<div class="quote_poster">Quoting K8B:</div><div class="quote_post">MVP means most valuable player. You take Dirk away from his team, the Mavericks are still better than the Lakers without Kobe. Take Nash off of Phoenix, they're still better than the Lakers without Kobe. Take Billups away from the Pistons, they're still a championship contender, that leaves both Kobe and Brand as the true definition of their team's Most Valuable Player.</div> Yes, if you take away Dirk from the Mavs and Kobe from the Lakers the dirk-less Mavs are better than the Bryant-less Lakers. But with the two of them on their teams the Mavs are still better than the Lakers. The way I see it is that without Kobe the Lakers still are better than Atlanta and Charlotte and right now would be at 13-15 wins, -7 or -9 wins from when they have Kobe. Take Billups from the Pistons and they are a .500 team. Thats a 13 game difference from where they are now. Take Nash from Phoenix? Not even a .500 team. The point is that IMO you can't have an MVP from a 22-19 team because without that player they can't be that much worse than with him. Right now he has put his team in the position to have to go up against a much better Phoenix team in the first round. Plus there is a chance the Lakers miss the playoffs so MVP? If they get the 4th or 5th seed bring the talks back up.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting K8B:</div><div class="quote_post"> That's a horrible example. If Kobe scored 100 in every game, there is no way in hell the Lakers would lose even 20 games.</div> Agreed..Yea lakers might not be in top 3. But they are still above .500 obviously if they didnt win any games it would be a different story..use ur HEAD!!
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Greazy9:</div><div class="quote_post">Kobe is the most talented scorer in the league, quite possibly and in my opinion, ever. This year, noone can argue that with a straight face unless it's the pound for pound argument that AI might win. The only person that can stop Kobe is Kobe and there isn't one player in the league that has the ability to take over a game better. That's the truth. But he is not... I repeat, NOT the MVP. Yet. He has not learned how to make his team better, and in fact, in some ways, makes them worse. Don't believe the hype... there is alot of talent on that team, but you never see it because they never touch the ball. There is great leadership and coaching in Phil Jackson. If you think they are where they are all because of Kobe, you're mistaken. Nash drives his team by making them better and controling<u></u> the offense. He did the same in Dallas, but everyone was paying so much attention to Dirk, they didn't see where the heart of that teams success was. Any team Nash is on, he will make better or alot better. THAT's why he was MVP. They won with him, they lost without him. Need I remind you that Kobe's on this "talentless" team because of Kobe, and his inability to lead... truly lead. In my mind, that alone excludes him from the race. j Yes... but not an entire starting line-up of All-Star or near All-Star caliber teammates. j</div> Also just wanted to add to this Nash-Kobe debate. A huge key for the Suns is the consistent two-way effort of Shawn Marion. He's a legit All-Star and gets 20/10 in almost every single game. You add a consistent talent like Marion alongside Kobe, and you would see an improvement in the Lakers overall record. The Lakers are only 11-10 in games decided by 6 points or less. They lead the league in amount of close games played, and if they had more consistency they probably could have had at least 5 more wins, and 5 less losses.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">That's a horrible example. If Kobe scored 100 in every game, there is no way in hell the Lakers would lose even 20 games.</div> Im just saying in general.
Kobe doesn't have the MVP locked up just yet. If he can get more wins then Kobe is a huge front runner for MVP.
