Midseason MVP Rankings by CBS

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-...ve-a-real-race

Quote:

---

The individual numbers aren't as impressive as some of these other guys, but the manner in which Kawhi Leonard exudes an almost stat-less dominance -- or a less traditional stat-driven dominance if you will -- has everybody in the league buzzing about him and fearing him on a nightly basis. Part of the boost in his MVP potential is the fact that the Spurs are on the heels of the Warriors after Golden State dominated the conversation with the best start in NBA history. After all of that, the Spurs are right there. They're also more dominant to date (and most dominant in history thus far) and there's a real chance they go perfect at home.

Where Kawhi's case is hurt is the fact that the Spurs are destroyers whether he's on the court or off the court. The defense is just one point worse without him than with him, and both look to be historic measurements of defensive efficiency. Overall, the Spurs with Kawhi on the court are a ridiculous 15.1 points per 100 possessions better than their opponent. But without Leonard out there, the Spurs are still 14.6 points per 100 better. It's tough to judge the "value" of a player when the team just dominates no matter who is on the floor.

You can break that down into him being the new Tim Duncan, who sets the tone for the organization and roster by being willing to sacrifice, being willing to do whatever his team asks and being willing to be treated like the 15th man on the roster when he's the best player they have. And there's merit to that. It's just really difficult to make the case of him being the most valuable in that assumption. He's arguably the best defender in the NBA this season and he's been one of the most accurate 3-point shooters in the league. I'm just not quite there to name him over ...

---

Ehhh, not sure why they bring up how the Spurs are amazing regardless of Kawhi being playing or not, and then following that up with a comparison to Duncan.

When Duncan was in his prime, it wasn't like that at all. He absolutely carried the team night in and night out and they were didn't perform well at all when he went to the bench. Those teams weren't remotely as deep as the current one.

Fair assessment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursFan86

Ehhh, not sure why they bring up how the Spurs are amazing regardless of Kawhi being playing or not, and then following that up with a comparison to Duncan.

When Duncan was in his prime, it wasn't like that at all. He absolutely carried the team night in and night out and they were didn't perform well at all when he went to the bench. Those teams weren't remotely as deep as the current one.

---

Unfortunately, Duncan's 2003 dominance is forgotten due to playing in the least popular era of NBA basketball in league history, tbh..when he was carrying teams with young Parker/Ginobili and role players, nobody outside of hardcore NBA fans was watching:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursFan86

Ehhh, not sure why they bring up how the Spurs are amazing regardless of Kawhi being playing or not, and then following that up with a comparison to Duncan.

When Duncan was in his prime, it wasn't like that at all. He absolutely carried the team night in and night out and they were didn't perform well at all when he went to the bench. Those teams weren't remotely as deep as the current one.

---

I think this "You can break that down into him being the new Tim Duncan, who sets the tone for the organization and roster by being willing to sacrifice, being willing to do whatever his team asks and being willing to be treated like the 15th man on the roster when he's the best player they have." answers that. But I get what you're saying, although it was clear they wanted to make the article short as possible thus the jumbled topics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 100%duncan

I think this "You can break that down into him being the new Tim Duncan, who sets the tone for the organization and roster by being willing to sacrifice, being willing to do whatever his team asks and being willing to be treated like the 15th man on the roster when he's the best player they have." answers that. But I get what you're saying, although it was clear they wanted to make the article short as possible thus the jumbled topics.

---

Fair enough, but yeah, it is sort of jumbled. It kind of makes it seem like Duncan was playing the same sort of role as Kawhi (having his minutes limited, often taking a backseat to other players, etc.), but like I said, Duncan in his prime years wasn't really doing those things. He was playing 40 minutes a night and while he certainly would've been willing to take a backseat to others, the roster didn't allow for it.

1. Curry
2. Kawhi
3. Lebron
4. Westbrook/Durant
6. Green
7. Chris Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

Unfortunately, Duncan's 2003 dominance is forgotten due to playing in the least popular era of NBA basketball in league history, tbh..when he was carrying teams with young Parker/Ginobili and role players, nobody outside of hardcore NBA fans was watching:lol

---

True. Also, people have a tendency to look back on those years and just look at names rather than how players actually performed. People assume or act like Parker/Manu were always the players they ended up becoming and that simply wasn't the case. I've heard people argue that Duncan had plenty of help in 2003 and mention D-Rob/Parker/Manu :lol They make it seem like he was playing with all those guys in their primes.

