- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,132
- Reaction Score
- 213,013
I was kidding when I said he should have to give back his trophy, was just trying to illustrate how bad he was. Are people seriously saying he doesn't deserve the MVP?
OT: NBA Finals
- Thread starter tzznandrew
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 13,469
- Reaction Score
- 36,022
Here's a thought: does 2015 Dellavedova = 2001 Tyron Lue?
In that, I mean a scrappy, irritating player who isn't as athletic as the person he's guarding but can bother them just enough, but ideally should only do so for about 10 minutes a game?
He played Curry well, and Curry seemed genuinely unable to respond to his defense...but Curry has been guarded by much better players in the past. I wonder if he decides to go all Davidson on him, and worry less about the pick and rolls and just beat him off the ball.
In that, I mean a scrappy, irritating player who isn't as athletic as the person he's guarding but can bother them just enough, but ideally should only do so for about 10 minutes a game?
He played Curry well, and Curry seemed genuinely unable to respond to his defense...but Curry has been guarded by much better players in the past. I wonder if he decides to go all Davidson on him, and worry less about the pick and rolls and just beat him off the ball.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 5,918
- Reaction Score
- 10,556
i was referring to the poster who compared curry to malone in 97.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,574
- Reaction Score
- 24,380
No, the numbers do tell the story. Curry was sensational this season and elevated his team from good to historically dominant. It wasn't just that it "made sense," he deserved it.
Look, Curry is a great player and it's not that he's undeserving of such recognition, but if you're truly going to give the award to the "most valuable" there is no way anyone can argue that is not LeBron James. The guy is and has been for eight years, the most valuable player in the league. Period. If anyone doubted that before, the playoffs should be proof positive. The Cavs just had not one but two all-star players removed from this postseason due to injury, and here we are with the Cavs at 1-1 and holding homecourt advantage against this "historically dominant" team you speak of. Take Klay Thompson and Draymond Green from Golden State and I guarantee you... double guarantee you... the Warriors are not in this position.
Even statistically though, you can easily make a case LeBron was the deserving MVP.
Lebron (25.3 PPG, 7.4 APG, 6.0 RPG, 48.8% FG)
Curry (23..8 PPG, 7.7 APG, 4.3 RPG, 48.7% FG)
With eFG%, turnovers and everything else factored in, the advanced metrics give a slight edge to Curry, but again, you can still easily make a case for LeBron based only on statistics. But in the real world, it should be obvious to anyone watching basketball that LeBron's value far exceeds any other player out there. Need it be reminded that the Cavs went from 60 wins in 2010 to 19 wins the following season; that the Heat went from 58 wins last year to 34 this year; the Cavs were just 2-11 without LeBron this season. LeBron is and always has been the MOST VALUABLE player in this league.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 13,469
- Reaction Score
- 36,022
It was certainly close in the regular season, but don't forget that LeBron missed 13 games.
Curry also put up those numbers in 32 mpg whereas LeBron did it in 36 mpg. His advanced metrics, as you pointed out, were better also (28 PER/15.7 WS vs. 26 PER/10.4 WS).
LeBron is the better player, but this isn't a 1997 MJ vs. Malone debate (which to be fair was pretty close by advanced metrics: MJ's PER was 27.8 with 18.3 WS vs. Malone's 28.9 PER and 16.7 WS). Curry had, statistically speaking, the better regular season. This gets into question about whether "Most Valuable" means most important to team or best player, but I'd say the voters made the right call no matter what happens in these Finals.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,132
- Reaction Score
- 213,013
Curry deserved the award this year, best player on by far the best team. If the award was always given to the best player in the world then Jordan would have won 10 in a row and Lebron would have won 8 in a row. Not fair looking at Heat record from last year and this year, of course they are a lot worse without Lebron but they would have been a playoff team this year without all the injuries.
The award isn't "best player on best team" it's "most valuable player." I'm not concerned with how the award has been administered in the past, I'm more concerned with how it should be administered. Whether Jordan actually won 10 in a row or not (he actually would not have because he took 1 3/4 seasons off from basketball anyhow) is irrelevant. It doesn't mean it was justified that he didn't.
