Is it Time to Revisit What the MVP Actually Means?

[antidope]

The OP has like nine paragraphs in it, and the title is whats being discussed the most.

Lebron's stats and his team's success speaks enough volumes man.


Trying to discern his "value" to the team is dumb. Miami being a 5 or 6 seed without him and NY being a lottery team without Melo is completely subjective.


Why don't people just go off what they see instead of these dumb hypotheticals.

Because thats how the MVP is voted on.  You think that Steve Nash or Derrick Rose win MVPs without dumb hypotheticals?  Of course they dont.

This is why the MVP award needs to be clearly defined.  There are far too many seasons where the MVP is going to the wrong guy.

Exactly.

a little dramatic with the title although that boston sportswriter was kind of ridiculous for going against the grain just cause

At least he didn't do it just to deny the unanimous vote, he had his reasons, he is granted a vote for a reason, and LeBron still won. No big deal at all, won't affect his legacy

True, but if there was a defined criteria for it, then this wouldnt happen. If there was a criteria for the award where LeBron got so many of the votes, then more than likely he would fit that criteria for the lone Melo voter. Leaving it totally up to personal interpretation is what leads to things like Steve Nash winning two, and Derrick Rose winning one.

I'm surprised that so many people dont think being the first unanimous MVP is that big of deal. It may not be the worlds biggest deal, but its at the very least thread worthy.

 

[maxelite]

Because thats how the MVP is voted on.  You think that Steve Nash or Derrick Rose win MVPs without dumb hypotheticals?  Of course they dont.

This is why the MVP award needs to be clearly defined.  There are far too many seasons where the MVP is going to the wrong guy.

Well don't really agree with that part of your post

 

[dmxfury]

If you have a rigid criteria, no need for voters then, just have a comp run the numbers and hand out the award. Otherwise human error, interpretation and judgement will occur

 

[antidope]

If you have a rigid criteria, no need for voters then, just have a comp run the numbers and hand out the award. Otherwise human error, interpretation and judgement will occur

Theres a thought, the player with the highest PER, Plus/Minus, or maybe a stat they create solely for the MVP wins.

 

[kdawg]

It's clearly been the 'Player of the Year' award for a while and they should just call it that. It's stupid when they give it to someone who is inferior but carrying a bad team.

 

[VinMillerHearn58]

LBJ is still MVP no matter what. Even if one person did not vote him, that doesn't mean a thing now.

 

[knightngale]

It's flawed logic.
And instead, with him - they're a historically good team that won 66 games and is an overwhelming favorite to win a title. Is that not the same amount of value as turning a mediocre team into a pretty good one?

Do you know the Knicks the Knicks still outscored opponents when Melo was off the floor? The Heat without LeBron did not. The Clippers did without Paul, the Thunder did without Durant...but the loaded Miami Heat? They didn't. They were outscored by 75 points over the 1096 of the season's minutes without LeBron.

http://www.82games.com/1213/1213MIA.HTM

If you go by that logic then Shaq should have won at least 3. The MVP is "most popular player amongst the media currently whose team has a good record." It is a joke award.

If you go by that logic then Kobe should have gotten the 2009 MVP. Lebron's team was only a game ahead of the Lakers. The only reason those cavs teams were
ahead of the Lakers is cause they played in the east and were beating on the garbage teams. It was clear which team was the best team that year. It was clear who was the best player on the best team. The cavs were not even the second best team. The Celtics were.

However, that year the definition used was "turning a mediocre team into a good one." Same with 2010.

Now you are telling me that the "best player on the best team" definition should be used? It seems to me the definition is changed so as to make a preferred player (Lebron) win. Even Jordan was not given such a privilege, i.e. slurping.

If you go by both definitions as the media does with Lebron then Jordan should have about 10 MVP's.

In 2011-2012, Lebron's team did not have the best record yet he won MVP. If you go by 2010 or 2009 logic then Durant or Parker should have won it.

How about the definition be changed to "whichever definition that can be used so as to make Jabron win."

 

[dland24]

Because thats how the MVP is voted on.  You think that Steve Nash or Derrick Rose win MVPs without dumb hypotheticals?  Of course they dont.

This is why the MVP award needs to be clearly defined.  There are far too many seasons where the MVP is going to the wrong guy.

