Players that SHOULD have won the MVP

[jlauber]

Thanks to a question by ShaqAttack, I think this topic would be an interesting discussion...

Players who SHOULD have won the MVP in a year in which they did not...

There are probably many good ones, but I'll start it with Wilt's 68-69 season. Why? Wes Unseld won the award that year (as well as ROY.) He led the Bullets to their best-ever record, at 57-25...so that was probably a good reason, but as ShaqAttack pointed out, his teammate Earl Monroe averaged 25 ppg that year as well. In any case, Unseld averaged 13.8 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 2.6 apg, and shot .476 from the floor.

Meanwhile, MY "impartial" pick for the MVP that year was Wilt. He led the Lakers to their best-ever record (in LA) at 55-27. He did finish third in scoring on his own team, behind West and Baylor...but he averaged 20.5 ppg. He also led the NBA in rebounding at 21.1 rpg, as well as leading the league in FG% at .583. In addition, he averaged 4.5 apg. On top of that, he abused Unseld H2H, including one game in which he put up a 25-38 game to Unseld's 9-15 (or something close to that.)

BTW, while Unseld won the MVP award that year...Chamberlain did not even finish in the top-10!

[Yung D-Will]

In before someone says 08 Chris Paul.


Yea but Jordan should have taken Malone's mvp

[brantonli]

To me, it seems weird how Nash and LeBron both have 2 MVPs, and guys like Shaq, Bryant, Garnett have one each. I guess in a sense it shows that MVP is really a regular season award.

[jlauber]

To me, it seems weird how Nash and LeBron both have 2 MVPs, and guys like Shaq, Bryant, Garnett have one each. I guess in a sense it shows that MVP is really a regular season award.

EXCELLENT post. IMHO, Shaq in 00-01 and Kobe in 05-06.

[Sarcastic]

Michael Jordan deserved it in 1988-89, but lost to Magic. He also deserved it in 1996-97, but lost to Malone.

Olajuwon deserved it in 1994-95, but lost to David Robinson. They both had dominant years, but I think Olajuwon was the better player that year.

[allball]

Dr. J - 80

[Disaprine]

To me, it seems weird how Nash and LeBron both have 2 MVPs, and guys like Shaq, Bryant, Garnett have one each. I guess in a sense it shows that MVP is really a regular season award.
:applause:

[jlauber]

Michael Jordan deserved it in 1988-89, but lost to Magic. He also deserved it in 1996-97, but lost to Malone.

Olajuwon deserved it in 1994-95, but lost to David Robinson. They both had dominant years, but I think Olajuwon was the better player that year.

If they included the post-season, Hakeem would definitely have won it.

Speaking of Magic...he should have won it in 81-82. 18.6 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 9.5 apg, and .537 from the floor. A near triple-double season, and the closest anyone has come to Oscar's mark (other than Oscar himself.)

[ShaqAttack3234]

Jordan in 1990
Shaq in 2001

Those come to mind instantly.

[no pun intended]

1996-2010 Kobe Bryant

[jlauber]

Jordan in 1990
Shaq in 2001

Those come to mind instantly.

Jordan certainly had much better stats...but Magic led that Laker team to a 63-19 record...and Kareem had retired the season before. Once again, I believe Magic made his teammates much better than they would have been without him. His stats, like Russell's and even Duncan's, don't always tell the whole story.

[PowerGlove]

What a surprise ShaqAttack.:oldlol:

Anyways, MVP is a completely subjective award and I don't how many times I have to stress that to people over and over again. It's not just about statistics, teammates, wins/losses,etc. I dont get what is so hard to understand about that.

[jlauber]

What a surprise ShaqAttack.:oldlol:

Anyways, MVP is a completely subjective award and I don't how many times I have to stress that to people over and over again. It's not just about statistics, teammates, wins/losses,etc. I dont get what is so hard to understand about that.

I agree with your basic premise (that is why I believe Magic's value went way beyond his own stats), and I also believe that that Philly team over-achieved, and I'll give AI credit for that...but still...Shaq's numbers and efficiency were just spectacular.

[PHILA]

Barkley 1990
Shaq 2005

[BoogieWoogieMan]

Jason Kidd 2001-02

[1987_Lakers]

Shaq 2001
Jordan 1997
Jordan 1990
Larry Bird 1981
Kareem 1973

[jlauber]

Shaq 2001
Jordan 1997
Jordan 1990
Larry Bird 1981
Kareem 1973

72-73 was a tough one. Cowens led the Celtics to a 68-14 record. And Archibald not only led the league in scoring, he also led the league in assists. And finally, Wilt led the league in rebounding, set a FG% mark that will probably never be broken, and was voted first team all-defense.

[jlauber]

Incidently McAdoo should probably have beaten Kareem out in 73-74. McAdoo led the NBA in scoring at 30.6 ppg (Kareem was at 27.0); he led the league in FG% at .547 (Kareem was at .539); and he averaged 15.1 rpg (Kareem was at 14.5 rpg.)

[ShaqAttack3234]

Jordan certainly had much better stats...but Magic led that Laker team to a 63-19 record...and Kareem had retired the season before. Once again, I believe Magic made his teammates much better than they would have been without him. His stats, like Russell's and even Duncan's, don't always tell the whole story.

Jordan was just the better player at that point, IMO and he was elite at both ends of the court and the Bulls team was good, but not that good as Pippen and Grant were not in their primes yet.

Technically, Barkley got robbed in a sense because got the most first place votes and lost the award based soley on biased morons who left him off their ballot completely. Granted, I think Jordan was the most deserving anyway, but anyone who left Barkley off their ballot should have been banned from voting for the award.

[SALFORD-RED]

This may have been mentioned in Shaqattacks post that you mentioned in the OP, but Kobe 05-06.

Seriously, he got the 7th seed with the most garbage roster of all time.

Chris Mihm, Kwame Brown, Smuch Parker, Luke Walton, Vujacic, Brian Cook.

That was his supporting cast and he took them within 1 Tim Thomas 3 of beating the 2 seed. That was the year I looked upon the MVP as a joke accolade (as Shaq later described "tainted").


Finals MVP should have been Manu in 2005.

[Samurai Swoosh]

IMO

1990 - Michael Jordan
1993 - Michael Jordan
1997 - Michael Jordan
2006 - Kobe Bryant
2007 - Kobe Bryant
2008 - Chris Paul
2009 - Dwyane Wade

[DeeDee]

06 - Lebron
08 - Chris Paul

[1987_Lakers]

72-73 was a tough one. Cowens led the Celtics to a 68-14 record. And Archibald not only led the league in scoring, he also led the league in assists. And finally, Wilt led the league in rebounding, set a FG% mark that will probably never be broken, and was voted first team all-defense.

The Celtics winning 68 games that year really wasn't impressive once you realize that they played in the same division as Buffalo who lost 61 games & the Sixers who lost 73 games. 14 of their wins came against these two teams. Archibald had a great year statistically, but it led to no team success, the Kings only won 36 games that year. Wilt was an amazing defender & rebounder in '73, but he was no longer dominant enough to win MVP. Kareem was clearly the best player in the league averaging 30/16/5 on 55FG% & his team did win 60 games. Kareem should of been MVP in 1973.

[Samurai Swoosh]

IMO

1990 - Michael Jordan
1993 - Michael Jordan
1997 - Michael Jordan
2006 - Kobe Bryant
2007 - Kobe Bryant
2008 - Chris Paul
2009 - Dwyane Wade
Yes, you read all that correctly ... Michael Jordan should've been sitting on 8 MVP awards.

No one man should have ALL that power !!

[jlauber]

The Celtics winning 68 games that year really wasn't impressive once you realize that they played in the same division as Buffalo who lost 61 games & the Sixers who lost 73 games. 14 of their wins came against these two teams. Archibald had a great year statistically, but it led to no team success, the Kings only won 36 games that year. Wilt was an amazing defender & rebounder in '73, but he was no longer dominant enough to win MVP. Kareem was clearly the best player in the league averaging 30/16/5 on 55FG% & his team did win 60 games. Kareem should of been MVP in 1973.

Not really arguing with you, but all three of those guys had a legitimate case. Chamberlain finished 4th. That guy couldn't even win the MVP award with a 50.4 ppg, 25.7 rpg, .506 season. And in another year, he averaged 44.8 ppg (winning the scoring title by 10 ppg); led the league in rebounding at 24.6 rpg; set a then record FG% mark of .528; led the NBA in Win Shares by a wide-margin (albeit on a losing team); and a PER rating of 31.8, which is the all-time record. For all of that, he finished SEVENTH in the voting.

[Sarcastic]

Yes, you read all that correctly ... Michael Jordan should've been sitting on 8 MVP awards.

No one man should have ALL that power !!

If Jordan won every year from 1987-1998 (not including 1994+1995 due to retirement), I would have no problem with that. He was easily the best player in the league for each and every one of those years.

[Samurai Swoosh]

If Jordan won every year from 1987-1998 (not including 1994+1995 due to retirement), I would have no problem with that. He was easily the best player in the league for each and every one of those years.
Yesss ... easily. Anyone arguing that is ridiculous. It wasn't even arguable from 1990 - 1998. Throw in the '87 MVP. That's 8 MVP's I feel he should have.

[Lebron23]

2005 - Kobe
2006 - LeBron James
2008 - Chris Paul

[Bosnian Sajo]

shaq 00-01, 04-05

kobe 05-07 basically :lol

[1987_Lakers]

Yesss ... easily. Anyone arguing that is ridiculous. It wasn't even arguable from 1990 - 1998. Throw in the '87 MVP. That's 8 MVP's I feel he should have.

No.

[Sarcastic]

No.

37 ppg was unreal.

[ImmortalD24]

2006 - Kobe Bryant
2007 - Kobe Bryant
2008 - Kobe Bryant
2009 - Dwyane Wade

[Sarcastic]

2006 - Kobe Bryant
2007 - Kobe Bryant
2008 - Kobe Bryant
2009 - Dwyane Wade

Kobe won in 2008.

[Shep]

1965 - oscar robertson
1969 - wilt chamberlain
1970 - kareem abdul-jabbar
1973 - kareem abdul-jabbar
1975 - elvin hayes
1978 - george gervin
1979 - kareem abdul-jabbar
1982 - larry bird
1989 - michael jordan
1990 - michael jordan
1993 - hakeem olajuwon
1994 - david robinson
1997 - michael jordan
1998 - karl malone
1999 - tim duncan
2001 - shaquille o'neal
2005 - shawn marion
2006 - tim duncan
2008 - chris paul

[East_Stone_Ya]

Jason Kidd 2001-02

that was a shock to me, i mean Nets won franchise best 52 games that season.

[beermonsteroo]

Jordan 1990
Drexler 1992
Shaq 1998
Kidd 2002
Paul 2008

[Stringer Bell]

I remember feeling at the time that Jordan deserved the MVP for the 1989-90 season.

Now I look back on it and seeing what a great year that was for MVP candidates.

Jordan's Bulls go 55-27, Michael has another amazing year. 4th straight year leading the league at scoring with 33.6 PPG. Also puts up 6.9 RPG, 6.3 APG. All defensive first team, leads the league in steals, win shares, PER, 2nd in total minutes played,

Robinson's Spurs improve from 21-61 to 56-26. D-Rob averages 24.3 PPG, 12 RPG (2nd in the league), almost 4 blocks a game (3rd in the league).

Magic, who won, lead the Lakers to a 63-19 record and puts up 22.3, 11.5 APG (2nd in the NBA), and 6.6 RPG.

Barkley averages 25.2 PPG (6th in the NBA), 11.5 RPG (3rd in the NBA), and shoots 60% (2nd in the league) from the floor. Philadelphia wins 53 games.

I really don't know who I would vote for that year.

[Shep]

I remember feeling at the time that Jordan deserved the MVP for the 1989-90 season.

Now I look back on it and seeing what a great year that was for MVP candidates.

Jordan's Bulls go 55-27, Michael has another amazing year. 4th straight year leading the league at scoring with 33.6 PPG. Also puts up 6.9 RPG, 6.3 APG. All defensive first team, leads the league in steals, win shares, PER, 2nd in total minutes played,

Robinson's Spurs improve from 21-61 to 56-26. D-Rob averages 24.3 PPG, 12 RPG (2nd in the league), almost 4 blocks a game (3rd in the league).

Magic, who won, lead the Lakers to a 63-19 record and puts up 22.3, 11.5 APG (2nd in the NBA), and 6.6 RPG.

Barkley averages 25.2 PPG (6th in the NBA), 11.5 RPG (3rd in the NBA), and shoots 60% (2nd in the league) from the floor. Philadelphia wins 53 games.

I really don't know who I would vote for that year.
ya

what about john stockton who averaged 17.2ppg, 2.6rpg, 14.5apg (most assists per game in nba history), and 2.7spg while leading the jazz to 55 wins

or

hakeem olajuwon who only won 41 games, but put up one of the craziest statlines you'll ever see while playing all 82 games: 24.3ppg, 14rpg, 2.9apg, 2.1spg, and 4.6bpg

michael jordan is the real mvp out of this stellar group tho, just over robinson..infact it was so close it could've been co-mvp

[k-vil]

Jason Kidd 2001-02
This.
Even Shaq commented that Jason Kidd was the true MVP of that season.

