughts?


EDIT: People who have responded so far seem to be of the mind that this thread is questioning whether somebody else should have gotten MVP. It is not. It's questioning the voting process and where other players ranked in that voting process. For example, should Lowry have ranked higher? Or not at all? Should CP3 have gotten a higher ranking? Or Draymond? Or LBJ? It's not meant to question whether Curry was deserving: obviously he was. It's meant to look at other guys on the list and how they were ranked, or guys who didn't even make it on the list that you might have thought deserved mention.

So in total Western Conference players (8) totaled 2,769 MVP votes, and the Eastern Conference players (2) totaled 637 MVP points. Take LeBron out from the East and it's a 2,769 votes vs only 6 votes, and people say the East is better than the West LMAO man the East is a joke

Chronz
05-11-2016, 07:56 PM
It's like Most Improved isn't about most improved, it's really "breakout player". MVP means "best season".

Just out of curiosity I looked up their win shares (not that it is any kind of "answer") ... Curry is 18, LeBron is 14. If you took them away the Cavs would have had 43 wins and they'd have been on the cusp of making/missing the playoffs. The Warriors would have 55 wins and be the #2 seed in the West.

In total wins Curry was maybe more valuable. In a percentage of total wins the team achieved LeBron was more valuable.

It comes down to who had the best season on the best team by the biggest margin and it's Curry, but LeBron deserved to be high up in the voting ... and he was.

As far as the Cavs being a trash team ... LeBron's "supporting cast" has more talent than Curry's ... it's just that the Warriors make better use of the talent on the roster. The Cavs have a lot of talent, but they also have bad coaching and a system and team built around a singular player ... removing that player is going to make them look even worse than their talent.
Nah. Gs has the most talent, why do you guys keep trying to push this narrative after we've already seen how good they are without him?

Saddletramp
05-11-2016, 08:28 PM
Nah. Gs has the most talent, why do you guys keep trying to push this narrative after we've already seen how good they are without him?

Yeah, if it's a Warriors/Cavs Finals but Curry and Lebron both break their ankles right before the first game, who do you think would win the title? I'd bet my life savings on the Warriors.

blahblahyoutoo
05-11-2016, 09:06 PM
Curry was the best, but as the first two rounds have shown, Curry is on a deep amazing team, and though the best, may not be the 'most valuable' (as demonstrated by the fact that teammate Draymond Green - who led the team in rebounds and assists) also finished in the top ten.


1. they played against the rockets in rd 1
2. you also saw them lose gm 3 and almost lose gm 4 had it not been for his heroics.

JordansBulls
05-11-2016, 09:33 PM
They really don't. Take Lebron off this team and all the spacing, double teams, and assists he brings/commands are gone and I'm no Lebron fan either. That team is simply a joke without him.

They are a joke because anytime Lebron plays with stars as we have seen twice with guys in there primes they all of a sudden start to suck with him. Probably has to do with the way he plays and has the ball all the time. Can't put 2 other stars with Lebron that are first options and expect them to be dominate when they don't get the rock like they used to.

Raps08-09 Champ
05-11-2016, 09:42 PM
Curry, Leonard, Lebron for me so they got it right.

IBleedPurple
05-11-2016, 09:44 PM
Nah. Gs has the most talent, why do you guys keep trying to push this narrative after we've already seen how good they are without him?Boosting up Curry. Shocking.

5ass
05-11-2016, 10:03 PM
Andrew Nicholson.

Scoots
05-11-2016, 11:45 PM
Yeah, if it's a Warriors/Cavs Finals but Curry and Lebron both break their ankles right before the first game, who do you think would win the title? I'd bet my life savings on the Warriors.

I didn't say the Warriors were not a better team, I said the Cavs had more talent. The Warriors are better coached and better matched as a team. But the Cavs have more talent.

HandsOnTheWheel
05-12-2016, 12:14 AM
They are a joke because anytime Lebron plays with stars as we have seen twice with guys in there primes they all of a sudden start to suck with him. Probably has to do with the way he plays and has the ball all the time. Can't put 2 other stars with Lebron that are first options and expect them to be dominate when they don't get the rock like they used to.

The Lebron effect. Prime Wade was never the same after Lebron came and went.

raiderposting
05-12-2016, 12:27 AM
The only guys that hate curry are the ones that are salty that their significant other likes him. Insecure baby dick ******

IBleedPurple
05-12-2016, 12:42 AM
The only guys that hate curry are the ones that are salty that their significant other likes him. Insecure baby dick ******:laugh2: Curry could have that same baby syndrome for all we know, looks like it. Get off his D.

