by Stop Mike Lupica on March 19 at 3:05PM
My opinion (the only one that probably doesn't count, in any way, shape or form):
6. Amare Stoudemire:
Not really in my top-5, but Section F Sports does a good job of making the case for why Amare should get some consideration this season. There are some good points in there, though he does his argument a disfavor when he correctly points out that Stoudemire's poor defense is a liability, and then tries to write it off by pointing out four previous winners who were awful on defense, and two of them are Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki. In both cases there was (and still is) strong backlash against the naming of those guys as MVPs, precisely because they are such defensive liabilities to their teams. Besides, these days only a white person can get named MVP with poor defense!
5. Kevin Garnett:
A lock for MVP the first half of the season, but he suffers from the stigma of playing in the Eastern Conference, where only four teams are even above .500. Never the less, the Celtics are still an incredible .800 on the season; they have an 8-game lead over the second-best record in the NBA (currently the Rockets); they are even 22-4 against the Western Conference, which proves that they are good no matter where they are playing. Holding the Eastern Conference's overall weakness against KG is unfair and foolish.
Here is what you can hold against him: he already won an MVP, so he's not "due". Don't think that won't effect voters. It may not be fair, but that's how voters think. He's surrounded by talent - it's not just that Ray Allen and Paul Pierce are good players (even if both are a bit past their peak, they are still both in their prime) - it's that they are both perennial All-Stars. We're not talking marginally All-Star guys, like Michael Redd (one appearance); Walter Ray Allen has made 8 All-Star appearances, and Paul Pierce has six appearances. These guys are also potential Hall of Famers. And the rest of the team isn't terrible - at the time of the trade, I criticized the Celtics, saying that the Big Three wasn't enough, and that they didn't have a bench. Since then, they have picked up James Posey (we called it at the time "a huge pick up", and it has been), Eddie House, and most recently, Sam Cassell. Rajun Rondo has been solid, as have been Leon Powe and Perkins.
Certainly this team wouldn't be a contender (if not the outright favorite) for the Championship if you replaced KG with, say, Al Jefferson. But it might still be a top four team in the East, and that hurts Kevin Garnett's chances of winning the MVP the most.
Plus, let's face it - he doesn't care about the MVP; he wants a ring.
4. Tracy McGrady:
What, somebody has to put a Rocket into the mix, and I'm not crazy enough to nominate Rafer Alston yet. Though I will tell you this - Skip to My Lou is going to win a few playoff games for the Rockets, and yes, they are going to go further than you think. The Western Conference Finals, perhaps further. Even without Yao Ming.
The reality is lost in the 22 game win streak (snapped yesterday by the Celtics in what might have been a possible preview of the Finals, though I wouldn't beat that much money on either team), but this Rocket team has been good for a while. So far in 2008, they are 31-4. They were 9-3 before they went on their 22-game tear. This team has all the right guys peaking at the right time - Rafer, Battier, Scola (a rookie in name only - he's a Gold Medal winner with lots of savvy international experience), plus is getting good contributions from guys like Carl Landry.
And the clog that is keeping everything together - Tracy McGrady. The thing is, right now he's doing a Jordan, and building his team's confidence (especially the aforementioned guys - Alston, Battier, Scola and Landry). Come playoff time those guys will make their mark. And, at the same time, there will still be a few games where McGrady will have to step up and drop 40 points. And he will.
Somehow lost in the win streak story was the real story - McGrady is making his move into historical greatness this season, without anyone even noticing. Sort of like Dwyane Wade in 2006.
3. LeBron James:
He's hurt by the "he'll get his MVP someday" bias amongst voters. He's also hurt by his team's semi-mediocre performance in a terrible conference. Seriously, 16.5 games behind the Celtics? 11.5 behind the Pistons? If not for the fact that the bottom teams in the Eastern Conference are such crap, you might be afraid of having a repeat of the "Dirk Nowitzki getting his MVP after his team was already sent packing" moment.
Fear not, for LeBron will take his team to the Eastern Conference Finals, if not further. He's probably the one guy who can truly put fear in Kevin Garnett.
Never the less, the MVP is for regular season performance. And LeBron's team is one small losing streak away from "barely over .500". That hurts him more than anything else. Remember: it's not the "best player this season" award; it's the most valuable. And how valuable is LeBron, when his team might be, what, 10-15 games worse (at most) without him?
2. Chris Paul:
Now take Chris Paul off the Hornets, and replace him with a so-so point guard. Jamaal Tinsley? Rafer Alston? Jameer Nelson? Whoever the Cavs have? Sam Cassell?
How much worse are they? Are they really a team that is only half a game behind the Rockets for best record in the Western Conference (and home field until the Finals)?
Have you really looked at this team? Watched them? They could be a title contender, and yet this is their team: David West (Mr. "9-20 FG") and Tyson Chandler (a one-dimensional player who went from slumming with the Dalemberts of the NBA to being practically untradeable). Hey, speaking of one-dimensional... how about the a SF who can't rebound, can't play defense, can't create his own shot, and can only hoist up three-pointers? That's Peja Stojanovic.