[creepingdeath]

To those who think that Kobe should have won Dirk's award, some facts:

- he led the Mavericks to the 6th best NBA record ever (67-15) and, of course, to the best record of the year in the toughest conference and division (all 1st NBA players of that year were from the West)
- he got nearly twice the amount of 1st place votes than runner-up Steve Nash and more than 40 times the amount of Kobe's
- he became the first player in the NBA to lead his team to three 12+ win streaks (12, 13, 17) in a single season
- the rest of the starting five: Harris, Howard, Dampier, Terry with only Howard being an All-Star
- for the stat freaks: he lead the league in PER for the second time in a row with 27.1 (one of the highest in the history of the game) and in win shares with 16.3
- efficiency: his statline in only a little over 36 minutes - 24.6 ppg, 50.2FG%, 41.6 3pt%, 90.4 FT%, 8.9 rbds, 3.4, 2.2 TO (he was the only player that season with 40+ 3pt%, 50+ FG% and 90%+ FT%)


- in a MVP survey after the season, the General Managers of the NBA gave Dirk more than twice the 1st place votes than runner-up Steve Nash and 17 times the votes that Kobe obtained
- Nowitzki received 10 of 16 votes from an ESPN panel of experts

and most importantly, for Kobe fans, the man himself after only being halfway through the season about who should win the MVP award:

"Give it to Dirk. I just think he's having a phenomenal year," said Bryant.

"Dirk gets my vote," said Nash.

This is not a knock on Kobe at all, so please don't hate. But Dirk absolutely deserved the MVP that year.

[MasterDurant24]

Doctor J in 1979-80
Willis Reed in 1968-69

[Yung D-Will]

This.
Even Shaq commented that Jason Kidd was the true MVP of that season.
I call Bullshit.

[PurpleChuck]

2008-09: Dwyane Wade, dude got robbed.

[brantonli]

How about Nash's 2nd MVP? Even when he got awarded it a lot of people were saying he didn't deserve it.

[k-vil]

I call Bullshit.
:oldlol:

[Yung D-Will]

2008-09: Dwyane Wade, dude got robbed.

You know Damn well the Nba wants to make it seem like Wade never existed in history

[SinJackal]

The only changes I would make to the recent MVPs would be to replace AI's MVP with a Shaq MVP, Nash's second MVP with Kobe's first, and Kobe's MVP for one for Paul.

To go back to the 90's, I don't agree that Hakeem deserved more than 1 MVP. . .how can you guys seriously sit there and claim DRob didn't deserve his MVP? DRob should have won the MVP over Hakeem the year before anyway. Put up way better numbers. He was 30/11/5 on 51% shooting, 35% 3pt shooting, 75% FT%, with 2 steals and 3 and a half blocks a game. If that's not MVP numbers, then what is?

Hakeem didn't win it in 94-95 because his team had a shit record. The only reason he got it the year before was 'cause he won a few more games than DRob's Spurs while putting up lesser stats in a HIGHER PACED OFFENSE. He sure as hell didn't deserve it a second year in a row when DRob won over 60 games and Hakeem didn't even win 50.

And I would've given Magic's last two MVPs to the "better MJ", since he obviously deserved them more as he was the far better player. And debatably Malone didn't deserve both his MVPs.

My opinons anyway. I can't speak on any earlier basketball, since I didn't watch any earlier.



To me, it seems weird how Nash and LeBron both have 2 MVPs, and guys like Shaq, Bryant, Garnett have one each. I guess in a sense it shows that MVP is really a regular season award.

It's weird that Shaq only got one since AI shouldn't have got the one he did (imo) but it's not weird that LeBron has two. He's been the best player in the league for at least 3 years now. It's also not weird that Garnett only has one, because you'd be taking away MVPs from Tim Duncan if you were to give KG more. Does KG deserve 2 MVPs, and Duncan only 1?

Nash shouldn't have gotten two, agreed, but imo Bryant never had 2 seasons where he was clearly even a top 2 player, much less best. And the season I'm talking about isn't even the season he won it in, so I don't think he deserved more than one anyway. Chris Paul has 0, and should have one.


2008-09: Dwyane Wade, dude got robbed.

D Wade's team that year was barely over .500. LeBron's was 66-16.

LeBron also put up similar/better stats in most categories. It was Wade's best season ever, but he was the second best player that year, and played for a shit team. Best player happened to also be on the team with the best record.

No brainer that LeBron was MVP. Especially since He should have won it the year before as it is.

[Ikill]

In before someone says 08 Chris Paul.


Yea but Jordan should have taken Malone's mvp
chris paul is better than deron Williams

[brantonli]

I was talking more from a overall success to MVP ratio. If LeBron had won a championship, then I would have no qualms about his MVPs. At the time, I had no problems with James winning 2 MVPs, his team had won 66 and 60 something games, and had just gone to the NBA Finals. I know that rings and MVPs are unrelated, but it's just the stigma of not getting both still sticks in my mind. But I disagree about Chris Paul, as far as memory serves the only year he got serious MVP consideration was during 08-09, and Paul and Bryant were the main forerunners, but Kobe deserved it that season because he finally lead the team to the 1st seed (although nobody expected he would win by such a huge margin). Plus I think (pure opinion here) that the voters thought 'Ah heck Kobe deserves the MVP after all this time anyway' and voted for him.

[Ikill]

Kobe in 06 paul in 08 wade in 09

[Calabis]

To me, it seems weird how Nash and LeBron both have 2 MVPs, and guys like Shaq, Bryant, Garnett have one each. I guess in a sense it shows that MVP is really a regular season award.

I think Kobe would have had more, if not for the Colorado incident. His image took a hit right before his best seasons. Its funny I thought he should have had one over Nash 05-06, yet the one he won I thought Chris Paul was more deserving.

[L.A. Jazz]

(2010 James)
(2009 James)
(2008 Bryant)
(2007 Nowitzki)
2006 Bryant
(2005 Nash)
(2004 Garnett)
(2003 Duncan)
(2002 Duncan)
2001 Shaq
(2000 Shaq)
1999 Duncan
1998 Malone
1997 Jordan

that would give Nash and Malone only 1, 2 for Shaq and Kobe and 3 for Duncan. thats what i think would be about right.

[Calabis]

Michael Jordan in 88-89..Pippen and Grant still wet behind the ears

32.5ppg 8reb, 8ast, 53%FG,2.9stls. After being called on to run the point guard position, he put up 7 straight triple doubles and 10 in 11 games. He finished with 14 triple doubles. He had 5 50+ point games and his last month of the season he avg 32ppg, 9rebs, 10ast

Magic won it 22.5ppg, 12.8ast, 7.9rebs, yeah his team had a better record, but he also had better players

[jlauber]

Doctor J in 1979-80
Willis Reed in 1968-69

Reed came in second in 68-69 (behind Unseld), and would win it the next year. Interesting, though, to compare Reed's numbers with Wilt's. Reed averaged 21.1 ppg, 14.5 rpg, shot .521, and averaged 2.3 apg. Chamberlain averaged 20.5 ppg, 21.1 rpg (led the league), shot .583 (led the league), and 4.5 apg. Reed's Knicks went 54-28, while Wilt's Lakers went 55-27. Once again, Reed finished 2nd...while Wilt was not even in the top-10.

[Desperado]

1990- Charles Barkley

1997- Michael Jordan

2001- Shaquille O'Neal or Tim Duncan

2002- Jason Kidd

2005- Shaquille O'Neal

2006- Kobe Bryant

2007- Kobe Bryant

[rzp]

Shaq got robbed year after year, except 00. He was the most dominant player by far for like 7-8 years in a row, he deserved at least 4 mvps. I think mvp voters just dont like his bulk up style, overpowering people and dunking in their faces. Shaq would be more recognized if he decided to be a gay soft jumpshooter.

[step_back]

Scottie Pippen 1994

lead the bulls in points, assists, steals and led the team to 55 wins which was 2 less than the previous year with Michael Jordan.

Even though I am a bulls fan you have to admit that is MVP worthy ^

[Desperado]

Scottie Pippen 1994

lead the bulls in points, assists, steals and led the team to 55 wins which was 2 less than the previous year with Michael Jordan.

Even though I am a bulls fan you have to admit that is MVP worthy ^

Pippen could have won MVP that season, but Hakeem wasn't a bad choice.

[Desperado]

Pippen could have won MVP that season, but Hakeem wasn't a bad choice.

Not to mention the Bulls were 4-6, on pace for 33 wins and the lottery without Pippen, and 51-21 on pace for 58 wins and the #1 seed with him.

Also if Grant and Pippen played as many games as they did in '93 that year, the Bulls would have won 59-61 games in '94 (they were a ridiculous 44-16 in games Grant and Pippen played). Not only would they have topped the win total of the '93 Bulls without Jordan they would have also had the # 1 seed in the East, second best record in the NBA overall.

Pippen would have defiantly won MVP then.

He still had a great case for MVP that year anyway and would have been deserving if he won, Hakeem was a good choice though that season but if you factor in those things he clearly would have won it.

[Samurai Swoosh]

1990- Charles Barkley
**** OUTTA HERE ...

Michael Jordan 1989 - 1990

34 PPG, 7 RPG, 6 APG, 3 SPG

All NBA 1st Team Defense

Team went 55 - 27

Next closest scorer Scottie Pippen @ 17 ppg ... Jordan doubled the amount of the next closest scorer on the team.

Charles Barkely ... :facepalm ... no defense

[Samurai Swoosh]

Kobe won in 2008.
He's got Kobe on the brain ... and wishes he was giving him brain.

:oldlol:

[ShaqAttack3234]

This.
Even Shaq commented that Jason Kidd was the true MVP of that season.

:oldlol: No, I rememeber Shaq saying he got robbed that year just like he said in What prevented Shaq from winning several more was games played.

In 2002, the Lakers started off the season 19-4 before he missed a few games with an injury and he was considered the MVP favorite. He came back after a few games, but he went down with another shortly after. Actually, many were predicting he'd win his second before the season, iirc. The Lakers were 51-16 with him and 7-8 without him that year and they lost to some bad teams without him, but missing 15 games is a bit much too win MVP. Duncan was deserving, though it does speak volumes that they were on a 62-63 win pace when he was in the lineup and couldn't even play .500 ball without him.

In 1998, he produced at an MVP level(28.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.4 bpg, 58.3 FG%), but he missed 22 games.

The 1994 MVP race had several centers who had phenomenal years.
Hakeem Olajuwon- 27.3 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 3.6 apg, 3.7 bpg, 1.6 spg, 52.8 FG% 80 games, 58 wins
David Robinson- 29.8 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 4.7 apg, 3.3 bpg, 1.7 spg, 50.7 FG%, 80 games, 55 wins
Shaq- 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 2.4 apg, 2.9 bpg, 59.9 FG% 81 games, 50 wins

I might've given it to Robinson for the regular season that year, a lot of people thought he was deserving. Pippen had a great case as well considering how well the Bulls played after Jordan left, and how poorly the Bulls played with Pippen out of the lineup.

But Robinson was a center who led his team in scoring, assists, shot blocking and steals while leading them to 55 wins. His cast really didn't have any business winning 55 games.

His second option was Dale Ellis who was good for 15 ppg and shooting, nothing more.
Willie Anderson who was good for 12/4/3
Vinny Del Negro who averaged 10 ppg and 4 apg
Dennis Rodman who was a beast on the boards with over 17 per game, but didn't help with their lack of offense.

Olajuwon proved to be the better player in the playoffs and his team won a few more games, but for regular season MVP, I might have to go with Robinson.

1995 was close between Shaq and Robinson.

Shaq- 29.3 ppg, 11.4, 2.7 apg, 2.4 bpg, 58.3 FG%, 2.6 TO, 79 games, 57 wins
Robinson- 27.6 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 2.9 apg, 3.2 bpg, 1.7 spg, 53 FG%, 2.9 TO, 81 games, 62 wins

As far as MVPs who should have won or co MVP situations

1969- Wilt Chamberlain
1970- Kareem Abdul Jabbar
1973- Kareem Abdul Jabbar
1982- Larry Bird
1988- Larry Bird/Michael Jordan
1990- Michael Jordan
1994- Hakeem Olajuwon/David Robinson
1995- David Robinson/Shaquille O'Neal
1997- Michael Jordan
1998- Michael Jordan/Karl Malone
2001- Shaquille O'Neal
2005- Shaquille O'Neal
2006- Kobe Bryant/Dirk Nowitzki

[Samurai Swoosh]

2005- Shaquille O'Neal
:facepalm

Such a stan ... you're like the Loki equivilent to Shaquille O'Neal. Dude was ARGUABLY the best player on his own team. How could he be a sure thing to be the MVP over Steve Nash who did magical things with a decent roster in his first season in Phoenix in a difficult Western Conference.

Yes Shaq's impact on the team made them a title contender, but he wasn't their clear cut best player in the regular season, and CERTAINLY wasn't in the playoffs.

And don't give me the rationale about the number of votes he recieved from the various sports writers and columnists who vote on the MVP award, because for a stretch of time that have been horrificly bad at picking them, and often give favor to media darlings, which Shaq has always been to them. Supplying psuedo funny quips for ages.

Wade has just as big a case for being the Heat's best player, especially given the significant leap from his break out rookie playoffs to the next regular season, and then elevated even further in the playoffs where your so called "MVP" falled back like the second option he was in Miami and regressed.