The whole "the Spurs are nearly as good without Kawhi" thing is silly, IMO. Sample size and opposition are important..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursFan86

True. Also, people have a tendency to look back on those years and just look at names rather than how players actually performed. People assume or act like Parker/Manu were always the players they ended up becoming and that simply wasn't the case. I've heard people argue that Duncan had plenty of help in 2003 and mention D-Rob/Parker/Manu :lol They make it seem like he was playing with all those guys in their primes.

---

Yep..as I've always said, the NBA suffers from "name recognition" way more than any other pro sport, and it's not even close..

Washed-up players are constantly hyped, and teams with recognizable names are given too much credit..the Chicago Bulls being the perfect example, perennially overrated, because people look at the names, rather than their impact..this year's Miami Heat is receiving a lot of it, too..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

Unfortunately, Duncan's 2003 dominance is forgotten due to playing in the least popular era of NBA basketball in league history, tbh..when he was carrying teams with young Parker/Ginobili and role players, nobody outside of hardcore NBA fans was watching:lol

---

The 2012-2014 spurs narrative of being all about the team and everyone is involved have somehow affected peoples perception on the 03-05 teams. Tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ParadoxEN

The whole "the Spurs are nearly as good without Kawhi" thing is silly, IMO. Sample size and opposition are important..

---

Especially the strength of the Spurs bench compared to other teams. How many games has it turned into trash time in the early third quarter and the Spurs 2nd and 3rd teams come in and dominate the other teams bench.

Kawhi is a great player but this is a one man race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

Unfortunately, Duncan's 2003 dominance is forgotten due to playing in the least popular era of NBA basketball in league history, tbh..when he was carrying teams with young Parker/Ginobili and role players, nobody outside of hardcore NBA fans was watching:lol

---

Young Parker. Ginobili and Tim are almost the same age, tbh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ParadoxEN

The whole "the Spurs are nearly as good without Kawhi" thing is silly, IMO. Sample size and opposition are important..

---

I think some people take the numbers too far (the Spurs wouldn't be just as good without Kawhi), but there is something to say about how the Spurs are still dominant even when he goes to the bench, compared to the Warriors who absolutely collapse when Steph goes to the bench.

Curry on: Net RTG = +22.1, Curry off: Net RTG = -7.5

Curry on, Draymond off (127 minutes): Net RTG = +12.5
Curry off, Draymond on (197 minutes): Net RTG = -2.2

Curry on, Klay off (295 minutes): Net RTG = +17.2
Curry off, Klay on (256 minutes): Net RTG = -4.9

Curry on, Klay and Draymond off (71 minutes): Net RTG = +14.2
Curry off, Klay and Draymond on (166 minutes): Net RTG = -2.3

The Warriors are a completely different team (in a bad way) when Curry isn't playing. Their offense revolves around the insane amount of attention defenses are required to give him. Kawhi is immensely important/valuable to the Spurs, but not to the extent Curry is for the Warriors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursFan86

I think some people take the numbers too far (the Spurs wouldn't be just as good without Kawhi), but there is something to say about how the Spurs are still dominant even when he goes to the bench, compared to the Warriors who absolutely collapse when Steph goes to the bench.

Curry on: Net RTG = +22.1, Curry off: Net RTG = -7.5

Curry on, Draymond off (127 minutes): Net RTG = +12.5
Curry off, Draymond on (197 minutes): Net RTG = -2.2

Curry on, Klay off (295 minutes): Net RTG = +17.2
Curry off, Klay on (256 minutes): Net RTG = -4.9

Curry on, Klay and Draymond off (71 minutes): Net RTG = +14.2
Curry off, Klay and Draymond on (166 minutes): Net RTG = -2.3

The Warriors are a completely different team (in a bad way) when Curry isn't playing. Their offense revolves around the insane amount of attention defenses are required to give him. Kawhi is immensely important/valuable to the Spurs, but not to the extent Curry is for the Warriors.

---

Says more about the benches/teams than Kawhi or Curry, IMO.

"You can break that down into him being the new Tim Duncan"

Yet another thing I "don't get". (I suppose you aren't surprised... yet again.) I guess it must be my inability to have fantasies about Kawhi while watching the games. My lens is broken.

Kawhi is the best player on the team now. And he deserves to be considered a solid #2 MVP candidate. The "new Tim Duncan"? Not yet, anyway.