Ok. Where do I start? Let me start off with my opinion on whether Kobe deserves the MVP. If the MVP award were purely based on the one player who is most important to his team, then yes... Kobe is that one player. Without him the Lakers are pretty much an NBDL team. No argument there. But the MVP award has traditionally been a combination of the most valuable player on a team most likely to make noise in the playoffs. In which case the only deserving player to me right now appears to be Steve Nash, Elton Brand if the Clippers can start playing solidly again, and maybe Chancey (although I do agree that the Pistons starters are way too good and their style of play is not conducive to individual accolades). If the Lakers make it to the playoffs at a 6th seeding then I think the league might be willing to make an exception on tradition just because of the sheer magnitude of what Kobe would have done. Whether that happens or not remains to be seen. Kobe's 81 points was incredible... but that one game alone cannot clinch the MVP trophy so early in the season. Now onto some extremely unfair comments about Kobe not making his teammates better. As far as making his TEAM better... there is no player in the league (due respect to Steve Nash) that has as much a positive effect on his team as Kobe... Check these stats: The point differential when a player is on the court. <font color="Red"> Players Tm Diff --------------------- Bryant LAL +22.0 Wade MIA +17.0 Szczerbiak MIN +15.0 Howard ORL +14.9 Nowitzki DAL +14.9 <font color="Black">Kobe is by far the leader in the NBA in this category. Last season Nash lead this category with a point differential of +17. But does he make his teammates better? Well lets look at the point differentials of each individual player when Kobe is on the court as opposed to when his off the court: </font> Player with w/o diff ----------------------------- Brown 76.8 68.5 + 8.3 Bynum 66.9 49.5 +17.4 Cook 104.6 100.9 + 3.8 George 92.0 80.2 +11.8 Mihm 96.4 81.1 +15.3 Odom 92.9 91.9 + 1.0 Parker 100.5 73.3 +27.2 Profit 90.5 86.1 + 4.4 Vujacic 95.9 72.7 +23.2 Walton 81.2 64.2 +17.0</font> The statistics above speak for themselves - evry single Laker benefits when Kobe is on the court despite taking less shots. Their efficiency increases when Kobe is on the court because the double teams Kobe attracts gets them open looks. To say Kobe does not make his teammates better is a horrible misconception used by Kobe critics to show Kobe is some sort of negative light because it is virtually impossible to smear him on his individual ability.
Wow Fiyah that is one of the better arguments I have seen and you have the numbers to back it...I'm totally with you...nice job very nice
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting DynastYWarrioR6:</div><div class="quote_post">Wow Fiyah that is one of the better arguments I have seen and you have the numbers to back it...I'm totally with you...nice job very nice</div> I got the stats from an article posted in here I believe. I saved the article on my PC because the author did an excellent job of statistically proving that not only did Kobe make his teammates better, but he did it better than most players in the league.
Listen im not a hater, Kobe's performance was the best individual performance i've ever witnessed. but, MVP is so much more than scoring. The year wilt scored 100 points and averaged 50ppg, he didn't win MVP. Bill rusell did, because wins count more than points. if your going to base MVP on points scored then it should just go to the scoring leader. The MVP this year will come from these 3 teams almost positive, Dallas, Detroit and Phoenix.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Johnnybrasco:</div><div class="quote_post">Listen im not a hater, Kobe's performance was the best individual performance i've ever witnessed. but, MVP is so much more than scoring. The year wilt scored 100 points and averaged 50ppg, he didn't win MVP. Bill rusell did, because wins count more than points. if your going to base MVP on points scored then it should just go to the scoring leader. The MVP this year will come from these 3 teams almost positive, Dallas, Detroit and Phoenix.</div> I agree with you to an extent. The MVP race is more that just scoring... scoring is a factor yes... wins definately... value to your team for sure. But the criteria is not written in stone. Its more or less a "vibe" vote. As a result it is possible for Kobe to win over the voters without being a front runner in the race for the championship. Mark my words... if the Lakers make it to the playoffs as a 6th seed or higher in the Western conference Kobe's name is going to get called... ALOT.