[Big#50]

Duncan in 99
Barkley in 90

[magnax1]

I don't really understand how Shaq was MVP when Wade was just as good that year, and was considerably better in the playoffs (I know, no effect on MVP, just saying) I think that Shaq had a good case to win in 98/99 and 02 though.
I think the two worst this decade were 07 Nash/Lebron, and 06 Kobe. Of the 90's the only one I had a problem with is 97 Jordan should've won, but other then that it was pretty fair. The 05-07 was a pretty bad stretch because there wasn't really a good candidate for it.

[chris2010]

Kobe 05-06
Wade 08-09

[ShaqAttack3234]

:facepalm

Such a stan ... you're like the Loki equivilent to Shaquille O'Neal. Dude was ARGUABLY the best player on his own team. How could he be a sure thing to be the MVP over Steve Nash who did magical things with a decent roster in his first season in Phoenix in a difficult Western Conference.

Nash was his team's 4th leading scorer and a defensive liability. I never said he should be a sure thing, I felt he was more valuable than Nash. So did several other posters in this thread yet you didn't comment on them picking Shaq. :oldlol: at nash having a "decent" roster, they had a 26/9 player, a 19/11 player who was one of the most versatile defenders in the league and prolific 3 point shooters in Richardson and Johnson. And don't cite the previous years record because Stoudemire missed nearly 30 games, 2 years prior to that they made the playoffs with Marbury and a rookie Amare who was like a 13 ppg scorer.

Shaq had a great teammate in Wade, but not nearly as deep of a team with other offensive options besides Wade like Nash did.

Hell, there were numerous articles about Shaq being robbed so obviously I wasn't the only one.

And I'm a stan? You're the same guy who just said Jordan should've won the '87 MVP over Magic and Bird. I guess the other posters who said he was MVP that year, the writers who voted for him and the writers who said he was robbed are also Shaq "stans" to.


And don't give me the rationale about the number of votes he recieved from the various sports writers and columnists who vote on the MVP award, because for a stretch of time that have been horrificly bad at picking them, and often give favor to media darlings, which Shaq has always been to them. Supplying psuedo funny quips for ages.

:oldlol: Shaq has never gotten favored in MVP voting which is why he's only gotten 1 and that one was so obvious it was nearly impossible for the majority of writers not to pick him.

Shaq has always gotten robbed because Wilt's statement is true "Nobody roots for Goliath". Idiotic people don't appreciate him sometimes because a big guy is "supposed" to dominate. Yet that doesn't change his impact on the court.


Wade has just as big a case for being the Heat's best player, especially given the significant leap from his break out rookie playoffs to the next regular season, and then elevated even further in the playoffs where your so called "MVP" falled back like the second option he was in Miami and regressed.

Funny, I've heard Wade fans like Plowking even attribute part of Wade's improvement to Shaq's presence. Shaq held back his individual game to make the team better. Here's an example.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2004121314

Wade was held scoreless in 18 minutes of play and left the game with an injury and Shaq told Wade he'd step up and he did with 40/12/3/5 in just 38 minutes because the game ended up being a blowout.

As far as Shaq regressing in the playoffs, he was injured and missed games for the only time in his playoff career. When Wade was injured in games 6 and 7 vs Detroit, Shaq had 24/13/4/5 on 11/18 shooting and 27/9/3 on 12/19 shooting.

[Round Mound]

Magic over Barkley in 1990 was by far the most pathetic thing seen in the MVP race in history.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I don't really understand how Shaq was MVP when Wade was just as good that year, and was considerably better in the playoffs (I know, no effect on MVP, just saying) I think that Shaq had a good case to win in 98/99 and 02 though.
I think the two worst this decade were 07 Nash/Lebron, and 06 Kobe. Of the 90's the only one I had a problem with is 97 Jordan should've won, but other then that it was pretty fair. The 05-07 was a pretty bad stretch because there wasn't really a good candidate for it.

Shaq had NO case in '99. That was his worst season from '93-'05. He didn't give any effort defensively and he was playing 34 mpg. The lockout year MVP doesn't mean much to me anyway, but Shaq didn't win it, and rightfully so.

'02, the best case he has is how his team was under .500 without him and on pace for like 63 wins with him, but Duncan carried an unimpressive roster to 58 wins, was comparable statistically and didn't miss any games, iirc. So Duncan is my pick for '02 as well.

[magnax1]

Shaq had NO case in '99. That was his worst season from '93-'05. He didn't give any effort defensively and he was playing 34 mpg. The lockout year MVP doesn't mean much to me anyway, but Shaq didn't win it, and rightfully so.

'02, the best case he has is how his team was under .500 without him and on pace for like 63 wins with him, but Duncan carried an unimpressive roster to 58 wins, was comparable statistically and didn't miss any games, iirc. So Duncan is my pick for '02 as well.
Considering that everyone except him and Iverson had crappy years that year, I'd say he had a case. He was just by far the best player in the league. I'd still give it too Malone in 99, but 02 I'd give it too Shaq. How you can say that he deserved it in 01 and had less of a case in 02 doesn't make any sense, he played almost exactly the same, and AI played much worse because of injuries. Duncan played better, but not considerably better.
AND 04 was BY FAR his worst season. Only scored 20 ppg, was over weight and didn't play a lick of D. Played some of the least motivated ball by any superstar ever.

[tpols]

Nash was his team's 4th leading scorer and a defensive liability. I never said he should be a sure thing, I felt he was more valuable than Nash. So did several other posters in this thread yet you didn't comment on them picking Shaq. :oldlol: at nash having a "decent" roster, they had a 26/9 player, a 19/11 player who was one of the most versatile defenders in the league and prolific 3 point shooters in Richardson and Johnson. And don't cite the previous years record because Stoudemire missed nearly 30 games, 2 years prior to that they made the playoffs with Marbury and a rookie Amare who was like a 13 ppg scorer.

Shaq had a great teammate in Wade, but not nearly as deep of a team with other offensive options besides Wade like Nash did.

Hell, there were numerous articles about Shaq being robbed so obviously I wasn't the only one.

And I'm a stan? You're the same guy who just said Jordan should've won the '87 MVP over Magic and Bird. I guess the other posters who said he was MVP that year, the writers who voted for him and the writers who said he was robbed are also Shaq "stans" to.



:oldlol: Shaq has never gotten favored in MVP voting which is why he's only gotten 1 and that one was so obvious it was nearly impossible for the majority of writers not to pick him.

Shaq has always gotten robbed because Wilt's statement is true "Nobody roots for Goliath". Idiotic people don't appreciate him sometimes because a big guy is "supposed" to dominate. Yet that doesn't change his impact on the court.



Funny, I've heard Wade fans like Plowking even attribute part of Wade's improvement to Shaq's presence. Shaq held back his individual game to make the team better. Here's an example.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2004121314

Wade was held scoreless in 18 minutes of play and left the game with an injury and Shaq told Wade he'd step up and he did with 40/12/3/5 in just 38 minutes because the game ended up being a blowout.

As far as Shaq regressing in the playoffs, he was injured and missed games for the only time in his playoff career. When Wade was injured in games 6 and 7 vs Detroit, Shaq had 24/13/4/5 on 11/18 shooting and 27/9/3 on 12/19 shooting.
To be fair, richardson and johnson were moreso products of nash than the other way around. Joe Johnson became a good SG when he left the team and richardson's epic 3pt season turned to shit the next year on the knicks. Amare was a great player and marion was a solid 3rd option, but steve nash made that team. They went from 29-53 to 62-20 with nash! (even though marion and amare were on the team that first year too) Nash's impact on that team can't be reduced to 'he was a defensive liability and a fourth option scorer.':facepalm He was their clutchest player and go to guy in the closing minutes as well as the general of their high octane offense. You're terribly underrating him.

[ShaqAttack3234]

To be fair, richardson and johnson were moreso products of nash than the other way around. Joe Johnson became a good SG when he left the team and richardson's epic 3pt season turned to shit the next year on the knicks. Amare was a great player and marion was a solid 3rd option, but steve nash made that team. They went from 29-53 to 62-20 with nash! (even though marion and amare were on the team that first year too) Nash's impact on that team can't be reduced to 'he was a defensive liability and a fourth option scorer.':facepalm He was their clutchest player and go to guy in the closing minutes as well as the general of their high octane offense. You're terribly underrating him.

Amare missed almost 30 games the previous year.

How was Joe Johnson a product of Nash if he proved to be a 20+ ppg scorer and 4-6 apg type player in 5 consecutive seasons starting the first year he didn't play with Nash?

Miami improved 17 games, BUT unlike Phoenix they had to give up players to get Shaq. They gave up Lamar Odom(17/10/4 the previous year), C aron Butler and Grant to get Shaq.

Nash was good and still is, but Shaq impacted the game more. He was in the best shape he'd been in in years and playing good defense, particularly with his shot blocking and he still drew tons of double teams.

Here's a quote from Chuck Daly about a less productive Shaq a year later.

[QUOTE]"It's amusing to me," Hall of Fame coach Chuck Daly said, adding that O'Neal remains one of the top five players in the league regardless of his stats. "Every night, people are playing him with two, 2

[tpols]

Amare missed almost 30 games the previous year.

How was Joe Johnson a product of Nash if he proved to be a 20+ ppg scorer and 4-6 apg type player in 5 consecutive seasons starting the first year he didn't play with Nash?

Miami improved 17 games, BUT unlike Phoenix they had to give up players to get Shaq. They gave up Lamar Odom(17/10/4 the previous year), C aron Butler and Grant to get Shaq.

Nash was good and still is, but Shaq impacted the game more. He was in the best shape he'd been in in years and playing good defense, particularly with his shot blocking and he still drew tons of double teams.

Here's a quote from Chuck Daly about a less productive Shaq a year later.



http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/playoffs/2006-06-07-finals-bonus-shaq_x.htm

Hell, Shaq was so valuable to even the 2006 team that the team was 10-11 with Wade and without Shaq, not saying Shaq was as good as Wade in '06, but that should give you an idea of better Shaq's value in 2005 to a team with a lesser Wade than the '06 version.
Uh... to give you an idea of how important nash was to his team's offense joe johnsons 3 pt% went from .478 to .356 the next year with atlanta! (His fg% went down as well and qrich went from the 3pt leader at 226 and the highest he hit afterwards in 5 years is 142 including seasons of 64, 66, and 97)

Nash made the shooters on that team THAT much better with his penetrating and passing ability. (not to mention he made amare better as well) That team was anywhere from a 20 something win team to a 30 something win team without him. The heat without shaq would have been much better off considering they had a developing top 3 player in the league.

The argument that 'nash played no defense' is totally baseless as that whole team played shitty defense. There frontline D was pathetic and they were ranked 17th in the league. To blame there defensive woes on nash is dumb. Dantonis run and gun system that focused predominantly on offense is the reason they were'nt good defensively.

[nysn]

paul in 08

[AirJordan23]

The primary reason Nash won it in '05 was that the Suns were 2-5 without him and the Heat were 6-3 without Shaq. That was probably the tiebreaker most voters used and thus gave the edge to Nash.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Considering that everyone except him and Iverson had crappy years that year, I'd say he had a case. He was just by far the best player in the league. I'd still give it too Malone in 99, but 02 I'd give it too Shaq. How you can say that he deserved it in 01 and had less of a case in 02 doesn't make any sense, he played almost exactly the same, and AI played much worse because of injuries. Duncan played better, but not considerably better.
AND 04 was BY FAR his worst season. Only scored 20 ppg, was over weight and didn't play a lick of D. Played some of the least motivated ball by any superstar ever.

Shaq had a much better year in 2001 than 2002, I don't know what you're talking about. He was in much better shape, more explosive and he was more mobile, particularly on defense, and he put up better numbers.

2001- 28.7 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.8 bpg, 57.2 FG%, 39.5 mpg
2002- 27.2 ppg, 10.7 rpg, 3 apg, 2 bpg, 57.8 FG%, 36.1 mpg

And :oldlol: at your comments about his 2004 season, he weighed MORE in 2002 and 2003. He only averaged 21.5 ppg because he got 14 shots per game, yet his rebounding and block numbers were better than they'd been since 2001 and his FG% was as good as it had been since the 1994 season.

Shaq and Iverson weren't the only guys who didn't have crappy years in 1999. Look at Duncan and Mourning.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Uh... to give you an idea of how important nash was to his team's offense joe johnsons 3 pt% went from .478 to .356 the next year with atlanta! (His fg% went down as well and qrich went from the 3pt leader at 226 and the highest he hit afterwards in 5 years is 142 including seasons of 64, 66, and 97)

Nash made the shooters on that team THAT much better with his penetrating and passing ability. (not to mention he made amare better as well) That team was anywhere from a 20 something win team to a 30 something win team without him. The heat without shaq would have been much better off considering they had a developing top 3 player in the league.

The argument that 'nash played no defense' is totally baseless as that whole team played shitty defense. There frontline D was pathetic and they were ranked 17th in the league. To blame there defensive woes on nash is dumb. Dantonis run and gun system that focused predominantly on offense is the reason they were'nt good defensively.

Yeah, the whole team didn't play defense, but the point about Nash not playing defense is valid because Shaq impacted the game at both ends.

Johnson also went to a bad team and had teams playing more attention to him, but 2 years later he averaged 25 ppg and his FG% jumped to 47%.

Quentin Richardson had similar years as far as production in '02 and '04.

Not saying these guys didn't benefit from playing with Nash, but they were solid players regardless.


The primary reason Nash won it in '05 was that the Suns were 2-5 without him and the Heat were 6-3 without Shaq. That was probably the tiebreaker most voters used and thus gave the edge to Nash.