Saddletramp
05-12-2016, 02:20 AM
I didn't say the Warriors were not a better team, I said the Cavs had more talent. The Warriors are better coached and better matched as a team. But the Cavs have more talent.

All right. Let's say Curry and Lebron cancel each other out. Then we have Love and Irving versus Green and Thompson. Pretty sure the advantage on both of those is the Warriors players. Bogut versus Tristan T? Toss up (although TT is mainly just a rebounder while Bogut is a great passer)? JR Smith versus Barnes? Toss up? (Man, I hope the Warriors match whatever offers he gets. Toss up between him and JR is funny, especially since Barnes wants $20 million a year.) Iggy versus Shumpert? Iggy wins that. Delly and Livingston? Toss up but leaning Livingston. Ezeli and Mozgov? Ezeli, Mozgov rarely ever plays anymore. Speights versus Frye? Speights does well in spurts but Frye can go off. Barbosa over Jefferson. I don't think I'm missing anyone crucial.

It's pretty even but Curry just won a unanimous MVP, Klay has been touted as the best SG in the league while Irving is in a pack of good/great PGs and Green not only was in the top ten in MVP voting but also was the runner up to the DPOY the last two years (and averages close to a triple double) while Love can rebound and hit threes. The top three is a no contest among the people's general consensus.

basketfan4life
05-12-2016, 02:27 AM
Lebron deserving MVP this year means Lebron didn't deserve those 2 mvps he got in miami to me. That tem would won 55+ without lbj in the weak east.

People who say Steph shouldn't be mvp this year should realy stop watching NBA.He is the first freaking unanimous winner.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2016, 06:01 AM
If you are going by different criteria and I'm not sure how it still can't be Curry I'll just post what I put in another thread:


Chris Paul... Without him they are nothing IMO. If he was still in the line up it would be clippers vs Golden State right now and the series wouldn't be 3-1 for Golden State I can tell you that much.

SAS said it best... Lol... Without Chris Paul Deandre Jordan is Dikembe Mutombo!

I like everything there up until the point where SAS compares DaJ to Mutumbo. Love DaJ, but he ain't no Mutumbo. You put Mutumbo in his prime on the Clippers in place of DaJ, and they be winning 60 games every year and contending for the title.

Chronz
05-12-2016, 09:22 AM
Lebron deserving MVP this year means Lebron didn't deserve those 2 mvps he got in miami to me. That tem would won 55+ without lbj in the weak east.

People who say Steph shouldn't be mvp this year should realy stop watching NBA.He is the first freaking unanimous winner.
Dont worry, none of the criteria bars really back him as the favorite but you really think they win that much when they couldn't win that much even tho they upgraded several positions since he's been gone.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2016, 09:52 AM
MVP is not about being most valuable to his respective team (which would probably be Lebron). It's about being most valuable in the league, PERIOD. It's about raw value. Curry had a more valuable, productive season than Lebron. The fact that Lebron's team is less deep and relies more heavily on him is irrelevant. Curry was better and a more valuable player in the league. The MVP is about awarding the most valuable player in the league not the most valuable player to his specific team. It's an individual award. Lebron doesn't get to win the MVP because of the way his team was constructed. So I guess in a way it is about simply awarding the best player. But, it irks mean when people make that argument about what MVP means. Its never supposed to be about being more valuable to your specific team. Its about being more valuable in the league in general. It is a league wide MVP award, not just how well you do on your team and how your team's roster construction impacts your specific value to them. It is absolutely stupid to award a league MVP award based on that criteria.

That is a legitimate argument, but it is not the only legitimate argument. Different people have different criteria and different definitions about what 'MVP' means.

Let's say, for instance, that you are talking about the player who is most valuable to the league. Michael Jordan would have won it pretty much every year he played, because he was the league's highlight reel and brought their regular season ratings up to all time highs and generated more revenue than any other player. That makes him more valuable, regardless of his on-court production.

Likewise, Kobe would have likely strung together a number of MVPs because he was so popular, and Vince Carter likely could have pulled in one or two, as would Tracy McGrady. You see, when you say 'most valuable to the league', there are different ways to evaluate that.

Neither does 'league wide' exclude one's impact on their team. Which player 'league wide' was most valuable to his team?



You can define it however you like, and then make a case for MVP. That's fine. But you can't expect everybody to accept your definition when they have legitimate definitions that makes sense outside of your own.

There are a handful of guys whose teams would likely be in the lottery this year if not for them: LBJ, Lowry, and CP3. The Warriors are a deep team and play extremely well without Curry, but they are much better with him. Take him off the team, like taking Jordan off the Bulls, and that team still wins 55 games. Take LBJ, CP3, or Lowry off their respective teams this year, and I doubt if any of them make the playoffs.