Everyone agrees that LeBron is still the best player on the planet. So if he is, how is he not still the most valuable? His value to everything involved, both with what can be measure and what cannot be measured, clearly exceeds that of anyone else.
As far as the Heat, the injuries are kind of a bogus copout. Even with LeBron there, the heat had injuries quite often. When was Bosh and especially Wade NOT injured or hobbling? The last year and half, they were always banged up. In fact, Wade actually played 10 more games this year than he did last year with LeBron there. Bosh obviously missed a lot of games, but he was playing through a lot of injuries last year, so he wasn't exactly healthy. The Heat may have been a playoff team if they were 'healthy' (which with Wade wouldn't be a realistic expectation at this point), but they wouldn't have won a ton of games.
- Joined
- May 6, 2015
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction Score
- 2,896
We can put that tired talking point to rest.
They just gave up a game winning shot to a Love-less Cavs at home, followed by a game winning shot to a Love-less, Irving-less Cavs at home all while managing to lead fewer than 30 minutes of the two games. "Historically dominant" teams don't get punked on their homecourt like that, and winning by 30 in the next 3 games won't change that. The East may have been historically bad this year, but that certainly doesn't make this GSW team better than they are.
- Joined
- May 6, 2015
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction Score
- 2,896
Right. Kinduv like the Cavs are this year with the injuries. Too much.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,132
- Reaction Score
- 213,013
Nobody is arguing with you on Lebron being the best player in the world I brought up Jordan because he was always the best player in the world and didn't win the MVP every season and obviously neither will Lebron. Do you seriously have a problem with Curry winning the MVP this season?
.-.
- Joined
- May 6, 2015
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction Score
- 2,896
Forget about "best player" on "best team" award. Any basketball fan watching the last 2 games knows who is more valuable.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,132
- Reaction Score
- 213,013
Warriors have looked terrible on offense but it doesn't take away how good their regular season was. This Warriors team isn't one of the best teams ever but their performance last night is certainly not representative of what kind of team they are. They were totally out of it from the tip, they had more turnovers than assists and shot 8-36 from three. They look like a team that hasn't been there before, we'll see if Kerr and Gentry make the necessary adjustments and if Curry and Draymond wake up.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2011
- Messages
- 14,810
- Reaction Score
- 82,705
You seem personally invested in this anti-GSW kick you've been on, because you're just repeating the same thing over and over and it's moved past the point of sports fandom and, honestly, it's beginning to sound like someone on the Warriors stole your lunch money. It's laugh out loud ridiculous to say that winning the next 3 by 30 plus doesn't make them historically dominant because they're 1-1 right now. That's just asinine and confirms your bizarre anti-GSW bias.
Incidentally, it's pretty indisputable that they were, in fact, historically dominant all season. You can check the #s. What that ultimately means if they don't win this series - probably not a hell of a lot. But you can't have much credibility if you try to undersell what they accomplished all year, which unquestionably puts them in rarefied air.
And, incidentally, they're going to win this series, and I can't imagine it's going 7. It took a historically awful performance from Steph Curry for the Cavs to win by a bucket in overtime.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,132
- Reaction Score
- 213,013
It's bizzarre, he just keeps repeating the same thing over and over and somehow he's labeled me a Warriors fanboy and Lebron hater. It's really strange considering I'm not a Warriors fan, don't dislike Lebron and picked the Cavs to win the series before it started.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2011
- Messages
- 14,810
- Reaction Score
- 82,705
It's like Skip Bayless giving Lebron a C+ for his performance yesterday, which is a thing that actually happened.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,574
- Reaction Score
- 24,380
@kyleslamb @TasteofUConn What has happened in this postseason has no baring on what happened during the regular season. And along those lines, your unprovable hypotheticals (where would this series be if LeBron and Curry switched teams?) have no baring on who won the MVP award.
It can both be true that LeBron is the best player on the planet while Curry was the most valuable player in the league this season. Nobody thinks Curry is better than LeBron.
