PDA

View Full Version : MVP race by difference in wins to the team



Scoots
04-04-2017, 12:23 PM
http://nba.nbcsports.com/2017/04/04/how-rockets-thunder-cavaliers-spurs-play-with-and-without-their-mvp-candidates/

I'm frankly stunned he has Curry 2nd best behind LeBron ... and I'm not sure I buy either of those numbers. Curry and LeBron are critical to their teams, but there are other quality players on those teams who would adjust their games and step up to make up some of that difference.

As always all advanced stats are flawed.

MygirlhatesCod
04-04-2017, 01:20 PM
I can slightly get behind this. the main reason is both Lebron and Steph are going to the finals (barring injury). whats more MVP than taking your team to the finals? I doubt the thunder get to the second round and I also don't see Houston coming out of the west. Lebron is just amazing and deserves MVP almost every year and Curry is way more important than he gets credit for. I honestly think if Curry got hurt instead of KD the Warriors wouldn't be playing this well. advanced stats are sometimes misleading but the reality is both the Warriors and the Cavs are the standard. and how does an MVP not come from that? its not at all taking away from westbrook or harden because they are unbelievable this year.

FlashBolt
04-04-2017, 06:41 PM
I saw this too but didn't pay any mind. If it means anything, it helps in my assertion that the Rockets are better without Harden than some people claim. But what irks me is how the Warriors are projected to be a what? 36 win team without Steph? So three all stars is a 36 win team? That's weird and silly to me. Pretty much ruined everything else for me.

Quinnsanity
04-04-2017, 06:58 PM
These stats are useful when evaluating teams against themselves. I think it's relevant to say "wow, it's surprising that Houston can still play as well as they do when Harden sits," or "holy **** how are the Cavs so bad when LeBron sits even with Kyrie and Love?"

But for MVP purposes, it's ****ing useless. Players don't control who's on their team, and if even when they do (say, you want to give the Warriors guys credit for recruiting KD, or LeBron credit for forcing the Love trade/TT+JR contracts), it's usually only at the top. We shouldn't take credit away from James Harden for the great year Eric Gordon is having, or give Westbrook credit because he plays on a team without another viable ball-handler.

Here's my criteria for MVP: if you gave every candidate from that season the same average teammates, which would produce the most regular season wins assuming average luck, health and coaching based on their own talent and effort? To me, the clear answer is Harden. Maybe you think it's Westbrook, or Kawhi, or LeBron, and that's fine. There are cases to be made for all of them.

But let's not let the players these guys are lucky (or unlucky) enough to have as teammates effect how we view them as individuals.