Out of all the point guards in the league there are four who have clearly seperated themselves from the rest of the pack; Nash, Paul, Williams and Kidd. Statistically they are all near one another in terms of assists. I consider any differences they have to cancel one another out. For example, Kidd gets more rebounds, but Deron plays better on the ball defense. Paul get's more steals, but he can't guard anyone with size. Nash gets more assists, but he also gets more turnovers. My point is, that statistically they are all very, very close and in terms of talent and importance to their teams, they are even closer. Except for one glaring difference in which Paul is kicking their asses.
This season Nash is #1 in the league in turnovers, Deron is 2 and Kidd is 3rd. Anyone want to guess where paul is at... 25. That's right Paul is getting more than an assist and a half better than those other three/TO. Absoultely incredible. However, he is not the MVP.
The reason is this; Chris Paul plays point guard. In my opinion, unless the voters are ready to give a point the MVP every single year, they should never give it to them. Being a point guard is very different from being any other position. Your job literally is to facilitate your team. In essence a good pg is always his teams MVP, because his job on the court is at it's most basic of levels all about making other people better. To me, that puts pg's at an incredible advantage when it comes to winning this award.
Of course, there are no clear criteria for the MVP voters; Are they voting for the most talented, the person who brought cultural change, the best player on the best team or the guy who improves his teamates the most? I'd suspect most of them though, vote based on the latter. In that case wouldn't they really be voting for a PG every year? And also, wouldn't that really mean, that a PG has a compe ive advantage, solely becasue of the position they play, to win the award every single season?
Well, that. Being an MVP is the PG's main job. Being the MVP trancends the SG, SF, PF positions of guys like Kobe, Garnett or James. Compared to pg's, they are at a competetive disadvantage when it comes to making their teamates better, but they do it anyway. Maybe not as well, but they do it from an entirely different modus operandi. (and aren't hapless gamblers on defense to boot).
I'm not going to flip if Paul wins it. He's had a great season, but he's also had the ball in his hands about 50% more time than any of the other candidates and he's also had the freedom to facilitate the team in ways that different positions simply cannot do. In conclusion, every season a pg is the truest MVP. For that reason alone they should never win it.
Last edited by balli; 03-22-2009 at 11:34 AM.
PGs are most important, which precludes them from winning an award les Most Valuable Player. Ok. Except that historically, PGs with high assist numbers don't win championships, and MVPs usually go to Centers and Centers playing PF (or in the case of Magic, playing PG).
Great points and i agree great year by Paul but i would only vote for him if the hornets had a record like the Celts ...otherwise he is just doing his job ...it's kobe or Lebron they both have the stats and Bron's aslightly better but the record does not support him.
That's exactly the point. It's a billion times harder for a center to make his teamates better than it is for a PG. Some of them do it. Therefore, if you're going to hand out the award based on that criteria don't you have to take into account the difficulty that Centers have over PG's? Or, doesn't a point have to win it every year?
Both MJ and Kobe were/are the PGs of their teams, no matter what the program says. Are you telling me that Kerr or Paxson ran the Bulls offense, or that Fisher runs the Laker offense? Please...
No one in the triangle offense would ever have the ball in their hands as much as a traditional offense the likes of Nash's or Paul's. Also, I believe no one in the triangle offense the last 20 years hasn't even averaged 9 assists per game.
Thanks. I was getting ready to say that. The triangle comlicates the issue.
However, ChuckD, take LeBron for example. He is the PG of his team, but he is 6'8" and see's double teams about 150% more of the time than Paul. It is much, much harder in my opinion for LeBron to facilitate his team than it is for Paul, but LeBron manages to do it anyway. It's exactly my point again- LeBron is trancending his position, paul is not.
CP3 has done more with less than any of the other candidates for MVP this year. His greatest magic trick of all is making Tyson Chandler look like the top 3 pick he was instead of the bust he has been every year until he ran into CP3. Only Lebron probably has less to work with and he hasn't done as good a job in a weaker conference.
Understand this: I'm not a Chris Paul fan. I don't like him, but I recognize what he is doing this year.
I mean by that criteria Paul is MVP because Kirk Hinrich sucked?
I recognize what he's doing this year too, but I guess I just view it as expected given his position. If Chris Paul were Deron, Nash or Kidd I guarantee they'd be making Tyson Chandler look good too.
Make no mistake. Paul has been the most important player for any team this season. I'm just saying, I expect that out of him, just like I do all the other 3 true point guards. And I'm saying, being 6' and playing point makes it easier for him.
My point isn't that there is a more valuable player than paul; it's that paul or a point-guard, realistically should win the award every single season. Therefore, they should never win it. (Barring a year in which someone averages a triple double)
Also, Paul gets a lot of steals but he sucks ing ass at defense. Why do you think Deron owns him? I mean, ing owns him! Because he can't guard anyone who's good, thats why.