Steve Kerr was just high off the emotions. I'll admit when I found out Kobe scored 81 I thought he was MVP too. But after I calmed down and look at that spectacular game he had, it doesn't do justice for an award that's worth a years worth of work. If Steve Kerr still stands by what he said on Kobe being a lock for MVP. That's he an idiot. Straight up.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Fiyah:</div><div class="quote_post">Ok. Where do I start?... ...smear him on his individual ability.</div> First of all, that proves nothing about making his teammates better. That just shows how much more Kobe scores when he's on the floor than he does from the bench. That's a Kobe + diff, not his teammates. Kobe score more than his entire team sometimes. Shape, you're actually backing up my point as to why Kobe is not the MVP. Nash is leading successfully, Kobe is not, no matter how they're doing it. If his team were responding positively to his leadership style and they were winning a ton of games, Kobe for MVP! But they haven't... again, I say yet! I didn't say Kobe wasn't trying to lead, I was saying he wasn't leading effectively. Nash is leading more successfully. Besides, I was using Nash as an example of "this is what a league MVP is". But I think you know that. I'll digress on the Bird/Magic thing though. I didn't think out the whole starting 5, but I still think Detroit's starting 5 are better or at least more complementary. (i know that'll piss some bball snobs off, but...) You're not actually comparing Billups to Magic or Bird are you? Wow K8B... yup! That's the whole line-up. Odom, Parker, Bynum, Vujacic & Mihm (and to a lesser extent Brown - & I'm going with players that have played) are all telented. That they are inconsistent proves this point. Example... I'm a pool player. I've been playing less time than any APA ranked 8 (9 ball) that I know. If I'm VERY lucky I play once a week. Yet on any given day, I can play at professional levels. But some days I play at "how could you miss that?" levels. But I have the talent to play at a very high level. So do these players. It just hasn't been brought out of them, like Diaw or House. It's my opinion. I'll stand by it. j
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Greazy9:</div><div class="quote_post">First of all, that proves nothing about making his teammates better. That just shows how much more Kobe scores when he's on the floor than he does from the bench. That's a Kobe + diff, not his teammates. Kobe score more than his entire team sometimes. <font color="red">Hmm. Maybe I wasn't clear enough when I posted those stats. The statistics are gleaned from comparing the individual players scoring efficiency with Kobe in the game vs with Kobe not in the game. It's not Kobe's + diff but instead the + diff of that player. The first stats are the teams + diff which would increase when Kobe is on the court. The second table of stats are actually each individuals + diff stats, which you would assume would drop when a ball hog comes on the court as they wouldn't have any more shots. In actuality their + diffs increase to a man. Why? Because most of those players, with the exception of Lamar Odom, are used to playing off the ball anyways. They have been doing it their entire NBA careers. They get less shots when Kobe is in the game (slightly less) but the quality of their chances are MUCH greater and so their offensive efficiency increases. Lamar Odom is the glaring exception (his + diff is only +1) because he does need the ball and does suffer more from a lack of shots than the other players. I hope that sifficiently breaks it down for you. </font> Shape, you're actually backing up my point as to why Kobe is not the MVP. Nash is leading successfully, Kobe is not, no matter how they're doing it. If his team were responding positively to his leadership style and they were winning a ton of games, Kobe for MVP! But they haven't... again, I say yet! I didn't say Kobe wasn't trying to lead, I was saying he wasn't leading effectively. Nash is leading more successfully. Besides, I was using Nash as an example of "this is what a league MVP is". But I think you know that. <font color="red">Again your logic is flawed. We cannot look at the end result alone to determine who is getting more wins for his team. We need to look at both the results if they weren't in the game and if they were. The differential so to speak. Take the Sun's toal wins with Nash playing and subtract the wins they would get without Nash and then compare that to the same stat with the Lakers with and without Bryant. The win differential for the Lakers would more than likely be substantially higher that the win differential for the Sun's. The Lakers team + diff stat proves this. The Lakers score +22 more points per 100 possessions when Kobe plays. The Suns are nowhere near to that stat indicating that while they are undoubtedly a better team with Nash in they can be where the Lakers are now without him. A .500 team.</font> I'll digress on the Bird/Magic thing though. I didn't think out the whole starting 5, but I still think Detroit's starting 5 are better or at least more complementary. (i know that'll piss some bball snobs off, but...) You're not actually comparing Billups to Magic or Bird are you? Wow K8B... yup! That's the whole line-up. Odom, Parker, Bynum, Vujacic & Mihm (and to a lesser extent Brown - & I'm going with players that have played) are all telented. That they are inconsistent proves this point. Example... I'm a pool player. I've been playing less time than any APA ranked 8 (9 ball) that I know. If I'm VERY lucky I play once a week. Yet on any given day, I can play at professional levels. But some days I play at "how could you miss that?" levels. But I have the talent to play at a very high level. So do these players. It just hasn't been brought out of them, like Diaw or House. It's my opinion. I'll stand by it. <font color="red">Its your opinion and you are welcome to it. But I believe that the NBA talent scouts, and coaches and GMs know a little bit more about NBA talent and potential than we do. They would NEVER pick a Smush Parker or a Chris Mihm over a Diaw.</font> j</div> Fiyah