Yeah, well, they really went 6-4 without him because they lost another game that he left after 2 minutes and if you look at the teams they played in those games, the Suns had a tougher schedule.

[Ruh-Roh]

Shaq had a much better year in 2001 than 2000, I don't know what you're talking about. He was in much better shape, more explosive and he was more mobile, particularly on defense, and he put up better numbers.

2001- 28.7 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.8 bpg, 57.2 FG%, 39.5 mpg
2002- 27.2 ppg, 10.7 rpg, 3 apg, 2 bpg, 57.8 FG%, 36.1 mpg

And :oldlol: at your comments about his 2004 season, he weighed MORE in 2002 and 2003. He only averaged 21.5 ppg because he got 14 shots per game, yet his rebounding and block numbers were better than they'd been since 2001 and his FG% was as good as it had been since the 1994 season.

Shaq and Iverson weren't the only guys who didn't have crappy years in 1999. Look at Duncan and Mourning.

You were JUST telling me Shaq peaked in 1999-2000...what did I miss?


Uhh, Hill was 27 in the 1999-2000 season, his last before the injuries and he had a better year in 1996-1997.

Shaq was also 27 when he peaked in 1999-2000, Ewing peaked at 27 as well in 1989-1990, Garnett peaked at 27 in 2003-2004, Kobe arguably peaked at 27 in 2005-2006, Jordan peaked in either 1989-1990 or 1990-1991 when he was 26 and 27, respectively. Chris Webber also peaked at 27 in 2000-2001, Wade was 27 last year and that may very well have been his peak, Dirk peaked at 27 in 2005-2006 ect.

Hell, some players peaked even earlier like Iverson in 2000-2001 at 25 years old, Duncan in 2002-2003 at 26.

Hill wasn't 24 when he started getting injured.

[ShaqAttack3234]

You were JUST telling me Shaq peaked in 1999-2000...what did I miss?

I meant 2001 than 2002. It was a typo, I posted Shaq's 2002 numbers not 2000 when he averaged 29.7 ppg, 13.6 rpg, 3.8 apg and 3 bpg on 57.4% shooting. He did peak in 2000.

[Ruh-Roh]

Okay, that makes much more sense. I was interested though if you'd give your two cents to my reply in the other thread.

[Shep]

Considering that everyone except him and Iverson had crappy years that year, I'd say he had a case. He was just by far the best player in the league.
:lol shaq and iverson? ever heard of a guy called tim duncan? who played every game, and averaged 21.7 points, 11.4 rebounds, and 2.5 blocks per game while leading his spurs to to the best record in the nba, and on pace for a 61 wins in a 82 game season? shaq wasn't even a top 2 center in '99

[ShaqAttack3234]

:lol shaq and iverson? ever heard of a guy called tim duncan? who played every game, and averaged 21.7 points, 11.4 rebounds, and 2.5 blocks per game while leading his spurs to to the best record in the nba, and on pace for a 61 wins in a 82 game season? shaq wasn't even a top 2 center in '99

I'm guessing you're counting Duncan as a center that year? And I'd imagine the other would be Mourning.

The one problem I have with Mourning ahead of Shaq that year overall(which I assume includes the playoffs) is that Mourning's team was eliminated in the first round by an 8th seed while Mourning was outplayed in game 5 by a 36 year old injured Patrick Ewing and Ewing outrebounded him for the series.

But if I was going to rank MVPs for that year then Duncan, Mourning and Malone would be the top 3, however an MVP award in a 50 game season doesn't mean much to me.

[Shep]

I'm guessing you're counting Duncan as a center that year? And I'd imagine the other would be Mourning.
robinson and mourning

The one problem I have with Mourning ahead of Shaq that year overall(which I assume includes the playoffs) is that Mourning's team was eliminated in the first round by an 8th seed while Mourning was outplayed in game 5 by a 36 year old injured Patrick Ewing and Ewing outrebounded him for the series.
yes, mourning's disappointing playoffs definately hurt his rank, but as bad as he was in the playoffs, the person who is mostly to blame for that first round exit is tim hardaway who only could manage 9ppg on a pathetic 27% shooting. o'neal did make ground on mourning as a result of the playoffs, but not enough to overtake mourning's gap over o'neal for his stellar regular season.

But if I was going to rank MVPs for that year then Duncan, Mourning and Malone would be the top 3, however an MVP award in a 50 game season doesn't mean much to me.
i have the same top 3, but in different order. i have duncan, malone, mourning. but the difference between malone and mourning is very minor.

[ShaqAttack3234]

robinson and mourning

Ehhh Robinson? He played his role very well, but to me, Shaq's offensive advantage was too big at that point. A 10.6 ppg advantage with a 57.6 to 50.9 FG% advantage. But atleast Robinson did a great job defensively on Shaq in the playoffs.

As a Shaq fan, I can still be very critical of Shaq's 1999 season. 1.7 blocks per game is inexcusable and there's no way a player of Shaq's caliber at 26 years old should have been playing only 34.8 mpg which is his fault for not being in better shape. And good defense or not, Shaq's performance vs the Spurs is also inexcusable.

By the way, what do you think of Robinson's 1999-2000 season? That was an underrated year for him, IMO. Still one of the top defensive players, but he led the Spurs in scoring in the second half and led them to a 5-3 record without Duncan while averaging 21.8 ppg, 8.8 rpg, 2.4 bpg, 1.3 spg on 53.6% shooting in those games. And most of those games weren't vs bad teams. In that time, they played the 67 win Lakers, 59 win Blazers, 55 win Jazz, 52 win Heat and 50 win Wolves twice. They held opponents to just 90.5 ppg in those games thanks to Robinson's defense.

Finished with 17.8 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 1.8 apg, 2.3 bpg and 1.2 spg on 51.2% shooting. He led the Spurs in blocks, steals and FG% and was 6th in blocks and FG% and 9th in rebounding overall.

He was still one of the more mobile centers, very good passer, had one of the better mid-range shots for a big man, obviously a great defensive player and he could still put the ball on the floor and get to the basket.

Where would you rank 1999-2000 Robinson that year and who would you rank above him?


yes, mourning's disappointing playoffs definately hurt his rank, but as bad as he was in the playoffs, the person who is mostly to blame for that first round exit is tim hardaway who only could manage 9ppg on a pathetic 27% shooting. o'neal did make ground on mourning as a result of the playoffs, but not enough to overtake mourning's gap over o'neal for his stellar regular season.

Yeah, I'm not saying Mourning deserves all of the blame and Hardaway was indeed pathetic, but Mourning definitely should have outplayed Ewing in that game 5. Shaq destroying Olajuwon and making it to the second round puts him over Mourning that season, IMO.


i have the same top 3, but in different order. i have duncan, malone, mourning. but the difference between malone and mourning is very minor.

I actually wasn't listing them in order. I give Malone the edge as well with Duncan as the MVP in the shortened season, and ultimately, Duncan's playoff run puts him as the top player of the year, IMO.

[bl2k8]

kidd 01-02
kobe 05-06

[bl2k8]

I call Bullshit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUQ5CZNBuRk&feature=related#t=7m51s
:lol

[necya]

1990 MJ
1993 MJ
1994 Robinson
1997 MJ
2001 O'neal
2008 Paul

1981 finals MVP Bird !!!
2010 finals MVP Gasol !!!
they use to give the award to other great players in order to avoid to put MJ in an untouchable bubble. but it was the reality, mJ surpassed everyone.

[ShaqAttack3234]

1981 finals MVP Bird !!!

Agreed! how Maxwell got it is beyond me. Anyone who watches the series will see that while Bird didn't shoot well he was making smart plays, hustle plays and doing everything else extremely well, crashing the boards, making pinpoint passes ect.

I'll throw Kareem in there for 1980 Finals MVP as well.

[stickfigure87]

any year in the 90's that jordan played and didn't win.
kobe 05-07.
shaq 02

[Shep]

Ehhh Robinson? He played his role very well, but to me, Shaq's offensive advantage was too big at that point. A 10.6 ppg advantage with a 57.6 to 50.9 FG% advantage. But atleast Robinson did a great job defensively on Shaq in the playoffs.
they were more or less the ranked equal for the regular season. robinson won 6 more games, recorded double o'neals steals per game, 141% of his blocks, less turnovers, in less minutes, and played some of the best defense you've ever seen.

in the playoffs robinson definately gets the advantage, and this ends up being the difference between the two players. the spurs only lost 2 games, including sweepings of o'neal's lakers and the talented trail blazers, en route to winning the championship with ease, with robinson averaging 16.6ppg, 11.8rpg, and 3bpg on the biggest stage of all.

By the way, what do you think of Robinson's 1999-2000 season? That was an underrated year for him, IMO. Still one of the top defensive players, but he led the Spurs in scoring in the second half and led them to a 5-3 record without Duncan while averaging 21.8 ppg, 8.8 rpg, 2.4 bpg, 1.3 spg on 53.6% shooting in those games. And most of those games weren't vs bad teams. In that time, they played the 67 win Lakers, 59 win Blazers, 55 win Jazz, 52 win Heat and 50 win Wolves twice. They held opponents to just 90.5 ppg in those games thanks to Robinson's defense.

Finished with 17.8 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 1.8 apg, 2.3 bpg and 1.2 spg on 51.2% shooting. He led the Spurs in blocks, steals and FG% and was 6th in blocks and FG% and 9th in rebounding overall.

He was still one of the more mobile centers, very good passer, had one of the better mid-range shots for a big man, obviously a great defensive player and he could still put the ball on the floor and get to the basket.

Where would you rank 1999-2000 Robinson that year and who would you rank above him?
i have him 9th, with o'neal, kobe bryant, tim duncan, alonzo mourning, kevin garnett, gary payton, chris webber, and karl malone all ranked ahead of him.

Yeah, I'm not saying Mourning deserves all of the blame and Hardaway was indeed pathetic, but Mourning definitely should have outplayed Ewing in that game 5. Shaq destroying Olajuwon and making it to the second round puts him over Mourning that season, IMO.
so you're basing your rank of o'neal over mourning on 1 game? :lol what about the whole regular season, where mourning was the third most valuable player, 1st team all-nba, and defensive player of the year? its just too much to overcome, especially for a player who did not make much noise at all, and who got swept in the second round

[Bigsmoke]

Jordan - 90
Hakeem - 93
Jordan - 97
Duncan - 99
Duncan - 01
Shaq - 05
Kobe - 06
Kobe - 07

[Bigsmoke]

To me, it seems weird how Nash and LeBron both have 2 MVPs, and guys like Shaq, Bryant, Garnett have one each. I guess in a sense it shows that MVP is really a regular season award.

Lebron >>>> KG

[Bigsmoke]

2008-09: Dwyane Wade, dude got robbed.

robbed?

Lebron took a team to 66 wins with Mo Williams best supporting cast member. Lebron clearly was and IS a better player than Wade. What the **** are people watching?

[L.A. Jazz]

i see it the same way.
Clear cut MVP 09 and 10 is Lebron.
No Wade, no Kobe, or someone else.

[ShaqAttack3234]

i have him 9th, with o'neal, kobe bryant, tim duncan, alonzo mourning, kevin garnett, gary payton, chris webber, and karl malone all ranked ahead of him.

Interesting, my rankings for the 1999-2000 season would probably be.

1.Shaq
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kevin Garnett
4.Alonzo Mourning
5.Karl Malone
6.Gary Payton
7.Chris Webber
8.Grant Hill
9.Jason Kidd
10.Kobe
11.Vince Carter
12.David Robinson
13.Allen Iverson

And MVP rankings

1.Shaq
2.Mourning
3.Malone
4.Garnett
5.Duncan
6.Payton
7.Carter
8.Iverson
9.Webber
10.Robinson

:lol I always change my mind on rankings anyway but that's probably pretty close to how I'd rank them.



so you're basing your rank of o'neal over mourning on 1 game? :lol what about the whole regular season, where mourning was the third most valuable player, 1st team all-nba, and defensive player of the year? its just too much to overcome, especially for a player who did not make much noise at all, and who got swept in the second round

I'm not basing it on one game. Mourning played pretty well offensively, but lost a series in a historic way by losing to an 8th seed and he easily got outrebounded by a 36 year old Patrick Ewing who was playing basically on one leg. Hakeem Olajuwon was better than Ewing, even at that point, which I'm sure you'd agree with and Shaq destroyed him.

For the season, Shaq outscored him by over 6 ppg and did so on a superior FG% of almost 58% to 51% and Mourning's free throw shooting did not make up for it because while he wasn't as pathetic at the line as Shaq, he also shot a subpar 65% and he was nowhere near the passer Shaq was. This is also evident in the numbers as Shaq averaged 0.6 more apg and 0.5 fewer turnovers per game. Rebounding isn't really an issue here with Mourning holding a 0.3 edge in total rebounds per game.

Shaq was terrible by his standards vs the Spurs that year when you consider his 36/14 game came with the series essentially over. But atleast he did his job on the boards in that series with as many rebounds as Robinson and Duncan combined in game 1, as many as Duncan in game 2, 15 to again lead everyone in game 3 and 14 to tie Duncan for the lead in game 4 and double Robinson's total in that game.

To me, Mourning deserved a higher MVP finish, but Shaq was the better player.