Now look at that record again. This team isn't sniffing .500 in the West without Paul. I'm absolutely convince that if you trade Paul to the Knicks, they would be better than Boston. Or to the 76ers. He's the best pure point guard since Isiah Thomas, and perhaps it's not too early to start wondering if he'll be the best by the time he peaks.
Still, he's too young and unhyped. So the MVP is
1. Kobe Bryant.
Long overdue, because he should have won in 2005 (instead of Nash). But his team wasn't good enough? Well, is it good enough now? Despite the "improvement" in talent, it's really all Kobe again. He's taken the same team from last year, plus a noticeable improvement in Bynum (but hardly an All-Star performance just yet - the kid is averaging 13/10/2 on the year, with 60%... he's not making the All-Star game on those numbers). And this team was rolling along, sitting at the top of the heap that is the West division. Then Bynum went down with a knee injury. The team kept chugging along, even while the naysayers predicted immediate doom for the Lakers.
Then they got a real All-Star, in Pau Gasol. Good for them. But just adding an All-Star doesn't mean you'll make a smooth transition, especially midseason. Well, for the Lakers it was pretty smooth, right? That's a credit to Kobe, as well as Phil Jackson.
Honestly, this won't be the year that Kobe gets his ring (that might be next year, though we're on record as suspecting Shaq might beat Kobe to that ring while he's in Phoenix), but this will be the year Kobe gets his MVP. And rightfully so.
Leave a comment
6. Amare Stoudemire:
Not really in my top-5, but Section F Sports does a good job of making the case for why Amare should get some consideration this season. There are some good points in there, though he does his argument a disfavor when he correctly points out that Stoudemire's poor defense is a liability, and then tries to write it off by pointing out four previous winners who were awful on defense, and two of them are Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki. In both cases there was (and still is) strong backlash against the naming of those guys as MVPs, precisely because they are such defensive liabilities to their teams. Besides, these days only a white person can get named MVP with poor defense!
5. Kevin Garnett:
A lock for MVP the first half of the season, but he suffers from the stigma of playing in the Eastern Conference, where only four teams are even above .500. Never the less, the Celtics are still an incredible .800 on the season; they have an 8-game lead over the second-best record in the NBA (currently the Rockets); they are even 22-4 against the Western Conference, which proves that they are good no matter where they are playing. Holding the Eastern Conference's overall weakness against KG is unfair and foolish.
Here is what you can hold against him: he already won an MVP, so he's not "due". Don't think that won't effect voters. It may not be fair, but that's how voters think. He's surrounded by talent - it's not just that Ray Allen and Paul Pierce are good players (even if both are a bit past their peak, they are still both in their prime) - it's that they are both perennial All-Stars. We're not talking marginally All-Star guys, like Michael Redd (one appearance); Walter Ray Allen has made 8 All-Star appearances, and Paul Pierce has six appearances. These guys are also potential Hall of Famers. And the rest of the team isn't terrible - at the time of the trade, I criticized the Celtics, saying that the Big Three wasn't enough, and that they didn't have a bench. Since then, they have picked up James Posey (we called it at the time "a huge pick up", and it has been), Eddie House, and most recently, Sam Cassell. Rajun Rondo has been solid, as have been Leon Powe and Perkins.
Certainly this team wouldn't be a contender (if not the outright favorite) for the Championship if you replaced KG with, say, Al Jefferson. But it might still be a top four team in the East, and that hurts Kevin Garnett's chances of winning the MVP the most.
Plus, let's face it - he doesn't care about the MVP; he wants a ring.
4. Tracy McGrady:
What, somebody has to put a Rocket into the mix, and I'm not crazy enough to nominate Rafer Alston yet. Though I will tell you this - Skip to My Lou is going to win a few playoff games for the Rockets, and yes, they are going to go further than you think. The Western Conference Finals, perhaps further. Even without Yao Ming.
The reality is lost in the 22 game win streak (snapped yesterday by the Celtics in what might have been a possible preview of the Finals, though I wouldn't beat that much money on either team), but this Rocket team has been good for a while. So far in 2008, they are 31-4. They were 9-3 before they went on their 22-game tear. This team has all the right guys peaking at the right time - Rafer, Battier, Scola (a rookie in name only - he's a Gold Medal winner with lots of savvy international experience), plus is getting good contributions from guys like Carl Landry.
And the clog that is keeping everything together - Tracy McGrady. The thing is, right now he's doing a Jordan, and building his team's confidence (especially the aforementioned guys - Alston, Battier, Scola and Landry). Come playoff time those guys will make their mark. And, at the same time, there will still be a few games where McGrady will have to step up and drop 40 points. And he will.