MVPs are many times the facilitators of the offense, whether or not they are the point guards. Michael was the facilitator of the offense in Chicago. Hakeem was the facilitator of the offense in Houston. Tim Duncan was the facilitator of the offense for the Spurs the years he won it. This compe ive advantage you speak of for point guards isn't an advantage for point guards who play on teams that run their offense through the post or with hybrid 2-guards or point forwards like Michael, Kobe, LeBron, or Wade. Derek Fisher and Jameer Nelson don't have advantages to win the MVP over LeBron and Kobe because LeBron and Kobe have a lot of point guard responsibilities.
It's a pretty good theory on paper if you don't go deeper. But, I don't think it holds true very much at all.
Actually, they owned each other in their recent meeting.
I like Deron Williams better. He has more to work with, though, with Booz, Okur, and AK47.
I don't like your argument that a PG should never win because of their position and that they are expected to make their teammates better. By that logic, no franchise player should win either, since they would only be doing what is expected of them.
Hakeem facilitated the game from the post. He was an awesome passer and had to deal with double teams on near every single play. Same with Duncan. A pg has the entire court to work with and the only time they see doubles is for fleeting seconds when defenders flash out on screen-rolls. In my opinion, it was harder for Hakeem and is harder for Duncan to facilitate the game than it would be for a point guard.
A point can roam the whole court to facilitate the game and rarely see's doubles. LeBron, Kobe and Michael can roam about half the court (although we already discussed the triangle ing this up) and they see more doubles than points. A big man can only roam the high and low post and if they're good, they always see doubles.
With each change upwards in position, it gets harder and harder for players to facilitate a game. That's why I'm more impressed with forwards and centers who are still able to do it.
if you say cp3 isnt worthy of mvp
then why does steve nash has 2?
mind you, this season cp3 has outplayed any of steves best during his b2b mvp performances and his oscar act, let alone cp3 has less around him, and his posting up a nice team record there.
Yeah true that. They did both play ty. And you're right, you expect LeBron and Kobe to be facilitators. That doesn't mean it's as easy for them as it is for a PG. It just means it's expected of them. Maybe I should have stated that better the first time. I think it not only comes down to expectation; but rather the ease ones' position allows in terms of carrying those expectations out.Actually, they owned each other in their recent meeting.
I like Deron Williams better. He has more to work with, though, with Booz, Okur, and AK47.
I don't like your argument that a PG should never win because of their position and that they are expected to make their teammates better. By that logic, no franchise player should win either, since they would only be doing what is expected of them.
I just thought it would be a foregone conclusion that I didn't agree with Nash winning those MVP's. It was implicit based on my position.
And it isn't that paul isn't worthy of being MVP. In my opinion, he's too worthy. And by that logic he always will be. If they give it to him this year, they better give it to him or another pg for the next 15 because no player is going to make his teamates better than a pg.
But the difference between cp3 and the other PGs out there currently is that his posting up nice numbers, roland ratings, watever number crunchin analysis you wanna bring up are up there with the greats,
only franchise players are in discussion for MVPs....
borderline players never get a look at...
Well... and that's why people make the argument for Paul and it's the reason I started this thread the way I did. He's not that much better than Kidd, Deron or Nash. Except in turnovers. Roland ratings, etc get inflated because of his propensity to gamble on steals.
I mean, I see exactly why people are clammoring for Paul... he is having an incredible season. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that maybe someday I'll have to admit being wrong and all the Paul supporters will be right. For now though, I disagree with it. And whether or not people agree or disagree with me, I'd hope they at least see my argument and reasoning as possible and plausible, if not in line with their views, that's all.
CP3 probably isn't the MVP but he is close.
I hate Chris Paul and hopes he comes down with a BAD injury. Thug .
And with that BS this thread takes it's first ugly turn.
I was being.... .. nevermind .
What a horrible person CP3 is. He is everything that is wrong with the nba.
Does this come back to Paul punching that dude in the nuts or is there a reason people hate him otherwise?
Edit: I know you were being sarcastic mavsfan, but could someone who hates paul clue me into why?
Last edited by balli; 04-12-2008 at 02:18 PM.
Like Jamstone said, that theory doesn't completely hold up. Just because a PG initiates the offense, great players still make plays regardless. There have been PG's who deservingly won MVP, and those who have not. This year I think the award belongs to Kobe.
There is something to be said about the argument though. Since Nash won his MVPs, the writers sort of decided that the MVP has to 'make his teammates' better, whatever that is supposed to mean.
If that's the criteria though, it is always biased towards the PGs because they are the ones who are putting their teammates in position to succeed. Somehow Stockton never won, or came close to winning an MVP, while doing the same things and now all of a sudden it has become the main criteria in winning the MVP.
To me it's simple, take the elite teams in the league, I mean top3; see which player from these three teams is having the best season and hand him the award. None of this 'how would the team do without him' argumet.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