[Shep]

I'm not basing it on one game. Mourning played pretty well offensively, but lost a series in a historic way by losing to an 8th seed and he easily got outrebounded by a 36 year old Patrick Ewing who was playing basically on one leg. Hakeem Olajuwon was better than Ewing, even at that point, which I'm sure you'd agree with and Shaq destroyed him.
mourning: 21.6ppg, 8.2rpg, 0.8apg, 1.6spg, 2.8bpg, 52%fg
ewing: 14.6ppg, 10.8rpg, 0.6apg, 1spg, 1.2bpg, 44%fg

mourning got outrebounded my ewing, but simply destroyed ewing in every other facet of the game. mourning had never been a huge rebounder anyway and both players per minute rebounding average that season were the exact same number.

as for olajuwon being better than ewing, well before the playoffs he was, but after the playoffs he was not.

For the season, Shaq outscored him by over 6 ppg and did so on a superior FG% of almost 58% to 51% and Mourning's free throw shooting did not make up for it because while he wasn't as pathetic at the line as Shaq, he also shot a subpar 65% and he was nowhere near the passer Shaq was. This is also evident in the numbers as Shaq averaged 0.6 more apg and 0.5 fewer turnovers per game. Rebounding isn't really an issue here with Mourning holding a 0.3 edge in total rebounds per game.
mourning blocked almost 2 and a half more shots than o'neal swatted away, with his 3.9bpg (which is tied for 20th most per game in a season in nba history), where as the 7-1 o'neal could only manage a paltry 1.7. this , along with rebounding the ball more than o'neal, easily accounted for the minuscule advantaged o'neal had on mourning in other aspects.

Shaq was terrible by his standards vs the Spurs that year when you consider his 36/14 game came with the series essentially over. But atleast he did his job on the boards in that series with as many rebounds as Robinson and Duncan combined in game 1, as many as Duncan in game 2, 15 to again lead everyone in game 3 and 14 to tie Duncan for the lead in game 4 and double Robinson's total in that game.
he still got swept. he also had alot of help and guys didn't disappear like mourning's main teammates did like tim hardaway, jamal mashburn and pj brown did. mourning also blocked only 1 less shot than the entire knicks team that series.

i've already destroyed you with hardaway's 9 points on 27% shooting, but jamal mashburn went from a 15/6/3 45%fg regular season to 10/3/2 39%, pj brown also did not have an impact. where as o'neal had glen rice averaging 18ppg in the spurs series, and kobe bryant had his 21/7/4/2.

To me, Mourning deserved a higher MVP finish, but Shaq was the better player.
thats unfortunate, because mourning was both the better player, and the more valuable player.

[Papaya Petee]

If were talking about the BEST player, rather then best player on the best team, MVP'S would have been different a lot of times.

1999-2000 Shaq
2000-2001 Shaq
2001-2002 Shaq\Duncan
2002-2003 Duncan\Kobe\Shaq
2003-2004 Garnett
2004-2005 Shaq
2005-2006 Kobe or LeBron
2006-2007 Kobe or Dirk
2007-2008 Cp3 LeBron or Kobe
2008-2009 Wade or LeBron
2009-2010 LeBron or Durant.

[ShaqAttack3234]

mourning: 21.6ppg, 8.2rpg, 0.8apg, 1.6spg, 2.8bpg, 52%fg
ewing: 14.6ppg, 10.8rpg, 0.6apg, 1spg, 1.2bpg, 44%fg

mourning got outrebounded my ewing, but simply destroyed ewing in every other facet of the game. mourning had never been a huge rebounder anyway and both players per minute rebounding average that season were the exact same number.

Yeah, but when you lose as the number 1 seed to an 8 seed, the best player has to be held accountable. 8 rpg for a superstar center is subpar. Yes, he outplayed Ewing as he should have, but he shouldn't have gotten outrebounded so thoroughly and his overall numbers declined from the regular season.

And Mourning did not outplay Ewing in that deciding game at home despite Ewing playing injured.


as for olajuwon being better than ewing, well before the playoffs he was, but after the playoffs he was not.

Regardless, Shaq's demolition of Olajuwon was impressive. Olajuwon had averaged 18.9 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 2.5 bpg and 1.6 spg on 51.4% shooting. Here are their head to head numbers for the series.

Shaquille O'Neal- 29.5 ppg, 10.3 rpg, 4 apg, 0.8 spg, 4 bpg, 2.3 TO, 52.3 FG%
Hakeem Olajuwon- 13.3 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 0.5 apg, 1.3 spg, 0.8 bpg, 1.3 TO, 42.6 FG%


mourning blocked almost 2 and a half more shots than o'neal swatted away, with his 3.9bpg (which is tied for 20th most per game in a season in nba history), where as the 7-1 o'neal could only manage a paltry 1.7. this , along with rebounding the ball more than o'neal, easily accounted for the minuscule advantaged o'neal had on mourning in other aspects.

I wouldn't put much stock into 3.9 bpg from a historical standpoint over 46 games. Regardless, he was great defensively back then.

But if we're turning this into a statistical debate? Mourning blocked 2.2 more shots per game. So he prevented 4.4 more points, but O'Neal created 6.2 more with his 26.3 to 20.1 ppg advantage and he created roughly 1.4 more with his 2.3 to 1.7 apg average of course not factoring which assists were on 3s. So that's about 7.6 more ppg Shaq got for his team than Mourning created so Mourning preventing 4.4 more ppg does not make up for that.

A 0.3 rpg advantage is pretty insignificant and not worth mentioning. And don't forget that Shaq was not only a more efficient scorer, but less turnover prone.

So if you're basing your case on stats then Mourning loses.


he still got swept. he also had alot of help and guys didn't disappear like mourning's main teammates did like tim hardaway, jamal mashburn and pj brown did. mourning also blocked only 1 less shot than the entire knicks team that series.

Outside of Kobe, Shaq's teammates did disappear. Rice shot 37% Disher shot 38% and Horry shot 38% and Horry and Fisher combined for 11.3 ppg.


i've already destroyed you with hardaway's 9 points on 27% shooting, but jamal mashburn went from a 15/6/3 45%fg regular season to 10/3/2 39%, pj brown also did not have an impact. where as o'neal had glen rice averaging 18ppg in the spurs series, and kobe bryant had his 21/7/4/2.

You fail to mention that Rice shot 37% in that series.

[game385]

Shaq should have won 2004 - 2005 MVP (Nash's 1st MVP year), Kobe should have got it in 2005 - 2006 MVP (Nash's 2nd MVP), Jason Kidd should have won the 2002 MVP (Duncan's year), and Scottie Pippen should have won the 1993-94 MVP. With all due respect to Hakeem Olajuwon and David Robinson.

[mayo'sgrizz]

Kobe 06 & 07

[Shep]

Yeah, but when you lose as the number 1 seed to an 8 seed, the best player has to be held accountable. 8 rpg for a superstar center is subpar. Yes, he outplayed Ewing as he should have, but he shouldn't have gotten outrebounded so thoroughly and his overall numbers declined from the regular season.
i have held mourning accountable. he went from being the best player in the nba after the regular season, to the third best after the post season, and getting outrebounded by a player who averages the same per minute average you do is not a big surprise.

Regardless, Shaq's demolition of Olajuwon was impressive. Olajuwon had averaged 18.9 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 2.5 bpg and 1.6 spg on 51.4% shooting. Here are their head to head numbers for the series.
yeh, if only o'neal played that way for the entire regular season and playoffs he might have been ranked higher

I wouldn't put much stock into 3.9 bpg from a historical standpoint over 46 games. Regardless, he was great defensively back then.
it is what it is. 3.9bpg for an entire season, so historically it will be compared to other seasons. it is not alonzo mourning's fault he could not play 82 games that season, so he will not be punished for playing 50

But if we're turning this into a statistical debate? Mourning blocked 2.2 more shots per game. So he prevented 4.4 more points, but O'Neal created 6.2 more with his 26.3 to 20.1 ppg advantage and he created roughly 1.4 more with his 2.3 to 1.7 apg average of course not factoring which assists were on 3s. So that's about 7.6 more ppg Shaq got for his team than Mourning created so Mourning preventing 4.4 more ppg does not make up for that.
:roll: @ this paragraph. how many shots did zo alter? how many times did he make a guard think twice before driving into the lane? 10.44 times per game? 42.53675 times per game? these things cannot be measured. what i do know is that the lakers were one of the worst defensive teams, while the heat was one of the top 3, including the best interior defense in the league. mourning was largely responsible for this. also is there any statistic that o'neal has the advantage over mourning by over 200%?

A 0.3 rpg advantage is pretty insignificant and not worth mentioning. And don't forget that Shaq was not only a more efficient scorer, but less turnover prone.
oh yes, a 0.3 rpg advantage is insignificant, but a 0.7 apg advantage might be the difference! :applause:

So if you're basing your case on stats then Mourning loses.
i'm basing my case on having a better record, being a top 3 mvp, the best regular season player in the nba, 1st team all-nba, defensive player of the year, having better production, level of teammates play etc

Outside of Kobe, Shaq's teammates did disappear. Rice shot 37% Disher shot 38% and Horry shot 38% and Horry and Fisher combined for 11.3 ppg.
fisher stepped up big in those playoffs, with averages of 9.8ppg, 3.6rpg, and 4.9apg up from 5.9, 1.8, and 3.9 during the season. horry's production did not go down from the regular season, nor did rice's.

You fail to mention that Rice shot 37% in that series.
i don't know about you, but i'd take a 6%fg decrease and the same points per game from my third best player over a 13%fg decrease and half the points from my second best player anyday

[JDKMagic]

1998-1999 - Shaquille O'Neal
2000-2001 - Shaquille O'Neal
2001-2002 - Shaquille O'Neal
2002-2003 - Shaquille O'Neal
2003-2004 - Shaquille O'Neal
2004-2005 - Shaquille O'Neal


There is only one player, Duncan, during that entire timespan that even came close to having the same type of impact that O'Neal did on the court. There is nobody that any GM would have taken over Shaq during that timespan to build a roster around (except maybe 05) for each particular season (ignoring future).

Shaq having 1 MVP award is one of the biggest jokes in NBA award history.

The award is the NBA MVP. "NBA's Most Valuable Player". It is not NBA MVPtTRT. "NBA's Most Valuable Player to Their Respective Team", despite the fact that it's treated like such more often than not. Even still... Shaq's importance to the Lakers was heavily, heavily underrated because of the perception(false) of how good Kobe made those teams.

[ThaRegul8r]

1998-1999 - Shaquille O'Neal
2000-2001 - Shaquille O'Neal
2001-2002 - Shaquille O'Neal
2002-2003 - Shaquille O'Neal
2003-2004 - Shaquille O'Neal
2004-2005 - Shaquille O'Neal


There is only one player, Duncan, during that entire timespan that even came close to having the same type of impact that O'Neal did on the court. There is nobody that any GM would have taken over Shaq during that timespan to build a roster around (except maybe 05) for each particular season (ignoring future).

Shaq having 1 MVP award is one of the biggest jokes in NBA award history.

2001 was his own damn fault, so I don't have any sympathy there

[ShaqAttack3234]

i have held mourning accountable. he went from being the best player in the nba after the regular season, to the third best after the post season, and getting outrebounded by a player who averages the same per minute average you do is not a big surprise.

He got outrebounded by 2.6 rebounds per game and he got outrebounded by 6 in the most important game of the season while Ewing matched his offensive production. And considering Ewing was injured, yes, it is a surprise and disappointment that he'd get thoroughly outrebounded like that.


it is what it is. 3.9bpg for an entire season, so historically it will be compared to other seasons. it is not alonzo mourning's fault he could not play 82 games that season, so he will not be punished for playing 50

I'm not saying he should be punished, but maintaing that average over a full season would be more meaningful to me from a historical perspective. Mourning himself had averaged 4 blocks through the first half of the 1999-2000 season while playing 47 games in that first half.


:roll: @ this paragraph. how many shots did zo alter? how many times did he make a guard think twice before driving into the lane? 10.44 times per game? 42.53675 times per game? these things cannot be measured. what i do know is that the lakers were one of the worst defensive teams, while the heat was one of the top 3, including the best interior defense in the league. mourning was largely responsible for this. also is there any statistic that o'neal has the advantage over mourning by over 200%?

Right, because we can also measure through statistics the impact of teams doubling Shaq. :rolleyes:


oh yes, a 0.3 rpg advantage is insignificant, but a 0.7 apg advantage might be the difference! :applause:

10.7 is 97.3% of 11, 1.7 is 70.8% of 2.4. You see the difference?


i'm basing my case on having a better record, being a top 3 mvp, the best regular season player in the nba, 1st team all-nba, defensive player of the year, having better production, level of teammates play etc

I'm basing it on Shaq being a much more dominant offensive player who was clearly a much more productive and efficient player. Shaq was a much better scorer and passer and pretty much equal on the boards that year. Mourning blew him away as a defensive player, but Shaq also blew Mourning away as an offensive player and atleast dominated one playoff series and got to the 2nd round.

As far as the Lakers regular season record? Don't forget about the distractions that team faced. Dennis Rodman being the most memorable one, but they also had to adjust to a midseason trade of Eddie Jones for Glen Rice in what was a short season to begin with and they had 3 different head coaches that year.


fisher stepped up big in those playoffs, with averages of 9.8ppg, 3.6rpg, and 4.9apg up from 5.9, 1.8, and 3.9 during the season. horry's production did not go down from the regular season, nor did rice's.