Somehow lost in the win streak story was the real story - McGrady is making his move into historical greatness this season, without anyone even noticing. Sort of like Dwyane Wade in 2006.
3. LeBron James:
He's hurt by the "he'll get his MVP someday" bias amongst voters. He's also hurt by his team's semi-mediocre performance in a terrible conference. Seriously, 16.5 games behind the Celtics? 11.5 behind the Pistons? If not for the fact that the bottom teams in the Eastern Conference are such crap, you might be afraid of having a repeat of the "Dirk Nowitzki getting his MVP after his team was already sent packing" moment.
Fear not, for LeBron will take his team to the Eastern Conference Finals, if not further. He's probably the one guy who can truly put fear in Kevin Garnett.
Never the less, the MVP is for regular season performance. And LeBron's team is one small losing streak away from "barely over .500". That hurts him more than anything else. Remember: it's not the "best player this season" award; it's the most valuable. And how valuable is LeBron, when his team might be, what, 10-15 games worse (at most) without him?
2. Chris Paul:
Now take Chris Paul off the Hornets, and replace him with a so-so point guard. Jamaal Tinsley? Rafer Alston? Jameer Nelson? Whoever the Cavs have? Sam Cassell?
How much worse are they? Are they really a team that is only half a game behind the Rockets for best record in the Western Conference (and home field until the Finals)?
Have you really looked at this team? Watched them? They could be a title contender, and yet this is their team: David West (Mr. "9-20 FG") and Tyson Chandler (a one-dimensional player who went from slumming with the Dalemberts of the NBA to being practically untradeable). Hey, speaking of one-dimensional... how about the a SF who can't rebound, can't play defense, can't create his own shot, and can only hoist up three-pointers? That's Peja Stojanovic.
Now look at that record again. This team isn't sniffing .500 in the West without Paul. I'm absolutely convince that if you trade Paul to the Knicks, they would be better than Boston. Or to the 76ers. He's the best pure point guard since Isiah Thomas, and perhaps it's not too early to start wondering if he'll be the best by the time he peaks.
Still, he's too young and unhyped. So the MVP is
1. Kobe Bryant.
Long overdue, because he should have won in 2005 (instead of Nash). But his team wasn't good enough? Well, is it good enough now? Despite the "improvement" in talent, it's really all Kobe again. He's taken the same team from last year, plus a noticeable improvement in Bynum (but hardly an All-Star performance just yet - the kid is averaging 13/10/2 on the year, with 60%... he's not making the All-Star game on those numbers). And this team was rolling along, sitting at the top of the heap that is the West division. Then Bynum went down with a knee injury. The team kept chugging along, even while the naysayers predicted immediate doom for the Lakers.
Then they got a real All-Star, in Pau Gasol. Good for them. But just adding an All-Star doesn't mean you'll make a smooth transition, especially midseason. Well, for the Lakers it was pretty smooth, right? That's a credit to Kobe, as well as Phil Jackson.
Honestly, this won't be the year that Kobe gets his ring (that might be next year, though we're on record as suspecting Shaq might beat Kobe to that ring while he's in Phoenix), but this will be the year Kobe gets his MVP. And rightfully so.
Leave a comment
|
6 Comments
Comments
I don't think KG should be MVP, but if voters are really using the "he's not due" argument, I'm pissed.
That's a load of crap. I guess Nash was just "due" the two years he walked away with the award. People will rationalize anything.
Not you SML, but the media voters.
Prezs2ReprsntMe
said
im with you SML. in 05 kobe was the best, on a team that wasnt the best. no love then.
lebron might be a better all around player (the unending debate re hashed every day), but his team is no where as good as the lakers. if lebron wins, it puts the stamp on voter's changing the meaning of the award at their convenience. not that they dont do that already...
stopmikelupica
said
Exactly Prez! LeBron's current team (talent-wise and record-wise) isn't too different from Kobe's 05 Lakers.
Add to it that LeBron's feats this year (30-8-7) are amazing, but so was Kobe's 05 year. He dropped 50 like 8 games in a row! To me, that's as impressive (if not more) as a point forward who handles the ball on almost every possession dropping 7 or 8 dimes a game. He is the Cav's point for all purposes; 7-8 dimes a game is about right for an average point in the NBA. Just saying, it's impressive, but not so impressive it warrants changing the meaning of the award (as you said, Prez) from what it meant just three seasons ago!
Big Man: Agree. I get pissed when they use that argument. But it is part of the way they think, too.
Crack: LeBron's stats are amazing, in a historical context. But so were Kobe's numbers from three years ago. If they hadn't had used the "your team isn't that good" argument against Kobe, I would probably support LeBron winning it this year. But it would be hypocrisy on the voters' part to give the award to LeBron, when I believe both CP3 and Kobe have better arguments for it.
SML, I agree that Kobe's the man, but would cry neverending foul if Lebron got it. His team really sucks...
I disagree. LeBron is the MVP. The NBA should be ashamed.