<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Heatfan32 @ May 14 2006, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It isn't really,if you have an amazing first round and lose then guess what,you can't be the finals MVP.I think it's fine the way it is right now,it's not like Steve Nash is going to win a third MVP.</div>Well, if you take into account the ideaology of those people who support the MVP award being based atleast partly on the candidate's success in the playoffs, they are pretty much arguing that if you can't take your team deep into the playoffs then you shouldn't be the MVP, right? So, if you can't get your team out of the first round, then obviously you don't deserve the playoffs' MVP either, now do you?Now, if you are arguing that a player who has an amazing first round statistically, then how is that any different than a player deserving the MVP award for a great regular season, yet not taking his team deep into the postseason?The bottom line is that it is the regular season MVP award, not the regular season and playoff MVP award. The award and voting is fine the way it is, and people need to stop making such a huge fuss about changing the award just because there are a lot of deserving candidates. If you didn't win that just means that there was a player who was more valuable to their team in the eyes of the voting panel than you were.
I understand what you were saying about if you are the most valuable to your team then you should lead them to the finals but I don't find that to be the case.Kobe for example took the second seeded Suns to 7 games with a inferior Laker team.You can make a case that he had a bad 7th game but he was just following the game plan really.Or if you get your team out of the first round lets say,but lose in the second round to the Mavericks(just an example).I think the way it is now is fine,I was just trying to state that not always the most valuable player will be in the finals.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Heatfan32 @ May 14 2006, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I understand what you were saying about if you are the most valuable to your team then you should lead them to the finals but I don't find that to be the case.Kobe for example took the second seeded Suns to 7 games with a inferior Laker team.You can make a case that he had a bad 7th game but he was just following the game plan really.Or if you get your team out of the first round lets say,but lose in the second round to the Mavericks(just an example).I think the way it is now is fine,I was just trying to state that not always the most valuable player will be in the finals.</div>I think your misunderstanding what I was trying to say. I was arguing that people need to stop trying to incorporate a player's playoff success into whether or not they deserve to win the MVP because the award is for the regular season, not the playoffs. I was also saying that if people want to make a big deal about a player's playoff success, then the player who is the MVP of the playoffs will more likely or not be acknowledged by winning the Finals MVP award.And I'm tired of hearing that the Lakers took the Suns to 7 games... the Suns took the Lakers to 7 games, not the other way around.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nba dogmatist @ May 14 2006, 12:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>the overall MVP shouldn't get his conference too.They should start out w/ a West and East MVP. then, only those two are on the ballot for the overall mvp.</div>Yeah that idea sounds pretty good to me.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ May 14 2006, 03:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I think your misunderstanding what I was trying to say. I was arguing that people need to stop trying to incorporate a player's playoff success into whether or not they deserve to win the MVP because the award is for the regular season, not the playoffs. I was also saying that if people want to make a big deal about a player's playoff success, then the player who is the MVP of the playoffs will more likely or not be acknowledged by winning the Finals MVP award.And I'm tired of hearing that the Lakers took the Suns to 7 games... the Suns took the Lakers to 7 games, not the other way around.</div>I think we are misunderstanding each other here,I never take into the account how well a player does in the playoffs into whether or not you are the regular season MVP or not.You are half right about the Lakers-Suns series,no one really expected for the series to go to 7 games but the Suns did manage to force a game 7 and win it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Heatfan32 @ May 14 2006, 02:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I think we are misunderstanding each other here,I never take into the account how well a player does in the playoffs into whether or not you are the regular season MVP or not.You are half right about the Lakers-Suns series,no one really expected for the series to go to 7 games but the Suns did manage to force a game 7 and win it.</div>I was making those points in a response to Waqas' post originally, and I think you said something that made me want to clarify what I meant. Anyway, I think we did misunderstand each other, so let's just drop it and move on. :beerchug:
I think the current voting for almost all awards in the NBA are horrible.I like how the defensive NBA teams work because they are voted on by the coaches.My solution: Give every NBA team 3 votes. Coach, GM (Player Personnel person) and a Player Rep. That would get 90 votes. These people would vote for the MVP, COY, ROY, DPOY, etc. . No media bias. People who know basketball would be in charge of voting. Simple easy and gets rid of the media.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ender @ May 14 2006, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I think the current voting for almost all awards in the NBA are horrible.I like how the defensive NBA teams work because they are voted on by the coaches.My solution: Give every NBA team 3 votes. Coach, GM (Player Personnel person) and a Player Rep. That would get 90 votes. These people would vote for the MVP, COY, ROY, DPOY, etc. . No media bias. People who know basketball would be in charge of voting. Simple easy and gets rid of the media.</div>Players should certainly get a vote. It works pretty well in Premier League Football (I live in the UK). There is an award for player of the year voted for by the players, and there is also one voted for by the media. They are both well respected and the winners deserved.