Yet neither were there in the second round. If we're basing it on production for the entire playoffs then Shaq's 26.6 ppg, 11.6 rpg, 2.3 apg and 2.9 bpg look pretty good, no?


i don't know about you, but i'd take a 6%fg decrease and the same points per game from my third best player over a 13%fg decrease and half the points from my second best player anyday

Shaq also lost to a much better team so supporting casts are relative, but atleast Hardaway contributed with his assists. And atleast Shaq was able to step up to clinch the series vs Houston with 37 points, 11 rebounds, 3 blocks and 3 assists on 14/22 shooting despite Glen Rice being out, Kobe shooting 9/25 and having more shot attempts than points(though he contributed in other areas) and the rest of the starting lineup combining for 11 points on 5/15 shooting.

Anyway, I'm not going to spend any more time arguing about this specific debate. Shaq vs Alonzo Mourning in 1999 isn't that important. I still feel Shaq was the better player at that point, but it's not worth going back and forth over.

[alanLA92]

05/06-kobe
00/01 Shaq
95/96 Jordan

[ShaqAttack3234]

Some MVPs that have always bugged me are '69, '70 and '73 when Unseld, Reed and Cowens won, respectively.

1969
Wes Unseld- 13.8 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 2.6 apg, 47.6 FG%, 36.2 mpg, 57 wins
Wilt Chamberlain- 20.5 ppg, 21.1 rpg, 4.5 apg, 58.3 FG%, 45.2 mpg, 55 wins

From what I've seen, Unseld just didn't seem like an MVP caliber player to me. the only things that stuck out were his rebounding and outlet passing. I really value shot blocking for a center and he wasn't a great scorer either. Unseld's team won a couple of more games and Wilt had Baylor and West but Unseld had hall of famer, Earl Monroe and a damn talented team himself, in fact, he was just their 5th leading scorer. And while I haven't seen that many games of either, from what i've seen and from what the stats suggest, comparing Wilt and Unseld's impact is a joke.

If you don't want to give it to Wilt, then what about Billy Cunningham or Hal Greer? They led Philadelphia to 55 wins despite losing Wilt Chamberlain in the offseason and Luke Jackson only played 25 games.

1970
Willis Reed- 21.7 ppg, 13.9 rpg, 2 apg, 50.7 FG%, 38.1 mpg, 60 wins
Kareem- 28.8 ppg, 14.5 rpg, 4.1 apg, 51.8 FG%, 43.1 mpg 56 wins
Jerry West- 31.2 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 7.5 apg, 49.7 FG%, 42 mpg, 46 wins

Any case for Reed over Kareem? Reed's team won 4 more games, but he had a stacked team including a teammate(Walt Frazier) who was arguably better than he was. Kareem joined a 27 win expansion franchise and led them to 56 wins. And if for whatever reason, someone doesn't want to acknowledge Kareem was the MVP, atleast give it to West who had to deal with Wilt only playing 12 games, Baylor only playing 54 and Happy Hairston only playing 55. West led the league in scoring by a good margin, basically shot 50% and finished 4th in assists while being regarded as one of the best defensive guards in the league.

1973
Dave Cowens- 20.5 ppg, 16.2 rpg, 4.1 apg, 45.2 FG%, 41.8 mpg, 68 wins
Kareem Abdul Jabbar- 30.2 ppg, 16.1 rpg, 5 apg, 55.4 FG%, 42.8 mpg, 60 wins

Hell, like Reed in 1970, you could argue Cowens wasn't even the best player on his own team. In fact, I'd argue Havlicek was better. He averaged 24/7/7 on 45% shooting and 86% from the line and he was on the all-defensive first team while Cowens didn't make either defensive team.

But, again, Kareem looks like the MVP. from what I've seen, he was a much better player than Cowens at both ends and was clearly the best player on his own team at that point and his second best teammate was no John Havlicek.

[jlauber]

Some MVPs that have always bugged me are '69, '70 and '73 when Unseld, Reed and Cowens won, respectively.

1969
Wes Unseld- 13.8 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 2.6 apg, 47.6 FG%, 36.2 mpg, 57 wins
Wilt Chamberlain- 20.5 ppg, 21.1 rpg, 4.5 apg, 58.3 FG%, 45.2 mpg, 55 wins

From what I've seen, Unseld just didn't seem like an MVP caliber player to me. the only things that stuck out were his rebounding and outlet passing. I really value shot blocking for a center and he wasn't a great scorer either. Unseld's team won a couple of more games and Wilt had Baylor and West but Unseld had hall of famer, Earl Monroe and a damn talented team himself, in fact, he was just their 5th leading scorer. And while I haven't seen that many games of either, from what i've seen and from what the stats suggest, comparing Wilt and Unseld's impact is a joke.

If you don't want to give it to Wilt, then what about Billy Cunningham or Hal Greer? They led Philadelphia to 55 wins despite losing Wilt Chamberlain in the offseason and Luke Jackson only played 25 games.

1970
Willis Reed- 21.7 ppg, 13.9 rpg, 2 apg, 50.7 FG%, 38.1 mpg, 60 wins
Kareem- 28.8 ppg, 14.5 rpg, 4.1 apg, 51.8 FG%, 43.1 mpg 56 wins
Jerry West- 31.2 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 7.5 apg, 49.7 FG%, 42 mpg, 46 wins

Any case for Reed over Kareem? Reed's team won 4 more games, but he had a stacked team including a teammate(Walt Frazier) who was arguably better than he was. Kareem joined a 27 win expansion franchise and led them to 56 wins. And if for whatever reason, someone doesn't want to acknowledge Kareem was the MVP, atleast give it to West who had to deal with Wilt only playing 12 games, Baylor only playing 54 and Happy Hairston only playing 55. West led the league in scoring by a good margin, basically shot 50% and finished 4th in assists while being regarded as one of the best defensive guards in the league.

1973
Dave Cowens- 20.5 ppg, 16.2 rpg, 4.1 apg, 45.2 FG%, 41.8 mpg, 68 wins
Kareem Abdul Jabbar- 30.2 ppg, 16.1 rpg, 5 apg, 55.4 FG%, 42.8 mpg, 60 wins

Hell, like Reed in 1970, you could argue Cowens wasn't even the best player on his own team. In fact, I'd argue Havlicek was better. He averaged 24/7/7 on 45% shooting and 86% from the line and he was on the all-defensive first team while Cowens didn't make either defensive team.

But, again, Kareem looks like the MVP. from what I've seen, he was a much better player than Cowens at both ends and was clearly the best player on his own team at that point and his second best teammate was no John Havlicek.

Much like Wilt in the entire decade of the 60's, you could make a case for Kareem winning the MVP almost every year in the decade of the 70's.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Much like Wilt in the entire decade of the 60's, you could make a case for Kareem winning the MVP almost every year in the decade of the 70's.

While Kareem is still my pick for '73, I didn't realize how strong of a case John Havlicek had. The leader in scoring and assists as well as an all-defensive 1st team player on a 68 win team, not to mention that he was known as one of the great clutch players.

[gts]

thing to note is the MVP voting changed in the mid 80's to members of the media... before that it was the players that voted for the MVP award.

[SALFORD-RED]

thing to note is the MVP voting changed in the mid 80's to members of the media... before that it was the players that voted for the MVP award.


Interesting. I assume its something the NBA did to sweeten the media. I would rather it was a panel of former players because a lot of the decisions of the last 10 years have been shocking.

One thing I've always wondered is why it takes so long to collate the votes. For example I'm 99% sure that in 2006 (Nash's 2nd) the voting was announced after the first round of the playoffs had concluded. With technology like it is I don't see why the announcement can't be made within hours of getting the votes in.

[50inchvertical]

Kevin Durant last season

[miller-time]

Interesting. I assume its something the NBA did to sweeten the media. I would rather it was a panel of former players because a lot of the decisions of the last 10 years have been shocking.

i sometimes think former players are not the most objective critics of current players.

[Psileas]

Arguable changes:

1962-Chamberlain (made seasons like West's 31/8/5 look pedestrian and led the Warriors to a 49-31 record)
1964-Chamberlain (Oscar was a good choice, too, though)
1969-Chamberlain (Unseld was great, but he wasn't Wilt. The Bullets saw great improvement, but Monroe, Loughery and Gus Johnson were not bad teammates at all. Seems like Unseld was the missing piece for that type of team. Maybe the Lakers should have won some games more, but it's bothering that Wilt wasn't even considered a candidate, so even if the Lakers had gone about 62-20, it's not a sure win for him).
1970-Kareem (seemed better than Reed from his rookie season, to be honest. Reed had the luxury of bringing his A game only when needed. Kareem played huge minutes in almost every game. West didn't win as much, so this takes away points from him. To be fair, Reed usually did play Kareem to a standstill during the regular season, and the Knicks, like the 60's Celtics, were the last team that somebody would choose for individual stats).
1973-Kareem (Cowens wasn't much better than his teammate, Havlicek).
1982-Magic (Maybe not as the MVP, but he should go MUCH higher than he did).
1990-Jordan (Magic was still a good pick, though)
1993-Jordan (Hakeem, too, though he won less. That was a close voting between Barkley and those two).
1995-Shaq (Robinson was a good choice, too. No, Hakeem should NOT win it this season. He was a champion, but he won only 47 games, despite playing with Drexler about half the season.
1997-Jordan (Deserved it more that season, leading his team to 69 wins, but they wanted to give one to Malone, as well).
1998-Malone (He deserved one, and it was this one, leading Utah to the #1 record in the league. But he wasn't going to beat Jordan again, especially since it was pretty much known that Jordan was retiring after the end of the season).
1999-Shaq/Duncan (Maybe they wanted to give Malone the MVP they took away in 1998. But, even with Jordan gone, he wasn't the game's best player.)
2001-Shaq (If the award was called "best player award", he would be the winner. He did miss).
2005-Shaq
2006-LeBron (He could be considered more, at least. Kobe didn't win enough. Dirk was also overlooked a bit).

[L.Kizzle]

Some MVPs that have always bugged me are '69, '70 and '73 when Unseld, Reed and Cowens won, respectively.

1969
Wes Unseld- 13.8 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 2.6 apg, 47.6 FG%, 36.2 mpg, 57 wins
Wilt Chamberlain- 20.5 ppg, 21.1 rpg, 4.5 apg, 58.3 FG%, 45.2 mpg, 55 wins

From what I've seen, Unseld just didn't seem like an MVP caliber player to me. the only things that stuck out were his rebounding and outlet passing. I really value shot blocking for a center and he wasn't a great scorer either. Unseld's team won a couple of more games and Wilt had Baylor and West but Unseld had hall of famer, Earl Monroe and a damn talented team himself, in fact, he was just their 5th leading scorer. And while I haven't seen that many games of either, from what i've seen and from what the stats suggest, comparing Wilt and Unseld's impact is a joke.

If you don't want to give it to Wilt, then what about Billy Cunningham or Hal Greer? They led Philadelphia to 55 wins despite losing Wilt Chamberlain in the offseason and Luke Jackson only played 25 games.

1970
Willis Reed- 21.7 ppg, 13.9 rpg, 2 apg, 50.7 FG%, 38.1 mpg, 60 wins
Kareem- 28.8 ppg, 14.5 rpg, 4.1 apg, 51.8 FG%, 43.1 mpg 56 wins
Jerry West- 31.2 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 7.5 apg, 49.7 FG%, 42 mpg, 46 wins

Any case for Reed over Kareem? Reed's team won 4 more games, but he had a stacked team including a teammate(Walt Frazier) who was arguably better than he was. Kareem joined a 27 win expansion franchise and led them to 56 wins. And if for whatever reason, someone doesn't want to acknowledge Kareem was the MVP, atleast give it to West who had to deal with Wilt only playing 12 games, Baylor only playing 54 and Happy Hairston only playing 55. West led the league in scoring by a good margin, basically shot 50% and finished 4th in assists while being regarded as one of the best defensive guards in the league.

1973
Dave Cowens- 20.5 ppg, 16.2 rpg, 4.1 apg, 45.2 FG%, 41.8 mpg, 68 wins
Kareem Abdul Jabbar- 30.2 ppg, 16.1 rpg, 5 apg, 55.4 FG%, 42.8 mpg, 60 wins

Hell, like Reed in 1970, you could argue Cowens wasn't even the best player on his own team. In fact, I'd argue Havlicek was better. He averaged 24/7/7 on 45% shooting and 86% from the line and he was on the all-defensive first team while Cowens didn't make either defensive team.

But, again, Kareem looks like the MVP. from what I've seen, he was a much better player than Cowens at both ends and was clearly the best player on his own team at that point and his second best teammate was no John Havlicek.
For Unseld, the previous season, they didn't make the playoffs, the next season with him added and basically the same players, (Monrie, Gus, Kev) they win 57 games for the best record in the league.

[jlauber]

For Unseld, the previous season, they didn't make the playoffs, the next season with him added and basically the same players, (Monrie, Gus, Kev) they win 57 games for the best record in the league.

I liked Unseld, but the reality was, that Bullet team over-achieved during the regular season. FWIW, the Bullets' pythagorean was only 51-31. Furthermore, they were swept in the first round of the playoffs by the Knicks. The next year they went 50-32, and then 42-40 in the year they were swept by the Bucks in the Finals.

As for Chamberlain, how he did not win it in 61-62 is one of the biggest mysteries in sports history. An ESPN panel of experts not only ranked that season as the greatest individual season in NBA history, they regarded it as the greatest individual season in all of professional team sport's history.