Forget about the stats, just look at the prognostications coming into the season. The Cavaliers were title favorites, and not just because of LeBron. Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love were thought of to be better than anybody Curry was playing with. Yet, again, the Warriors, behind the guide of Curry, submitted a historically dominant regular season in a historically dominant conference. And if you need evidence as to just how good Curry was, the Warriors were outscored with him not on the court. That's right, the historically dominant Warriors became just merely an average team when Curry sat. And again, whether they are identified as dominant in a futuristic sense is not relevant to the information the voters had at their disposal at the time - all we know is that statistically, they had one of the best regular seasons ever.
LeBron obviously had a terrific season, too, but the first half of the season doesn't just suddenly get forgotten because of their second half resurgence. Beyond the fact that the Cavaliers performed below the level of the sum of their parts during that first half, LeBron gains no benefit of the doubt given the murky nature of his injury. And even if he was injured...you can't be valuable if you're not on the floor. Durability is important over the grind of an 82 game season.
None of this means anything in the grand scheme of things. Ten years from now, nobody is going to say, "Player X won this many MVPs, LeBron only won four." LeBron made a conscience decision to pass up the MVP to play for the long haul. That seems to be working out, but it doesn't mean he was the MVP of the 2015 season.
It can both be true that LeBron is the best player on the planet while Curry was the most valuable player in the league this season. Nobody thinks Curry is better than LeBron.
Forget about the stats, just look at the prognostications coming into the season. The Cavaliers were title favorites, and not just because of LeBron. Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love were thought of to be better than anybody Curry was playing with. Yet, again, the Warriors, behind the guide of Curry, submitted a historically dominant regular season in a historically dominant conference. And if you need evidence as to just how good Curry was, the Warriors were outscored with him not on the court. That's right, the historically dominant Warriors became just merely an average team when Curry sat. And again, whether they are identified as dominant in a futuristic sense is not relevant to the information the voters had at their disposal at the time - all we know is that statistically, they had one of the best regular seasons ever.
LeBron obviously had a terrific season, too, but the first half of the season doesn't just suddenly get forgotten because of their second half resurgence. Beyond the fact that the Cavaliers performed below the level of the sum of their parts during that first half, LeBron gains no benefit of the doubt given the murky nature of his injury. And even if he was injured...you can't be valuable if you're not on the floor. Durability is important over the grind of an 82 game season.
None of this means anything in the grand scheme of things. Ten years from now, nobody is going to say, "Player X won this many MVPs, LeBron only won four." LeBron made a conscience decision to pass up the MVP to play for the long haul. That seems to be working out, but it doesn't mean he was the MVP of the 2015 season.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2015
- Messages
- 4,380
- Reaction Score
- 1,362
Beyond crazy. He and the whole Cavs team expend so much energy on the defensive side and he has no PG to setup the O so he struggles to find any breaks on the floor.
I can't wait for tomorrow night, these games are awesome. The emotion LeBron showed after last night said it all, slamming the ball. The defense was intense from all sides.
I can't wait for tomorrow night, these games are awesome. The emotion LeBron showed after last night said it all, slamming the ball. The defense was intense from all sides.
- Joined
- May 6, 2015
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction Score
- 2,896
You and the other three GSW fan boys are all saying the same thing, and it's all one-eyed myopia.
What about Klay having a great game?
Or LeBron shooting horribly. Or the other players on the Cavs shooting like crap.
Funny how you GSW fanboys cherry pick only the things that make your erroneous conclusion.
Like I said - go find me a "historically dominant" team that got punked on their homecourt two games in a row by a team missing a top 3 and then two top 3 scorers. Never has happened.
People so desperately want the GSW to be something they're not, they're jumping through illogical hoops to reach poor conclusions - no beef here with the GSW - but I do have a beef with people giving them far too much credit in the history of hoops. They are not a top 20 historical team by any means.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 5,918
- Reaction Score
- 10,556
they won 67 games and had one of the best regular seasons ever. you should really pump the breaks, the series is only 1-1
- Joined
- May 6, 2015
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction Score
- 2,896
I'd give it a 95% GSW win. Cavs have to play tomorrow night and then 48 hours later. GS should be a able to wear them down, if nothing else. But it's not relevant, because we already have enough inf to take them out of the "historical" category. They struggled twice against a depleted Cavs team. They are "great," no doubt, but they are not "historically great."