Yea I herd them say this on the Cavs/Pistons game also. Thats when I turned the TV off. Terrible idea, would never work. The only reason MLB does this is because they have NL/AL, they have diffrent rules. The NBA has confrences, not leagues, therefor it wouldnt work. East and West...not National League and American League. For MLB National League has been around since 1870's and American League has been around since 1900's. Would be alittle to late for NBA to make that switch
Okay i really didnt read anyone else's posts before posting to pardon me. This is what i think. I like the "MVP" for each conference and then an overall MVP, but enstead of calling the award MVP of the Eastern Confernece and MVP of the Western Conference, it should be call Western Conference Player of the Year and Eastern Conference Player of the Year. Those 2 awards should only be judged by who had the best individual stats and hence the best player in his conference that year. You shouldnt take into account the question " who is more valueable to his team?" Only who had the best season. MVP award would be done the same way its done now.So like this year it would of went like this in my opinion. WCPY-Kobe BryantECPY-LeBron JamesMVP-Steve Nash (Nash was the MVP, so I put him here, even though I didnt think he was)Does any of that make sense? I think that would work the best.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nygiants4life @ May 14 2006, 03:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm not sure...what about still have MVP and then EC player of the year and WC player of the year?</div>Best idea. I dont want it to be like the MLB, but thats a good idea. MVP, then EC player year, WC player of year. Cool idea dude. Simple, but never brought up before.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjcolpitts @ May 14 2006, 10:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>So like this year it would of went like this in my opinion. WCPY-Kobe BryantECPY-LeBron JamesMVP-Steve Nash (Nash was the MVP, so I put him here, even though I didnt think he was)Does any of that make sense? I think that would work the best.</div> That's just dumb, it underminds the award and it's silly.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BCB @ May 15 2006, 07:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That's just dumb, it underminds the award and it's silly.</div>No it doesnt. Look at it, just because you have to best season in your conference doesnt mean your the most valueable to your team. I think we all agree that Kobe was statisticlly better than Nash, but we all argue on who was more valueable to thier team. Now i dont want to turn this into a "who was the MVP" thread, but thats how i see it. Anyways, most years one of the Players of the Year would also get the overall MVP award. I also think the coaches should vote on everything enstead of the media. The coaches know more about who is having the best season. Most writers only cover thier team and dont even know how other players are doing except when they watch Sportscenter. Its exactly the same way with the Hiesman Trophy.
Or...they should just have the players/coaches/etc. vote for MVP instead of the media. Players wouldn't give P.J. Brown an MVP vote.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fouled Out @ May 15 2006, 09:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Or...they should just have the players/coaches/etc. vote for MVP instead of the media. Players wouldn't give P.J. Brown an MVP vote.</div>i like this idea. i dont like the 1 mvp plus 2 conference mvp idea though. just gives them an excuse to keep giving it to nash. that needs to stop.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fouled Out @ May 16 2006, 02:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Or...they should just have the players/coaches/etc. vote for MVP instead of the media. Players wouldn't give P.J. Brown an MVP vote.</div> But P.J. Brown would. :happy0144: I think having one MVP award is the right way to go, having 2 POY's and an MVP just underminds the award in all honesty. I would much rather have the players/coaches/GM's vote than the media.
I think the NBA has to change a lot of things/rules, but leave the MVP award alone. MVP = Most Valuable Player, not players. That's the way it should be.
Okay dont let the players vote, but let the owners, GMs, and coaches vote. I mean come on the media is so biased I hate the fact they're the ones voting i mean why let them vote? they dont vote on anything else and theyre not league officials.