Dammit! I just blew another chance to get into the Krew, didn't I? Good thing there's like a dozen tryout threads a day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ParadoxEN

Says more about the benches/teams than Kawhi or Curry, IMO.

---

I mean it's not like Golden State has an awful bench. I'd say most are in agreement that they're probably top 5 in that aspect. Iguodala is one of the best bench players in the league, and guys like Livingston/Ezeli are pretty solid as well. Besides, I provided numbers where Draymond and/or Klay were playing and GS still didn't look remotely as good without Curry.

Don't get me wrong: I agree with the idea that Kawhi's importance to the team gets understated when you look at on/off numbers since SA has such a dominant bench. But I still think the notion that he's nearly as important to SA as Curry is to GS is way off.

BTW the positive aspect of that (for us Spurs fans) is that GS is much more heavily-dependent on Curry than we are on Kawhi. The Warriors with Curry struggling/uncomfortable are far less dangerous than the Spurs with a struggling Kahwi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MB20

Young Parker. Ginobili and Tim are almost the same age, tbh

---

Ya, but young Parker and Ginobili(2003) weren't anywhere near what they would eventually become..

#2 or #3 is accurate right now. It's going to be a lot of fun if he doesn't make it to the ASG because Kobe Bryant has suddenly been slotted as "front court"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

#2 or #3 is accurate right now. It's going to be a lot of fun if he doesn't make it to the ASG because Kobe Bryant has suddenly been slotted as "front court"...

---

Which is very likely because Draymond was always higher in popularity.

A top 5 player in the league not making the AS SL because of popularity and Kobe deciding to retire as a SF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

#2 or #3 is accurate right now. It's going to be a lot of fun if he doesn't make it to the ASG because Kobe Bryant has suddenly been slotted as "front court"...

---

Well the front court designation is correct. He's spent the vast majority of his minutes this year playing SF, so him being labeled a front court player is fine.

Regardless, yeah, it's beyond stupid that Kobe will be the reason Kawhi isn't starting in the ASG...that's the downside of fan voting: people pick based off names and not performance. In the end though he'll still make it regardless. There's no way coaches won't select him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursFan86

Well the front court designation is correct. He's spent the vast majority of his minutes this year playing SF, so him being labeled a front court player is fine.

---

Situational BS because they happen to be playing small ball. He's the prototypical 2, and has always been. It's just that 3 players are selected in the front court instead of 2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

Situational BS because they happen to be playing small ball. He's the prototypical 2, and has always been. It's just that 3 players are selected in the front court instead of 2.

---

Sure, he has been in the past. Now he's much slower due to age/injuries and he really isn't suited to be playing the 2. Any smart coach wouldn't be playing him at SG at this point (probably wouldn't be playing him at all :lol but that's beside the point).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steeledl

Kawhi is a great player but this is a one man race.

---

Unless the Spurs capture #1

:toast :flag:

Kawhi has played 40 minutes in games that matter. Simmons limited to 8. In those games, Kawhi sitting makes a significant impact. Obviously he's not the epicenter of what we do offensively, nor is he on an island defensively, but he's the most impactful player on both ends. This team is incredibly deep, and we have a few guys who can play at the end of the bench that may truly be the next generation Spurs. We are lucky that against the vast majority of teams, they are good enough to come in and not let the competitiveness and the scoring go to hell.

Still this should not go against him as an MVP candidate. I remember last season MVP Curry and Harden were neck in neck in the MVP race, followed up very closely by Westbrook. Westbrook's team was decimated and underwent significant personnel changes midseason. Harden's team was ok, but they suffered injuries to many of their big men and Harden was unquestionably carrying that team at times. MVP Curry was sensational but that was b4 the championship and the heights he's reached this season. MVP Curry still won it despite the other two dudes carrying worse rosters.

So, Kawhi is in a terrific team, but he's still the best player in that team. The only knock on him is the astronomical level at which MVP Curry is shooting and carrying his team this season.

Ultimately it'll come down to the Spurs vs Warriors matchups. Especially since 3 of them are towards the end of the season. If Kawhi has a great performance he can steal the award like he did with the DPOY award when he had a 7 steal game against the Warriors.

Obviously other factors come into play as well, will both teams still be as dominant? Will either suffer an injury? Will both maintain or even improve their play?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

Ya, but young Parker and Ginobili(2003) weren't anywhere near what they would eventually become..