And Chamberlain finished 7th in 62-63, basically because he was playing with the cast from "Gilligan's Island." IMHO, this was his finest "scoring" season. He won the scoring title with a 44.8 ppg average (winning by 10 ppg over the runnerup.) He led the NBA in rebounding at 24.6 rpg. He set a then-record FG% mark of .528. Using advanced stats, he led the NBA by a wide margin in Win Shares, at 20.9 (.677 percent of his team's wins BTW.) AND, he set a PER mark of 31.8, which is the highest in NBA history.

His 63-64 season was not his best statistical season, but, if he was ripped for playing on a 31-49 team the year before, he should get accolades for carrying this team to a 48-32 record. Yes, they added rookie Nate Thurmond, but he played out of position, and only averaged 7.0 ppg and 10.4 rpg. Furthermore, while his team was beaten by the vastly superior Celtics in the Finals, Chamberlain dominated Russell. He outscored him, per game, 29-11. He outrebounded him, per game, 27-25. And he shot .590 against him. I couldn't establish what Russell's FG% was against Wilt, but in his ten post-season games, Russell shot .356, and five of those games were against Wilt.

I also find a paradox with Chamberlain's 71-72 season. Yes, Kareem had a monster statistical year, averaging 34.8 ppg, 16.6 rpg, 4.6 apg, and a .574 FG%. But, his team actually dropped a few games from the season before (from 66-16 to 63-19.) Meanwhile, Wilt anchored a Laker team that improved from a 48-34 record in 70-71 to a 69-13 record in 71-72 (which included a record 33 game winning streak.) If Russell beat out Chamberlain in Wilt's monstrous 61-62 season, then surely Wilt should have beaten out Kareem in 71-72. As it was, Chamberlain averaged 14.8 ppg, led the league in rebounding bya solid margin at 19.2 rpg, led the league in FG% at .649, averaged 4.0 apg, was voted first-team all-defense, and had he would certainly have won the DPOY of the year had the award existed.

And using the same logic, Chamberlain also has an argument in 72-73 as well. True, Cowens played on a 68-14 team, but Wilt once again led the NBA in rebounding at 18.6 rpg. He set a FG% mark of .727 that likely will never be broken. And once again, he was voted first team all-defense. The Lakers dropped slightly from their record-breaking 71-72 season (from 69-13 to 60-22), but they were struck with injuries to Happy Hairston, who missed nearly the entire regular season, and an assortment of injuries to West (who was obviously hurting in the post-season.)

IMHO, Wilt should have won the MVP in 61-62, 62-63, and 63-64. He DID win it in 65-66, 66-67, and 67-68 (as well as his rookie season of 59-60.) He also has a solid case in 68-69. And, if he were not to win it in 61-62, he should have won it in 71-72.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I liked Unseld, but the reality was, that Bullet team over-achieved during the regular season. FWIW, the Bullets' pythagorean was only 51-31. Furthermore, they were swept in the first round of the playoffs by the Knicks. The next year they went 50-32, and then 42-40 in the year they were swept by the Bucks in the Finals.

To me, Unseld just didn't seem like an MVP caliber player. It's very tough for me to give someone MVP with such a modest scoring average, particularly when they're 5th on their own team in scoring, unless they're a monster defensively.


As for Chamberlain, how he did not win it in 61-62 is one of the biggest mysteries in sports history. An ESPN panel of experts not only ranked that season as the greatest individual season in NBA history, they regarded it as the greatest individual season in all of professional team sport's history.

Russell's team won 11 more games. He averaged 2.1 more apg in 3.3 fewer mpg and their rebounds per minute were virtually identical while Russell was also considered the superior defensive player and team player. Combine that with the W/L record and it's not hard to see why he won.


And Chamberlain finished 7th in 62-63, basically because he was playing with the cast from "Gilligan's Island." IMHO, this was his finest "scoring" season. He won the scoring title with a 44.8 ppg average (winning by 10 ppg over the runnerup.) He led the NBA in rebounding at 24.6 rpg. He set a then-record FG% mark of .528. Using advanced stats, he led the NBA by a wide margin in Win Shares, at 20.9 (.677 percent of his team's wins BTW.) AND, he set a PER mark of 31.8, which is the highest in NBA history.

He led them to a 31-49 record, that's not going to win you an MVP any season, Russell's team won 17 more games, he outassisted Wilt in fewer minutes, was still considered the superior defensive player and he averaged more rebounds per minute. If Russell didn't deserve it then Baylor is the logical choice. Baylor averaged 34 ppg, 14.3 rpg and 4.8 apg on 45.3% shooting and 83.7% from the line in 42.1 mpg. He led the Lakers to 53 wins despite West missing 25 games.

Actually, it seems like Baylor easily could've won MVP that season.


His 63-64 season was not his best statistical season, but, if he was ripped for playing on a 31-49 team the year before, he should get accolades for carrying this team to a 48-32 record. Yes, they added rookie Nate Thurmond, but he played out of position, and only averaged 7.0 ppg and 10.4 rpg. Furthermore, while his team was beaten by the vastly superior Celtics in the Finals, Chamberlain dominated Russell. He outscored him, per game, 29-11. He outrebounded him, per game, 27-25. And he shot .590 against him. I couldn't establish what Russell's FG% was against Wilt, but in his ten post-season games, Russell shot .356, and five of those games were against Wilt.

I'll agree Wilt had a good case this year, but Oscar's stats were as eye-popping(31.4 ppg, 9.9 rpg and 11 apg) and he led Cincinnati to a 55-25 record. That's an MVP season.


I also find a paradox with Chamberlain's 71-72 season. Yes, Kareem had a monster statistical year, averaging 34.8 ppg, 16.6 rpg, 4.6 apg, and a .574 FG%. But, his team actually dropped a few games from the season before (from 66-16 to 63-19.) Meanwhile, Wilt anchored a Laker team that improved from a 48-34 record in 70-71 to a 69-13 record in 71-72 (which included a record 33 game winning streak.) If Russell beat out Chamberlain in Wilt's monstrous 61-62 season, then surely Wilt should have beaten out Kareem in 71-72. As it was, Chamberlain averaged 14.8 ppg, led the league in rebounding bya solid margin at 19.2 rpg, led the league in FG% at .649, averaged 4.0 apg, was voted first-team all-defense, and had he would certainly have won the DPOY of the year had the award existed.

About Milwaukee's 3 game decline, well Oscar's numbers declined a bit as he was getting older and he played in just 64 games compared to 81 the previous year.

And in all fairness, while Wilt had a great year, Jerry West led the league in assists, Wilt was just the 4th leading scorer while West and Goodrich both averaged around 26 ppg on good efficiency. Kareem seems like the obvious choice to me.


And using the same logic, Chamberlain also has an argument in 72-73 as well. True, Cowens played on a 68-14 team, but Wilt once again led the NBA in rebounding at 18.6 rpg. He set a FG% mark of .727 that likely will never be broken. And once again, he was voted first team all-defense. The Lakers dropped slightly from their record-breaking 71-72 season (from 69-13 to 60-22), but they were struck with injuries to Happy Hairston, who missed nearly the entire regular season, and an assortment of injuries to West (who was obviously hurting in the post-season.)

I just don't see a case for Wilt in '73. Kareem's team won as many games and Kareem was by far his team's best player on both ends. If you want to go with the W/L record then Havlicek is the correct choice, IMO.


IMHO, Wilt should have won the MVP in 61-62, 62-63, and 63-64. He DID win it in 65-66, 66-67, and 67-68 (as well as his rookie season of 59-60.) He also has a solid case in 68-69. And, if he were not to win it in 61-62, he should have won it in 71-72.

I can see cases for '62 and '64(though I think the voters got it right), '63 I can't see, he looks like a much better choice than Unseld in '69 though, however, the early 70's should have been Kareem's MVPs and.

[jlauber]

Your arguments for Russell over Wilt are the same arguments for Wilt over Kareem. Statistically Russell was not even CLOSE to Chamberlain in '62, '63, and '64. And, Wilt was far more efficient than Russell was in his MVP seasons, in his 71-72 and 72-73 seasons, as well as leading the league in rebounding both seasons. AND, he was first-team all-defense both years.

If Russell wins in 61-62, Wilt should definitely win in 71-72.

[jlauber]

And furthermore if Kareem won the MVP in 75-76 with a 40-42 team, then Chamberlain, who was much dominant in 62-63 (15 statistical titles out of 22), should have won the MVP award in 62-63. And to be very fair to Wilt, his 62-63 roster was probably the worst in NBA history.

[ShaqAttack3234]

No, the arguments for Russell over Wilt aren't the same because in '73, Kareem's team won as many games as Wilt's and in '72 only 6 fewer and Kareem was BY FAR his team's best player.

There could be a legit debate over who was the best player on the '72 Lakers and Russell's teams won 11 and 17 more games than Chamberlain's in '62 and '63, respectively. Besides, my pick for '63 would probably be Baylor.

I wouldn't call Wilt's '63 season more dominant than Kareem's '76 factoring in pace and minutes either and Kareem's team had a noticeably better record.

The bottom line is you're not going to win MVP on a 31-49 win team and rightfully so.

[jlauber]

No, the arguments for Russell over Wilt aren't the same because in '73, Kareem's team won as many games as Wilt's and in '72 only 6 fewer and Kareem was BY FAR his team's best player.

There could be a legit debate over who was the best player on the '72 Lakers and Russell's teams won 11 and 17 more games than Chamberlain's in '62 and '63, respectively. Besides, my pick for '63 would probably be Baylor.

I wouldn't call Wilt's '63 season more dominant than Kareem's '76 factoring in pace and minutes either and Kareem's team had a noticeably better record.

The bottom line is you're not going to win MVP on a 31-49 win team and rightfully so.

Kareem played with an other HOFer in 75-76, Wilt's second best player in 62-63, was ONE time All-Star Tom Meschery. Wilt led the league in scoring at 44.8 ppg, and by a margin of 10 ppg. Kareem was second in scoring in 75-76 at 27.0 and well behind McAdoo's 31.5 ppg. Wilt led the league in rebounding at 24.6 rpg, while Kareem was at 16.9 (and while Wilt beat out Russell, Kareem beat out the likes of Cowens and Unseld.) Wilt set a then NBA record of .528 FG%, while Kareem finished 5th at .529 (in a much higher league average BTW.) We don't know much about Wilt's defense in 62-63, but what we do know is that he outscored Russell, in NINE H2H games, by a staggering 38 ppg to 14 ppg margin.

The bottom line, if a player with a better roster can win the MVP award with a 40-42 team, then a player who has arguably the greatest statistical season in NBA history (once again...LEADING the NBA in 15 out of the 22 statistical categories...and some by HUGE margins)...should be able to win the MVP award with a horrible roster on a 31-49 team.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Kareem played with an other HOFer in 75-76, Wilt's second best player in 62-63, was ONE time All-Star Tom Meschery. Wilt led the league in scoring at 44.8 ppg, and by a margin of 10 ppg. Kareem was second in scoring in 75-76 at 27.0 and well behind McAdoo's 31.5 ppg. Wilt led the league in rebounding at 24.6 rpg, while Kareem was at 16.9 (and while Wilt beat out Russell, Kareem beat out the likes of Cowens and Unseld.) Wilt set a then NBA record of .528 FG%, while Kareem finished 5th at .529 (in a much higher league average BTW.) We don't know much about Wilt's defense in 62-63, but what we do know is that he outscored Russell, in NINE H2H games, by a staggering 38 ppg to 14 ppg margin.

The bottom line, if a player with a better roster can win the MVP award with a 40-42 team, then a player who has arguably the greatest statistical season in NBA history (once again...LEADING the NBA in 15 out of the 22 statistical categories...and some by HUGE margins)...should be able to win the MVP award with a horrible roster on a 31-49 team.

First of all, look at the other candidates in the '63 season vs the '76 season. In '63 you had Baylor and Russell who were in their prime on 50+ win teams. What other candidates were there in '76? Basically McAdoo.

Regarding stats, I don't think you can just compare the stats from '76 and '63 without putting them in perspective.

Kareem's rebounds came in 41.2 mpg, Wilt's in 48 and then factor in the faster pace in '63 and it's really not much of a difference.

As far as scoring? Kareem took 21.1 shots per game and also averaged 5 apg in almost 7 fewer mpg. Wilt took 34.6 shots per game and despite the extra 7 mpg, he had just 3.4 apg compared to Kareem's 5.

[magnax1]

If you want to look at a 60's/70's player that got robbed, I think its definitely Jerry West in 1970. Wilt only played 12 games, Elgin Baylor only played 50, and happy Hairston, a 20 ppg scorer that season only played 55 games and West averaged 30 points and 7.5 assists and won 46 games. Willis probably should've won in 69. Wilt had a good case too, though His team was probably better (or about equal since West wasn't there for 20 or so games) and he won about the same amount of games. Either of those two in 69 are good choices, though Unseld is a pretty weird choice. I've only seen him once though, so I don't have much basis to criticzie the choice.

[AirJordan23]

Chuck deserved the '93 MVP. I would agree that Jordan and Hakeem were better players than Chuck that year but you have to remember Chuck led them to a 25-8 record without KJ and PHX went 1-5 without him. The Bulls regressed / coasted that year so that hurt MJ's chances of winning another one and the Rocs didn't win enough games in contrast to Phoenix.