Alternately, Curry is clearly the best player in the league, and has the biggest impact on the court. So there's an extremely strong and compelling argument for him. But this is not an objective debate. One must make allowances for other perspectives.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2016, 09:56 AM
Raptors had the 4th best record in the NBA. Lowry is a big reason why.

I'm biased, because I'm a Raptors fan, but I'm pretty sure the Raptors wouldn't even break .500 without Lowry this year.

People putting him in the top five is reasonable.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2016, 10:13 AM
Westbrook is the only guy that had anything close to a chance of stealing some 1st place votes. Broke Magics recored for triple doubles.

James was nothing close to being a MVP this year. Not even in the top 5 players this year. Playing on the best team in the east with or without James don't mean nothing.


Did he beat Oscar's record for triple-doubles? ;-)

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2016, 10:19 AM
Nah. Gs has the most talent, why do you guys keep trying to push this narrative after we've already seen how good they are without him?

Yeah.... there is no shame in being on a talented team.

The fact that Draymond is in the MVP voting and that they have Iggy as the reigning Finals MVP, and considering that Klay is an All-Star and was considered the second-best player on the team heading into the season, and that Barnes is considered a future All-Star and the Bogut and Iggy both have All-Star appearances under their belt is all indicative of a very talented team.

And there is a point of pride for Curry in helping bring these guys up to a level where they can play so well without him and that he has developed this culture of sharing the ball (which obviously Kerr has a lot to do with).



It's like Duncan, even though he's playing poorly this series, his impact on the culture of the team is huge. The fact you have a guy with such a huge resume, and he is not demanding the ball is an example to the other guys on the team of how important it is to share the ball and put the team first.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2016, 10:23 AM
1. they played against the rockets in rd 1
2. you also saw them lose gm 3 and almost lose gm 4 had it not been for his heroics.

The Rockets are a playoff team in the West, have a form DPOY and an MVP candidate, and made it to the conference finals last year, where the healthy Warriors needed five games to beat them, and a Warriors team without Curry won five straight games against them (if you consider the findings of the NBA's officiating report).

And the blew out the Trailblazers without Curry on the floor.

no need to discredit what that team did without Curry by saying the Rockets suck, or not give them credit for the wins they got against Portland without Curry. They were 2-1 against Portland without Curry.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2016, 10:25 AM
They are a joke because anytime Lebron plays with stars as we have seen twice with guys in there primes they all of a sudden start to suck with him. Probably has to do with the way he plays and has the ball all the time. Can't put 2 other stars with Lebron that are first options and expect them to be dominate when they don't get the rock like they used to.


I'm not one of these 'LBJ makes players better' guys, but he makes players better, and guys don't 'suck' with him. Wade and Bosh saw their averages go down, because they were sharing more, but their efficiency went up.


I'll concede that it hasn't been as good a transition with Love, but Love is currently undefeated in the playoffs, and he never even won a playoff game before LBJ. So there's that.

JasonJohnHorn
05-12-2016, 10:36 AM
The Lebron effect. Prime Wade was never the same after Lebron came and went.

And Bosh never had a blood clot before LeBron. Right?

Wade's decline is due to injuries and age. Wade's career FG% is .488, and he shot over that every year he played with LBJ, and had his highest FG%s with LBJ (all four season with LBJ were higher than any other season).

He also had his best rebounding number with LBJ. And his first year with LBJ, he had more than 2 assists for every turnover, which is higher than his career average of 1.7.

So... there's not case for saying LBJ was hurting his game, just his per-game averages. And the season before LBJ showed up, Wade had just posted his worst FG% since his rookie year. And one of his worst assist-to-turnover ratios.

LBJ help Wade get back to where he was, and helped him reach new heights in efficiency.

ewing
05-12-2016, 10:39 AM
Agreed OP, its hard to stomach 2 players on the same team being ranked above him but I guess thats just how much of a team game this is, its quite possible those 2 are both more valuable to their respective squads. CP3 had a great year and thats all I care about, I just hope next year he can rest going into the playoffs, not that it would've made a difference this year but its impossible for someone his size to carry this kind of load well into his 30's, I fear a quick decline if we dont get him on the Stockton regimen soon.

If Cleveland doesn't win it all this year, I would love to send him off so he can finally taste some deep playoff runs. We really dont deserve him


I thought you were a ****ing clippers fan you want to get rid of CP3?!? :confused:

raiderposting
05-12-2016, 02:34 PM
:laugh2: Curry could have that same baby syndrome for all we know, looks like it. Get off his D.

But he ain't insecure. Back 2 back MVPs and he got a keeper. He ain't tripping