Well don't really agree with that part of your post

If you completely take away the whole "best player on one of the best teams" criteria, you can make a very compelling  argument that aside from LeBron's last 3 MVPs, every MVP awarded in the last 10 years went to the wrong guy.  Obviously, there are some that are far more egregious than others (Nash x2, Rose), but the point remains that this award typically goes to the guy who has the best surrounding story, than the guy who is the most deserving of the award.

 

[ThaxbyChamblis]

^ Like clockwork. Consistency

 

[6 Rings G.O.A.T.]

He's still MVP though..

 

[knightngale]

If you completely take away the whole "best player on one of the best teams" criteria, you can make a very compelling  argument that aside from LeBron's last 3 MVPs, every MVP awarded in the last 10 years went to the wrong guy.  Obviously, there are some that are far more egregious than others (Nash x2, Rose), but the point remains that this award typically goes to the guy who has the best surrounding story, than the guy who is the most deserving of the award.

Lebron was not the best player in 2009 or 2010. That is arguable. If you say "but stats..." then Iverson should not have won it in 2001. Another example of Lebron slurpage.

 

[sneakertechgeek]

he got it, its in his professional resume now, don't matter if only one vote didn't go towards him

 

[yeeupp]

Youguys need to remember that MIA won 27 straight games, that was taking into consideration too. And what was lebrons FG% for like 11+ games ? 60% ? some games near 70% ?

 

[Clyde Frog]

I have a bigger issue with Lebron not winning the last 6 MVPs. That's how valuable he is. You could pretty much put him on any team in the league no matter how bad they are and he'll get them in the playoffs. Ever since seeing what he did to get that god awful cavs team to the Finals he has deserved it every year. I don't like the idea of give it to someone else just to switch things up.

 

[knightngale]

I have a bigger issue with Lebron not winning the last 6 MVPs. That's how valuable he is. You could pretty much put him on any team in the league no matter how bad they are and he'll get them in the playoffs. Ever since seeing what he did to get that god awful cavs team to the Finals he has deserved it every year. I don't like the idea of give it to someone else just to switch things up.

I'll take it a step further. Since, we know how valuable he is and how valuable he turned to be for the league and his team I have a problem that he has gotten it every year since he was born. Don't you agree? Why would you leave out 2006? The cavs finished only 4 games behind the suns and took the cavs to the second round! Surely, he is the only player that can take a ****** team to the playoffs and the only player that should be rewarded for it!

 

[law3001]

I don't even understand what people are mad about he won MVP

 

[knightngale]

I don't think many people are saying he did not deserve it this year, because he did. The title of the thread is about being mad that he did not get one more vote.

 

[antbanks81]

I have no clue Law..like there are discussions about this????

Celebrate him, he won after a great season. but tripping off one vote WGAF

 

[maxelite]

Because the one person who voted for Melo made a dumb argument

 

[antbanks81]

but what about the millions who voted for Bush? TWICE?!?!?!

one man's opinion..not even threadworthy, talk showworthy IMO..but just as its been onNT, I expect to see it on around the horn, PTI etc

 

[antidope]

No one is mad, at least not over the LeBron thing(I think he should be mad about it somewhat, he had history on his fingertips) if theres anything I'm mad about its about the inconsistencies with awarding the MVP which is supposed be the most important of all the individual regular season awards. The constant inconsistencies with the winners and the criteria devalue the award. LeBron not being the unanimous winning was simply a launching point to a much bigger topic.

 

[mister friendly]

Are people really whining because Lebron wasn't the unanimous MVP?

If more dominant players like Jordan,Shaq and Wilt didn't win the NBA MVP unanimously then neither does Lebron on his super friends team

 

[denni5themenace]

i never understood why writers and broadcasters vote for the MVP.

 

[storm2006]

The title of this thread has more name changes than Puff Daddy.

 

[nicelikechrist]

I'll take it a step further. Since, we know how valuable he is and how valuable he turned to be for the league and his team I have a problem that he has gotten it every year since he was born. Don't you agree? Why would you leave out 2006? The cavs finished only 4 games behind the suns and took the cavs to the second round! Surely, he is the only player that can take a ****** team to the playoffs and the only player that should be rewarded for it!