Reply With Quote
Derron Williams is the black Steve-O. Ewww, no thanks!
The Lakers have been the walking wounded and injured this year while CP3's had a pretty healthy team.
Kobe, Fish, Bynum, Ariza, Pau, Luke, Mihm
If Kobe had Pau, Bynum and Ariza the entire year, they would have put the 72-10 record in jeopardy
Last edited by Allanon; 04-12-2008 at 05:14 PM.
Derron Williams is the black Steve-O. Ewww, no thanks!
More with less? Look at the starting five:
Chris Paul: All Star
Peja: 3-time All Star, 2 time 3 point champion
David West: All Star
Tyson Chandler: last year led the league in rebounding and field goal percentage
Morris Peterson: average player
And all these guys were with CP3 for the entire season. That looks like quite a bit to work with. Now look at who Kobe's had with him all season...
Kobe - many time All Star
Lamar
Fisher
Radmanovic
You can't seriously tell me CP3 had less to work with.
CP3's starting five is probably the 2nd best starting five in the NBA behind the Pistons.
LeBron I agree has less to work with but he's in the lEAST.
Last edited by Allanon; 04-12-2008 at 06:16 PM.
Did you forget Pau Gasol and soon to return Bynum?
Sorry but this is just stupid, if points guards have such an advantage why isn't this the position with the most MVP's in the history of the league?
Paul should be the MVP this season 'cause he's the most important player to his team. Without him N.O would be a lottery team right now.
It's funny how lakers fans say that they have the most talented team when they are talking 'bout the championship but then say that Kobe's no help when they talk 'bout the MVP race.
Both Gasol and Bynum have played less than half a season with the Lakers. That's 2 starters.
No doubt if the entire Lakers team (Pau, Bynum, Ariza) were all there for the FULL season, the Lakers would be much higher than 55 wins. Pau only played about 25 games for the Lakers. Bynum played something like 35.
CP3 had almost 100% of his Starters the entire season. Have Chris Paul lose Peja or David West or Tyson Chandler for half the season and see what they would be like. But of course the Haterade clouds the mind and makes people forget "little" things like that.
The Lakers without Pau and Bynum are not very talented at all.
Last edited by Allanon; 04-12-2008 at 08:29 PM.
kidd? that's stupid.
^^^
I'm sorry, but you're just stupid. Otherwise you would have actually read the ing thread and known that both of your "thoughts" have already been addressed & refuted by this fine poster. See.
And why take the disrespectful tone. This has been a fairly well-thought out, respectful and intelligent thread, whether people have agreed with me or not... That is until you showed up.
Last edited by balli; 04-12-2008 at 10:27 PM.
I read the thread and i wrote what i wrote 'cause i disagree with what you said. In my opinion the "how would the team do without its star player" argument is very valid.
I don't think that i "took the disrespectful tone" i didn't call you stupid i just said that the argument in my opinion is stupid.And why take the disrespectful tone. This has been a fairly well-thought out, respectful and intelligent thread, whether people have agreed with me or not... That is until you showed up
I'm not from the U.S maybe this is considered "disrespectful" in your country. If that's the case i'm sorry i didn't mean it.
I don't hate anybody, I don't consider that thinking that Paul should be the MVP this season makes me a hater.
Just for the record i do think that Kobe was robbed last season.
How would the Lakers do without Kobe? How would the Jazz do without Williams? How would the Nuggets do without Crymelo? How would the Blazers do without B-Roy? How would the Warriors do without Baron Davis? How would the Clippers do without Elton brand... oh wait. How would the Suns do without Steve Nash? How would the Cavs do without LeBron? How would the Magic do without Dwight Howard? How would the Mavs do without Dirk? How would the Spurs do without Timmy? How would the Celtics... Ah it. You get the idea. Maybe they should all be MVP.
Now I feel bad. The thing is this though. My argument isn't stupid. It might be something you disagree with, but it isn't stupid. It could be construed as slightly disrespectful to say it was. Especially since I've said stuff like this:
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.
CP3 IS the MVP this year. Though he hasn't played like it in the last couple of games.
Why?
All of those teams would be worst than what they are right now but most of them would still be very decent teams with the exception of the Cavs (but they are 4th in the east right now so i don't think Lebron should be the MVP).
Nobody thought that N.O would be a playoff team this season and they're 1st in the west right now (or 'til some minutes ago) and the reason for that is Paul's game so that's why i think he should win the MVP award.
Besides in my opinion Paul's numbers are better than Kobe's.
The "this is just stupid" thing it's just a saying in my counrty that you use when you're arguing with somebody but it doesn't mean that you actually think that the other person's artgument is stupid and it isn't considered as an insult. Like i said it's just a saying. But i didn't realize that it could have a different connotation in the U.S so sorry. I forget sometimes that literal translation can be dangerous.Now I feel bad. The thing is this though. My argument isn't stupid. It might be something you disagree with, but it isn't stupid. It could be construed as slightly disrespectful to say it was.
I agree in principal about PG's in general. It is nothing MVP'ish about a PG doing their jobs. Getting their team mates involved is what all of them do and should do. Where I disagree with you is that CP3 IS a reputable MVP candidate. This should have been used for Nash when he won the MVP award. CP3 has done more than just score and pass. He has led the league in steals, showing a commitment on both ends of the court. Nash does nothing on the other end of the court and never will. That is why i believe that the Suns will never win a le with Nash at point. I don't buy this bull that the Suns would not be good without Nash. You put any of the top 10 guards in the league on that team and they still will be good. Look at the Mavs? A MVP actually making a team he leaves better by leaving? It took Nash leaving for the Mavs to make it to the finals. Same thing will apply to the Suns. Cp3 has earned MVP recognition and If he wins, it will be deserved!