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Greazy9:</div><div class="quote_post"> Shape, you're actually backing up my point as to why Kobe is not the MVP. Nash is leading successfully, Kobe is not, no matter how they're doing it. If his team were responding positively to his leadership style and they were winning a ton of games, Kobe for MVP! But they haven't... again, I say yet! I didn't say Kobe wasn't trying to lead, I was saying he wasn't leading effectively. Nash is leading more successfully. Besides, I was using Nash as an example of "this is what a league MVP is". But I think you know that. I'll digress on the Bird/Magic thing though. I didn't think out the whole starting 5, but I still think Detroit's starting 5 are better or at least more complementary. (i know that'll piss some bball snobs off, but...) You're not actually comparing Billups to Magic or Bird are you? j</div> I guess my stance is, at what point does the responsibility fall on the players and not the leader or coach? When you are passing to teammates who consistently miss wide open looks, or fumble away passes and putting your team in a hole, when does it become the players' fault? When Steve Nash's teammates aren't converting, he switches roles and becomes a more aggressive scorer. The difference is Nash doesn't have to do it as often for his team to win and be competitive. I think the different offenses the Suns and Lakers run also have a lot to do with it. Also factor in the ball handler's the Suns have on the court, versus the lack of ball handler's the Lakers have. A lot of the Laker problems on offense and efficiency has to do with the lack of experience in the Triangle. The players still have problems with their spacing and still don't go to the right spot on the court to create the proper angles. The bottomline, the player's on Phoenix are smarter, more experienced than the Laker players, in basketball terms. <u>Experience factor (not including this year)</u> PG - Nash (9 seasons) v. Parker (2 seasons) SG - Bell (5 seasons) v. Bryant (9 seasons) SF - Diaw (2 seasons) v. Odom (6 seasons) PF - Marion (6 seasons) v. Brown (4 seasons) C - Thomas (10 seasons) v. Mihm (5 seasons) Keep in mind the Lakers have the youngest team in the league, and being young usually equates to being very inconsistent. And no I'm not putting Billups in the same stratosphere as Bird or Magic, I was just pointing out other players have won the MVP award despite playing with a stacked lineup.
I didn't realize that was what it was. But I have to ask... where did you get those stats? Do you have a link? My logic, as it were, is not flawed... in fact you back up your argument about a speculative scenario with a flawed logic reply. If we were to do exactly what you were to suggest, the Suns would not be a .500 team, because the Suns are WINLESS without Nash! Of course I don't believe they would be that way consistantly, but it speaks volumes about what he means to his team. I saw the games... they were lost. And which scouts have given you this information prior to this year? Or are you saying "But I believe that the NBA talent scouts, coaches and GMs know a little bit more about NBA talent and potential than we do. Personally, I would NEVER pick a Smush Parker or a Chris Mihm over a Diaw." Honestly, you're speculating what scouts would have done last year and stating it as though you heard it right from their own mouths. Look, I ain't hating on Kobe, the Lakers or you, but don't call my logic flawed and back it up with your own flawed logic. Shape - fair enough, and I respect your opinion. To an extent I agree, the Suns are a better team (individually) w/o Nash than the Lakers (individually) w/o Kobe. Young, for sure, but I see aot of raw talent on that team. Laker fans have more to look forward to than just seeing if Kobe can break 100. j
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Greazy9:</div><div class="quote_post">I didn't realize that was what it was. But I have to ask... where did you get those stats? Do you have a link? My logic, as it were, is not flawed... in fact you back up your argument about a speculative scenario with a flawed logic reply. If we were to do exactly what you were to suggest, the Suns would not be a .500 team, because the Suns are WINLESS without Nash! Of course I don't believe they would be that way consistantly, but it speaks volumes about what he means to his team. I saw the games... they were lost. And which scouts have given you this information prior to this year? Or are you saying "But I believe that the NBA talent scouts, coaches and GMs know a little bit more about NBA talent and potential than we do. Personally, I would NEVER pick a Smush Parker or a Chris Mihm over a Diaw." Honestly, you're speculating what scouts would have done last year and stating it