I was watching the Cavs-Pistons game and Tom Tolbert suggested that the NBA have an Eastern Conference MVP and an Western Conference MVP.I agree with this. You guys?
I like nygiants idea of having one MVP for the whole thing, and then an Eastern Conference player of the year, and Western Conference player of the year under neath that.
This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I think so much less of Tolbert now for suggesting this. This isnt like baseball where they only play 5 teams from the other league for a few games a year. Every team plays every team at least twice, so the competition is generally fair. You can only have one MVP, judged by the player who has the most value to his team. To have 2 would be just stupid.
So then either the east or west MVP wins it?Might as well just have an MVP and a runner up, 2nd place MVP who has to be in the other conference.I dont know, but it sounds kind of unorganized to me
Like, this year it could be:East MVP - LeBron James - because he was the top Eastern Conference Vote GetterWest MVP - Steve Nash - Because he was the top Western COnferenc Vote GetterOverall MVP - Steve Nash because he recieved the most votes
No. Just 1 MVP creates more debates and it is more intense of a battle. I like it how it is right now. So only the true great players win MVP.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yankshater213 @ May 14 2006, 11:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I think so much less of Tolbert now for suggesting this. This isnt like baseball where they only play 5 teams from the other league for a few games a year. Every team plays every team at least twice, so the competition is generally fair. You can only have one MVP, judged by the player who has the most value to his team. To have 2 would be just stupid.</div> Exactly, why should MVP be regulated by conference? It doesn't make sense. I hate the fact that baseball has 2 MVP's because the people that win it never get the attention they fully deserve. And because Albert Pujols should be the hands down MVP this year and for many many more.
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 class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nba dogmatist @ May 14 2006, 03:06 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>That makes sense..I like that alot
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nba dogmatist @ May 14 2006, 02:06 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 sounds more reasonable. That would be a great idea.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nba dogmatist @ May 14 2006, 02:06 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>Wait... either I'm not understanding what you're saying or you typed it wrong. You don't want the overall MVP to win the MVP of his conference? But then you say you should just have the West and East MVP in the running for the overall MVP? Sorry... I'm not understanding what you're trying to say.Anyway, my take on the entire issue is that we don't need to have an MVP of each conference. Like somebody else already stated, this is not like baseball where you play strictly within your conference/league. In the NBA you play every team atleast twice a season, and one MVP is plenty enough. You don't win it, tough luck, that's just life. The voting is designed to where each candidate has a fair shot at winning the award. There are enough voters and panelists to where pretty much the consensus pick will win the award.Stop worrying about the MVP... just go out there and try to win a ring.
If they were to do this, then there would be Offensive MVP in East and in West, and Defensive MVP in East and in West.Here's a BETTER idea to make sure the MVP is really an MVP.The voting process is the same as usual, but of the players that top the MVP voting, the one that makes it the furthest into the playoffs gets it?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Waqas @ May 14 2006, 02:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If they were to do this, then there would be Offensive MVP in East and in West, and Defensive MVP in East and in West.Here's a BETTER idea to make sure the MVP is really an MVP.The voting process is the same as usual, but of the players that top the MVP voting, the one that makes it the furthest into the playoffs gets it?</div>Why would you take playoffs into account for the MVP award? I still really do not understand why people want to do that. It is the Regular Season MVP, not the MVP of the entire season. The playoff's MVP is pretty much determined by the Finals MVP.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ May 14 2006, 02:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wait... either I'm not understanding what you're saying or you typed it wrong. You don't want the overall MVP to win the MVP of his conference? But then you say you should just have the West and East MVP in the running for the overall MVP? Sorry... I'm not understanding what you're trying to say.Anyway, my take on the entire issue is that we don't need to have an MVP of each conference. Like somebody else already stated, this is not like baseball where you play strictly within your conference/league. In the NBA you play every team atleast twice a season, and one MVP is plenty enough. You don't win it, tough luck, that's just life. The voting is designed to where each candidate has a fair shot at winning the award. There are enough voters and panelists to where pretty much the consensus pick will win the award.Stop worrying about the MVP... just go out there and try to win a ring.</div>oops, i just realized i kind of contradicted myself. just listen to the last part i said.
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.