Is that going to be your excuse when you get knocked out of the playoffs?The Lakers have been the walking wounded and injured this year while CP3's had a pretty healthy team.
Kobe, Fish, Bynum, Ariza, Pau, Luke, Mihm
If Kobe had Pau, Bynum and Ariza the entire year, they would have put the 72-10 record in jeopardy
Don't fans of all teams use that as an excuse?
Didn't Spurs fans use it as an excuse in the 2000 playoffs?
You could also make the argument that the leading big man of a team should never win the MVP because they impact the game too much. They get the majority of rebounds, are usually the best defender on the team, and get a lot of credit for picking up glory stats (see Camby of last year). Centers can dictate the pace of the game every bit as much as guardplay. They command double teams, and since it's easier for them to see over them, it makes passing out of one easier, with the bonus that they can actually pass over the top of the coming help-defender.
PGs might be the face of a team, but they don't always dictate the offensive rhythm, nor are they always the focus. As soon as Duncan arrived in San Antonio, he was the "point" man of the offense.
The fact is, a player who's good enough to win MVP will always be the focus of his team. The point-blank fact that the media hasn't gathered into it's consciousness yet is that the MVP should be that on BOTH sides of the ball. And no, it's not typically possible for a guard to be the defensive force that a Center is. But a guard CAN influence the game defensively, and they can hit 3s, penetrate at will, and distribute much more efficiently than is typical of a big man. So the counterbalance is there. An MVP should never be a weakness to a team, he should only add strengths to complement what his team CAN do. That's why Nash is a joke, but also why Paul could very possibly win the MVP this year.
To think that they would have even made the playoffs without him is a joke, and here they are with a few games left in the season, fighting for the #1 seed in the most compe ive WC in history, when no one had them as more than a 5 seed? If that? It was Spurs and Mavs, then the Rockets, then the Jazz and Suns, the Lakers were expected to do well, and yet here we are: Paul has his team where no one gave them a chance to be. Sounds like an MVP in my book.
Sure. We never talked about "oh well we were better than the Bulls 72-win season that year, we were just hurt so we didn't even win 60 games", though.
You have your Manu Injury card ready CryHavoc?
I also remember that excuse when Tim Duncan had an ankle injury and wasn't available for the Playoffs
You have your Manu Injury card ready CryHavoc?
I also remember that excuse when Tim Duncan had an ankle injury and wasn't available for the Playoffs
Yeah, because losing the best player in the league at the time for the duration of the playoffs, and having a 2nd year player who's never won a playoff game injured for the 2nd half of the regular season are the exact same thing.
Because saying, "We would have done better in the playoffs and had a shot at the le if we were healthy" and "we would have won over 70 games in the regular season if we were healthy". Are the same thing.
And if you really think Manu won't be ready for the playoffs, you probably have never watched him play. Even if we were completely healthy, I wouldn't be so homeristic and arrogant as to compare this current Spurs to the best regular season team of all-time (who also happened to win the le that year). You remind me a lot of the younger Mavs fans from last year who were already putting their team in the best-ever discussion while it was still February.
Hahah, patheticYeah, because losing the best player in the league at the time for the duration of the playoffs, and having a 2nd year player who's never won a playoff game injured for the 2nd half of the regular season are the exact same thing.
Because saying, "We would have done better in the playoffs and had a shot at the le if we were healthy" and "we would have won over 70 games in the regular season if we were healthy". Are the same thing.
And if you really think Manu won't be ready for the playoffs, you probably have never watched him play. Even if we were completely healthy, I wouldn't be so homeristic and arrogant as to compare this current Spurs to the best regular season team of all-time (who also happened to win the le that year). You remind me a lot of the younger Mavs fans from last year who were already putting their team in the best-ever discussion while it was still February.
I guess that leaves me begging the question as to why people assume Paul is a good defender. You talked earlier in your post about big men inflating their stats, citing Camby as a perfect example. I think the same thing is happening with Paul and steals. He is good at taking good bets and really isn't as much of a gambler as AI, for instance, but on the ball? In the post? He is just terrible. Not that it's his fault; he's a small-ass dude, but nonetheless his inability to guard anyone with even moderate size is not only a liability, it's a huge liability. Look no further than the 2-8 lifetime record against Deron. Kobe on the other hand is one of, if not THE best on-ball, defending SG in the league.
I kind of see you as making two different arguments here. The first, I reject. You can throw all that "where would they be without him" garbage out the window. Like I said last night- Where would any team be without their best player?
Your second argument is the one to make, and really, it's the one that gives me pause in consideration of my own position. I don't agree with those saying that he has a great supporting cast. I think at best it could be described as somewhere in the middle. Certainly not as good as the Jazz, Spurs, Suns or Mavs, but I actually do think it's comprable to LA's if you count Bynum and then Gasol as only one player. Therefore, because of Paul the team has overachieved (which is entirely seperate from "where would they be without him"). I guess I just think LA has overachieved as well and, in my eyes anyway, Kobe is just a better defender and ultimately a more talented player. For those reasons I give him an edge.
Furthermore, I do think it's harder for other positions to facilitate the game, even if they're tall enough to pass out of double-teams. I don't think anything will convince me otherwise. Like I said:
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