as though you heard it right from their own mouths. Look, I ain't hating on Kobe, the Lakers or you, but don't call my logic flawed and back it up with your own flawed logic. Shape - fair enough, and I respect your opinion. To an extent I agree, the Suns are a better team (individually) w/o Nash than the Lakers (individually) w/o Kobe. Young, for sure, but I see aot of raw talent on that team. Laker fans have more to look forward to than just seeing if Kobe can break 100. j</div> Here is the link -> http://www.82games.com/pelton13.htm Here is the thing though. I don't believe my logic to be flawed. The stats for one prove that Bryant's presence on the court vastly help put his teammates, despite the popular but unproven claim by many. So thats one. Secondly... I refuted your claim that Nash was more valuable to his team because they had more wins than the Lakers. I backed this up by pointing out that if you took what WOULD be a .500 team without Nash and added Nash to the mix then of course they would have more wins than if we took what would be a lottery team without Kobe and then added Kobe to the mix. My point being Nash has a better mix of ingredients to work with. Bear in mind we really, to this point, have no way of knowing this because both teams are winless without their leaders. But even you agree that the Pheonix Suns without Nash are better than the Lakers without Kobe. So really the factor here should not be how many wins the Suns have vs how many wins the Lakers have but more appropriately how many more wins does Nash add to the Suns vs how many more wins Kobe adds to the Lakers. Based on the stats and what I have seen of this Lakers team without Kobe or when Kobe goes to the bench I am confident in my belief that Kobe gets the Lakers more games than Nash gets the Suns. Right now the Suns are 26-15. 11 games over .500. I believe without Nash they would be right around .500. So Nash has added 11 more wins. The Lakers are 22-19. I believe without Kobe they would be at about 15-26 (they probably wouldn't perform any better than the Houston Rockets). 11 games under .500. Which overall gives Kobe a 3 game advantage on Nash. Thats my logic (speculative as it MUST be) and I am sticking to it.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Fiyah:</div><div class="quote_post">Here is the link -> http://www.82games.com/pelton13.htm Here is the thing though. I don't believe my logic to be flawed. The stats for one prove that Bryant's presence on the court vastly help put his teammates, despite the popular but unproven claim by many. So thats one. Secondly... I refuted your claim that Nash was more valuable to his team because they had more wins than the Lakers. I backed this up by pointing out that if you took what WOULD be a .500 team without Nash and added Nash to the mix then of course they would have more wins than if we took what would be a lottery team without Kobe and then added Kobe to the mix. My point being Nash has a better mix of ingredients to work with. Bear in mind we really, to this point, have no way of knowing this because both teams are winless without their leaders. But even you agree that the Pheonix Suns without Nash are better than the Lakers without Kobe. So really the factor here should not be how many wins the Suns have vs how many wins the Lakers have but more appropriately how many more wins does Nash add to the Suns vs how many more wins Kobe adds to the Lakers. Based on the stats and what I have seen of this Lakers team without Kobe or when Kobe goes to the bench I am confident in my belief that Kobe gets the Lakers more games than Nash gets the Suns. Right now the Suns are 26-15. 11 games over .500. I believe without Nash they would be right around .500. So Nash has added 11 more wins. The Lakers are 22-19. I believe without Kobe they would be at about 15-26 (they probably wouldn't perform any better than the Houston Rockets). 11 games under .500. Which overall gives Kobe a 3 game advantage on Nash. Thats my logic (speculative as it MUST be) and I am sticking to it.</div> Nash is more valuable for the fact he took a team that some in pre-season didn't even expect to make the playoffs and turned them elite. Who does nash have that makes his team much better than the lakers? aside from the matrix? he's taken boris diaw, a guy last year who was considerd a draft bust, and turned him into a MIP candidate. he has, raja bell, james jones, and kurt thomas playing center in the west and some people are expecting these guys to have a chance at conference finals. If nash was playing on the lakers, Brown would be avergaing like 15 points and 8 rebounds, mihm would be like 18 and 8, odom would be dominating games more. Its not even close.
I think if the Lakers can win their division that Kobe has a good shot at MVP, but unless he does that GOOSE EGG! The MVP will be on the team who wins the Pacific Division. (Nash, Brand, Kobe). I am almost positive the Suns will win it, I mean Amare isn't even back yet. Steve Nash carried this team this season and is showing why he was and should be the MVP.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Johnnybrasco:</div><div class="quote_post"> If nash was playing on the lakers, Brown would be avergaing like 15 points and 8 rebounds, mihm would be like 18 and 8, odom would be dominating games more. Its not even close.</div> If kobe was playing for the Suns they would be #1 in the west and their would be no question about him deserving to be MVP. At least thats my assumption.
