I Can't Say I Won't Be Salty If... (mvp Talk!)

Russell Westbrook, who I think should win, wins the MVP as an 8th seed, whereas the Lakers were the 7th seed, and Kobe didn't during that amazing season he had in 2005-06 wasn't even in the top consideration for MVP. People were saying the seeding was too low, the team record wasn't as god so he didn't deserve it? But the OKC Thunder are an 8th seed right now and it hasn't deterred from Russell being the MVP winner. Can someone explain the MVP award to me?

 

the award just doesn't mean anything because the parameters are so unclear. it's supposed to mean "most outstanding player"--at least that's how fans and media discuss it.

if that's really the case, it's Anthony davis, right? followed by westbrook, then curry, then LeBron, then harden (and the refs).

if it's best player on best team, then it's curry. open and shut.

i can't see a case for giving the mvp to westbrook or harden in any scenario or under any implied parameters.

 

That's one thing that I hope gets cleared up within the next 20 years -- a clear, definitive, standardized criteria for the award. If they say we judge it on x, y, & z and it's voted on with those in mind every year then there would be much less backlash and negative stuff from the fans. But through constant flip flopping of what the award is based on takes away some of the significance and makes it a bit of a joke.

 

Curry has been the most consistent player and his team is on pace to win 65 games in the West ...

Harden is scoring more FTs than FGs ...

Westbrook has been amazing for 1 month + but his team probably won't win 50 teams and is a 8th seed

As of now , there is no doubt Chef Curry should win the MVP

 

MVP is Harden IMO. Team has had every single starter go down with an injury, including Dwight for pretty much this entire year. The fact that Houston is a 3 seed in the WEST with all those injuries is extremely impressive. Curry has had a healthy squad all year and also has a better overall team than Harden imo. Westbrook has been amazing but his team's record simply isn't good enough (Kobe argument for that 05/06 year). If LeBron wins it or even gets close, I'm going to be really ticked off. Cleveland was supposed to stomp the east, and it looks like they'll finish as the 2 seed. This in NO WAY should be viewed as a successful season, as anythign short of #1 would be a disappointment and falling below expectations. Plus, did I mention they play in the weak east?

Curry or Harden should be MVP, no questions asked.

 

I'm fine with anyone but Bron winning it. If he does, the whole thing is a farce. Legit cases can be made for Westbrook, Harden, Curry, and Davis.

 

If the Pelicans make the playoffs, Anthony Davis is the Most Valuable Player by definition. Unfortunately, it's a popularity contest so who cares.

 

I'll restate my usual argument over the MVP debate.

I have always hated and still hate the idea that the MVP is, as many fans have accepted, "the best player on the best team." First of all its a lie and is often subject to a myriad of misunderstood or misused rules to justify. A couple years ago Lebron was having a statistically awesome season but his team was A) playing in a garbage conference, B) didn't have any competition and C) was not the #1 team in the league. That honor was to the Spurs who prior to the season had been believed to be a lower seed at best in the West. The Spurs best player, who was also putting up a career year while carrying that team, was Tony Parker. Of course that notion was scoffed at not because it wasn't valid in the previously mentioned MVP criteria but because the media and fans had bought into the current change that went with the narrative "OMG, LBJ is doing what no one has done in (insert years)." There is the problem with looking at Westbrook. He is carrying a team that should very well be in the lottery. OKC is a 2 trick pony with one gone. He is the very answer of what is an MVP? James Harden also deserves consideration but I, like mentioned by others, have a serious problem with a guy whose greatness and success is predominately predicated on officals and flopping. Curry is the front runner, again like others have said, because he has been the cog that makes that team go and has done it at an amazing clip. As for LBJ, I think the Cavs have underachieved and he has too. Some argue that Westbrook has missed too much time but LBJ has missed nearly as many as Westbrook has which I believe is 15 (Westbrook) and 11 (LBJ). I could be wrong on the number though.

The MVP will forever be a joke award because it isn't based on the player who is the "most valuable" to a successful team. It will be to whoever the media wishes to promote. Curry isn't getting nearly the attention for MVP as LBJ would be if the records were reversed. Anthony Davis doesn't get any attention at all. You can't have a true MVP race when most of the people are basically discredited and tossed out of the discussion before the discussion even starts.

 

I think they definitely need to redefine what the MVP criteria is. How about we do that here on LB for them. What should "da real MVP" criteria be? Should the award even be called something different?

 

I think it should be most outstanding player. too many other variables to account for in the other criteria (teammates, conference, injuries, etc.). who kicked the most a** this year?

btw, that answer is Anthony davis.

who was most important to a dominant team? curry, no contest.

to accept harden, you have to accept Houston as a contender, which they're not. and you have to ignore that much of his prowess is born of unprecedented favoritism from officials.

 

"Most outstanding" actually also directly relates to the variable of teammates. Are all your teammates going to utterly defer to you, like they do to Anthony Davis? Or do you have many other extremely valuable teammates that need the ball too, like Stephen Curry? I think Anthony Davis was surely the most outstanding player this season, but I think that it would have been more difficult for him to stand out as much with teammates as talented as Curry's.

 

hmm...don't know if i agree.

davis impacts the game defensively and on the boards regardless of who else is out there, and his offense is so versatile at this point that i think buckets would find him in any system with any teammates.

i do agree that a system can make a player look more impressive. houston built a roster around harden and runs the high screen for him on almost every single half court play. i could argue that if you did the same for curry, he'd be scoring 30+ per. in other words, the system/quality of teammates is actually depressing curry's measurables this year.

that said, you can also argue that it's harder to put up efficient offensive production when your teammates aren't as good, which is where davis is in NO.

so, i still think davis is the "most outstanding player" this year, but i'm not going get into a fistfight if someone suggested curry was.

now, if one suggests other candidates...maybe.