---

Which gives me hope for our young players. They are already showing promise and are not yet the kind of guys they can be in two or three years if we keep them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

Kawhi has played 40 minutes in games that matter. Simmons limited to 8. In those games, Kawhi sitting makes a significant impact. Obviously he's not the epicenter of what we do offensively, nor is he on an island defensively, but he's the most impactful player on both ends. This team is incredibly deep, and we have a few guys who can play at the end of the bench that may truly be the next generation Spurs. We are lucky that against the vast majority of teams, they are good enough to come in and not let the competitiveness and the scoring go to hell.

Still this should not go against him as an MVP candidate. I remember last season MVP Curry and Harden were neck in neck in the MVP race, followed up very closely by Westbrook. Westbrook's team was decimated and underwent significant personnel changes midseason. Harden's team was ok, but they suffered injuries to many of their big men and Harden was unquestionably carrying that team at times. MVP Curry was sensational but that was b4 the championship and the heights he's reached this season. MVP Curry still won it despite the other two dudes carrying worse rosters.

So, Kawhi is in a terrific team, but he's still the best player in that team. The only knock on him is the astronomical level at which MVP Curry is shooting and carrying his team this season.

---

Yes, Curry is far better this year than last year. That's the biggest reason for the Warriors' gaudy record.

I still wonder if his shooting is just some fluke hot streak or if he really can keep this up. The more of the season that passes, the more that the latter is true.

Actually, Curry is not having any better season this year than last. Last season, he took 1341 shots and 646 3 pt shots. This season, he is pace to shoot 1600 shots. 874 3pt shots. Kawhi on the other hand will take only 1196 shots and 310 3 pt shots.

Defense on the other hand is all Kawhi. Curry doesn't play defense, he shoots.

Curry is doing the Kobe act. Score and score some more. Even if I have to chuck up a lot of shots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursFan86

Ehhh, not sure why they bring up how the Spurs are amazing regardless of Kawhi being playing or not, and then following that up with a comparison to Duncan.

When Duncan was in his prime, it wasn't like that at all. He absolutely carried the team night in and night out and they were didn't perform well at all when he went to the bench. Those teams weren't remotely as deep as the current one.

---

Yeah Kawhi's on and off-court numbers are close because spurs bench beats up other teams bench. Kawhi shouldn't be knocked or lauded because the Spurs bench is really good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ParadoxEN

Says more about the benches/teams than Kawhi or Curry, IMO.

---

It does make it look like draymond doesn't really belong in the conversation, but even that is still very subjective based on who the opponents were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maverick1948

Actually, Curry is not having any better season this year than last. Last season, he took 1341 shots and 646 3 pt shots. This season, he is pace to shoot 1600 shots. 874 3pt shots. Kawhi on the other hand will take only 1196 shots and 310 3 pt shots.

Defense on the other hand is all Kawhi. Curry doesn't play defense, he shoots.

Curry is doing the Kobe act. Score and score some more. Even if I have to chuck up a lot of shots.

---

Why make a claim and then show stats that do nothing to support that claim?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maverick1948

Actually, Curry is not having any better season this year than last. Last season, he took 1341 shots and 646 3 pt shots. This season, he is pace to shoot 1600 shots. 874 3pt shots. Kawhi on the other hand will take only 1196 shots and 310 3 pt shots.

Defense on the other hand is all Kawhi. Curry doesn't play defense, he shoots.

Curry is doing the Kobe act. Score and score some more. Even if I have to chuck up a lot of shots.

---

Curry last year: 23.8 ppg on 63.8 TS%
Curry this year: 29.9 ppg on 67.7 TS%

And "chucking up a lot of shots" is a good thing when you're the most efficient scorer in the NBA (which Curry is).

Teams don't get enough credit. Players get credit for how well the team does instead of their individual performances on defense/offense and their ability/willingness to adapt to a new system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

Unfortunately, Duncan's 2003 dominance is forgotten due to playing in the least popular era of NBA basketball in league history, tbh..when he was carrying teams with young Parker/Ginobili and role players, nobody outside of hardcore NBA fans was watching:lol

---

Duncan was on another level those years when he was carrying the team, 02-03 Tim is as good as I have ever seen or near it. I remember he would light up teams in the playoffs those years for 40 and 20 stat lines and it was nothing.