Can you imagine the mid 80s Bird team playing game 2 at home against the Lakers without Jabbar and Worthy and getting beat? I sure can't. Or, in reverse, the Lakers playing game 2 at home against the Celtics without McHale and DJ (or Aigne or Parrish) and losing?
.-.
What has happened this postseason does have a baring on what happened in the regular season because it's more data to show who clearly the best player and most valuable player in the league really is, especially since we're seeing the two aforementioned players go head to head.
It can't really be true that the best player isn't the most valuable, especially since the crux of the ballot is about total contribution to his team. If LeBron is the best player in the world, then he's also the most valuable because he provides the most value to his team. It's really a simple concept.
And to answer the earlier question, do I really have that much of a problem with Curry winning? Yes and no. I think the awards are usually a product of nothing more than media hype anyhow, so in that context, I'm not bothered by Curry winning since he did have a great year. That said, I'm bothered by simply lessening the standards simply because LeBron would be MVP every year if they didn't. I guess that he took 2-3 weeks off gave the media an easy out to give the award to someone else, but I have a problem that he only didn't win it because his own greatness is used against him.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 6,842
- Reaction Score
- 24,631
kyleslamb said:
The entire history of sports MVP voting says it isn't that simple. Unless you think that baseball writers thought Jackie Jensen and Nellie Fox were better baseball players than Mickey Mantle. Or that Joey Votto was ever the best baseball player in the NL.
MVP measures value during a specific window of time, not overall greatness. A case can be made, purely in isolation, that Curry had a better season this year than James, just looking at the numbers (28 PER to 26, for example - or shooting percentages, where James had an off year). And Curry's team won 10 more games in a tougher conference, swinging the pendulum his way even more. I don't think anyone voting Curry MVP - or saying he deserved it now - thinks he's the best player in the game, that's still James by a healthy margin. It's really nothing more than that James has been deep in the playoffs five years running and is wise enough to hold back a little in the regular season. So in this particular year, Curry was the MVP and James still has the non-time specific title of best player in the sport, and the two aren't contradictory.
Important bit of trivia to remember as this series continues and they play against each other more: James wasn't even the runner-up. Harden was.
- Joined
- May 6, 2015
- Messages
- 1,140
- Reaction Score
- 2,896
These two contradict. Is it "value" or "better season"? You look at stats - pts, rbs, assists, steals - and you say Curry. But so what? That would support the notion that a guy playing on the worst team in the league that wins only 10 games but puts up gaudy stats should get the MVP. LBJ with the same stats as Curry makes his team much better than does Curry. It's that simple. That's where the "value" is - making the team better.
Look at it this way - if you were to swap Curry and LBJ for tonight's game, do you have any doubt that the Cavs would lose by 30? Think about that.
LeBron was playing with a completely new set of players, was hurt for a bit, took 10 games off which resulted in 8 losses, got a new batch of players mid-season to break in, and has a first year head coach. The pendulum swings wildly back to LeBron.
More important to remember - if you swap James and Harden the Rockets are playing for the title right now.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,132
- Reaction Score
- 213,013
I'm wondering if you and kylelamb are teenagers? If you are somewhat new to the NBA I can understand how you don't get this but it's been common knowledge forever in the NBA that the best player in the world doesn't win the MVP every year. Do you think people thought Steve Nash was the best player in the world when he won back to back MVP's? Do you think people thought Karl Malone and Barkley were better than Jordan when they won their MVP's? It's a regular season award and arguing that Curry didn't deserve the award this year is quite foolish. There have certainly been some gripes over the years when some guy's won the award but you guys don't have any argument other than Lebron is the best player in the world so he should win it every year.
UConnSwag11
Storrs, CT The Mecca
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 14,381
- Reaction Score
- 57,337
serious question, does anyone else feel that the league is watered down? especially in the east? the east has been terrible for so long and still is...
UConnSwag11
Storrs, CT The Mecca
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 14,381
- Reaction Score
- 57,337
also when did the league change the rules that make it seem "soft?"
.-.
- Status