For the people who said '94 goes to Robinson, he'd be regarded as one of the worst MVPs ever because his playoff failure (41% shooting while being shut down and outplayed by Malone) would be a lot more publicized. Think of what happened to Dirk in '07. There's NO WAY he wins another win with that type of playoff performance so Shaq would be the runaway candidate for MVP in '95.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Chuck deserved the '93 MVP. I would agree that Jordan and Hakeem were better players than Chuck that year but you have to remember Chuck led them to a 25-8 record without KJ and PHX went 1-5 without him. The Bulls regressed / coasted that year so that hurt MJ's chances of winning another one and the Rocs didn't win enough games in contrast to Phoenix.

For the people who said '94 goes to Robinson, he'd be regarded as one of the worst MVPs ever because his playoff failure (41% shooting while being shut down and outplayed by Malone) would be a lot more publicized. Think of what happened to Dirk in '07. There's NO WAY he wins another win with that type of playoff performance so Shaq would be the runaway candidate for MVP in '95.

I agree about Barkley, I use to say Jordan or Hakeem, but when you factor in KJ's injury and down year, his cast wasn't stacked like it seemed on paper.

As far as Robinson, based purely on the regular season, he had a great case and many thought he was going to win it, but his last day stat-padding for the scoring title(imagine if Kobe, Melo, Lebron or Iverson did that) and his disastrous playoff series bring down the year a bit, IMO.

In '95, Shaq had a good case as it is, but you can't go wrong with either.

[AirJordan23]

I agree about Barkley, I use to say Jordan or Hakeem, but when you factor in KJ's injury and down year, his cast wasn't stacked like it seemed on paper.

As far as Robinson, based purely on the regular season, he had a great case and many thought he was going to win it, but his last day stat-padding for the scoring title(imagine if Kobe, Melo, Lebron or Iverson did that) and his disastrous playoff series bring down the year a bit, IMO.

In '95, Shaq had a good case as it is, but you can't go wrong with either.
It wouldn't work that way, though. I see no reason why he gets MVP in '95 if he gets awarded the prior year and fails miserably in the playoffs. Look at what happened to Dirk in '08 after he had a disastrous playoff run; fell out of top 10 in MVP voting. Never mentioned as a legit MVP candidate again. Obviously, he was worse the next season and the Mavs didn't win as many games as they did. But, I feel DRob would suffer a similar fate and Shaq would've been the unanimous MVP next year. You can see Robinson in '96 didn't receive a single first place vote when he was better statistically than guys like Penny, Hakeem and Malone. Hell, statistically speaking, you can even argue he was on Jordan's level but he just wasn't close the player Jordan was. People were realizing his mental weaknesses, how his game declined in the playoffs due to various reasons and he couldn't win as the lead dog.

[ShaqAttack3234]

It wouldn't work that way, though. I see no reason why he gets MVP in '95 if he gets awarded the prior year and fails miserably in the playoffs. Look at what happened to Dirk in '08 after he had a disastrous playoff run; fell out of top 10 in MVP voting. Never mentioned as a legit MVP candidate again. Obviously, he was worse the next season and the Mavs didn't win as many games as they did. But, I feel DRob would suffer a similar fate and Shaq would've been the unanimous MVP next year. You can see Robinson in '96 didn't receive a single first place vote when he was better statistically than guys like Penny, Hakeem and Malone. Hell, statistically speaking, you can even argue he was on Jordan's level but he just wasn't close the player Jordan was. People were realizing his mental weaknesses, how his game declined in the playoffs due to various reasons and he couldn't win as the lead dog.

Yeah, I was just talking regular season. '95 is interesting.

Shaq- 29.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.4 bpg, 0.9 spg, 58.3 FG%, 2.6 TO, 37 mpg, 57 wins
Robinson- 27.6 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 2.9 apg, 3.2 bpg, 1.7 spg, 53 FG%, 2.9 TO, 38 mpg, 62 wins

Ignoring the stats which are very close, I'd say back then Shaq was the better offensive player and rebounder while Robinson was the better defensive player. Robinson was closer to Shaq offensively than Shaq was to Robinson defensively, but as far as MVP. Well, a huge part of Orlando's offense was 3 point shooting which often started with them throwing the ball into Shaq, Shaq waiting for the double team and then Orlando swinging the ball around the perimeter to the open man.

I'd give the MVP to Shaq that year, but I have no problem with Robinson winning it. Of course, the best player that year was Hakeem Olajuwon, but as far as regular season MVP, he didn't win because of Houston's disappointing regular season record(10 games behind Orlando and 15 behind San Antonio) and the fact that he missed 7 more games than Shaq and 9 more than Robinson. But he proved himself with a playoff run as good as any I've ever seen.

[EarlTheGoat]

In before someone says 08 Chris Paul.


Yea but Jordan should have taken Malone's mvp

Whats the point on saying this? Isnt it valid to say it just because you are a Deron Williams fan? Come on, I saw what you did there.

Like saying that is automaticlly going to discredit or make untrue/annoying that statement. Nice try.



Chris Paul in 2008 deserved the MVP.

[AirJordan23]

Yeah, I was just talking regular season. '95 is interesting.

Shaq- 29.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.4 bpg, 0.9 spg, 58.3 FG%, 2.6 TO, 37 mpg, 57 wins
Robinson- 27.6 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 2.9 apg, 3.2 bpg, 1.7 spg, 53 FG%, 2.9 TO, 38 mpg, 62 wins

Ignoring the stats which are very close, I'd say back then Shaq was the better offensive player and rebounder while Robinson was the better defensive player. Robinson was closer to Shaq offensively than Shaq was to Robinson defensively, but as far as MVP. Well, a huge part of Orlando's offense was 3 point shooting which often started with them throwing the ball into Shaq, Shaq waiting for the double team and then Orlando swinging the ball around the perimeter to the open man.

I'd give the MVP to Shaq that year, but I have no problem with Robinson winning it. Of course, the best player that year was Hakeem Olajuwon, but as far as regular season MVP, he didn't win because of Houston's disappointing regular season record(10 games behind Orlando and 15 behind San Antonio) and the fact that he missed 7 more games than Shaq and 9 more than Robinson. But he proved himself with a playoff run as good as any I've ever seen.
I agree. :cheers:

[beermonsteroo]

Jordan 97
Malone 98

[ShaqAttack3234]

I agree. :cheers:

It's funny, but I don't really have a problem with Shaq not winning in '95 and '05 because in '95, Robinson had a fell of a season and the big impact you expect from a center on both ends in '05 Shaq wasn't quite "prime Shaq" anymore. The only one I really have a problem with is '01. Though I think he deserved it in '95 and '05 as well.

Even though it's a little before my time, I've watched a ton of 1990 Jordan games(both regular season and playoffs), I've uploaded 2 so far and have plenty more and that's another year I really can't understand how he didn't win. His overall game was phenomenal. He had his prime athleticism and his outside shooting as well as his defense, explosiveness and playmaking and he had to carry a bigger load than any other MVP years of his save for '88(when he won 5 fewer games) and '98 with Pippen out(when he wasn't quite the individual player he was in '90).

When you consider his skills, efficiency and the fact he won 55 games while leading his team in assists, playing defense and scoring twice as many points as anyone on his team and adding 7 rebounds per game from the shooting guard position, he seems like a no-brainer pick to me. Actually, that might be the greatest scoring season of all time, it's better than Jordan's '87 and '88, IMO for a few reasons.

I think too many people get caught up in crap like "well player x won x amount of games with this cast". You really have to watch the games and see what kind of impact the player has because just looking at how "talented" the cast is can be misleading. That doesn't factor in chemistry and how well they fit into a specific system which can make a less talented cast contribute as much or more than a more talented cast.

[jlauber]

First of all, look at the other candidates in the '63 season vs the '76 season. In '63 you had Baylor and Russell who were in their prime on 50+ win teams. What other candidates were there in '76? Basically McAdoo.

Regarding stats, I don't think you can just compare the stats from '76 and '63 without putting them in perspective.

Kareem's rebounds came in 41.2 mpg, Wilt's in 48 and then factor in the faster pace in '63 and it's really not much of a difference.

As far as scoring? Kareem took 21.1 shots per game and also averaged 5 apg in almost 7 fewer mpg. Wilt took 34.6 shots per game and despite the extra 7 mpg, he had just 3.4 apg compared to Kareem's 5.

The pace in 75-76 was not significantly higher than in 62-63. The average NBA team averaged 100 FGAs per game in 62-63, while it was at 90 FGAs per game in 75-76...or 10%. Secondly, you have to discount team rebounds in rebounding. Wilt's Warriors averaged 58.4 rpg, while Kareem's Lakers averaged 48.8 rpg, or about 17 % difference. For example, Wilt averaged 24.6 rpg in 62-63. Reducing it down to 75-76 levels, it is still at 20.6 rpg (Kareem's was at 16.9.) True, Wilt averaged 47.6 mpg, but why should he be punished for that?

And Wilt's scoring would have dropped from 44.8 ppg down to around 40 ppg in 75-76. His FG% at .528 was, of course, an NBA record at the time (which he would shatter three more times BTW), and it came in a league that shot .441. Kareem finished 5th in FG% in 75-76, at .529, in a league that shot .458. All of which makes Wilt's scoring in 62-63 even more remarkable. Adjusted for pace AND league average, Wilt's scoring not only blew Kareem's away, by a HUGE margin, but he was considerably more efficient as well.

The more I look at Chamberlain's 62-63 season, the more impressed that I am. For example, let's compare Chamberlain's 62-63 season with Kareem's finest statistical year, his 71-72 season.

We can compare league average in rebounding, because team rebounds were used in both. The 62-63 NBA averaged 66.7 rpg. In 71-72 it was 51.1. The NBA averaged 101 FGAs per game in 62-63, and 95.5 in 71-72. The NBA averaged 35.9 FTAs per game in 62-63, and 31.2 FTAs in 71-72. The NBA shot .441 in 62-63, and .455 in 71-72.

Kareem averaged 44.2 mpg in 71-72, and of course, Wilt was at 47.6 mpg in 62-63.

So, let's reduce Wilt's 62-63 numbers down to 71-72 levels. His FGAs drop from 34.6 FGAs down to 32.7 FGA. His FTAs drop from 13.9 FTAs down to 12.1. Even before adjusting for league average FG%, Wilt's scoring looks like this: 17.3 FGM per game, or 34.6 ppg on his FGAs. 7.2 FTM per game. That equates to 41.8 ppg. Now, let's adjust for league average FG%. Chamberlain's FG% improves to about .545. His FGMs now rise to 17.8 per game, or 35.6 ppg. 35.6 ppg + 7.2 = 42.8 ppg.

Chamberlain's rebounding declines from 24.6 rpg, down to 18.8 rpg.

We can probably adjust Wilt's assists down from 3.4 to 3.0.

So here is a comparison of Kareem's 71-72 season, with an adjusted Wilt's 62-63 season...

Kareem averaged 34.8 ppg, 16.6 rpg, .574 FG%, .689 FT%, 4.6 apg in 44.2 mpg.

Wilt would have averaged 42.8 ppg, 18.8 rpg, .545 FG%, .593 FT%, 3.0 apg in 47.6 mpg.

Given the fact that Wilt would have had far worse personnel surrounding him (and presumably entire defenses designed to stop him), his efficiency is amazing. To score 8 more ppg, on only a slightly less FG% is phenomenal. And, his rebounding is over 2 better per game. Incidently, Chamberlain actually averaged 19.2 rpg in 71-72 in only 42.3 mpg. So he was actually a better rebounder, at age 35, than he was at age 26. And he was clearly a better rebounder than Kareem, at ANY age.

Given those numbers, I think that Chamberlain's 62-63 season has to rank above Kareem's best season.

[AirJordan23]

It's funny, but I don't really have a problem with Shaq not winning in '95 and '05 because in '95, Robinson had a fell of a season and the big impact you expect from a center on both ends in '05 Shaq wasn't quite "prime Shaq" anymore. The only one I really have a problem with is '01. Though I think he deserved it in '95 and '05 as well.
I wouldn't say DRob had the impact Shaq did on offense because Shaq would make defenses pay WAY MORE than he did. A true back to basket center naturally impacts the game more than a face up guy. An inside / outside game is what made Shaq and Hakeem so effective. Whenever they drew doubles, triples and all sorts of defensive attention, they were able to see the shooters, cutters and kickout for hockey assists. Robinson's game helped him a lot individually but it didn't create really well for his team. He was a good high / low passer and good off the dribble but his lack of a post game definitely hurt him. Facing up, he couldn't see where his team was save for the guy at baseline. It's why his game didn't create a lot for his team despite whatever his assist numbers say. He actually had nearly 5 apg one year but that was due to having some ball handling duties and even played some point center like Camby with the Nugz.

He had some post moves (could score with the jumphook with either hand) and Lucas made him more of a back to basket center iirc. You can see his FG% declined due to not getting enough FTA, lay ups etc with dribble penetration but the shooters benefitted cause of that.

FG% in LB years: 51, 53, 55
FG% under Lucas: 50, 51
FG% under Hill: 53, 52

When Hill arrived, so did Avery and they didn't run the offense through him anymore. Avery was more of a guy who thrived in the open court because he was lightning quick and could slash well so they ran a lot more than they used to and DRob was more of a finisher. His game definitely benefitted from that. But, as you saw, he had to create for his team in the slower, halfcourt playoff setting and he couldn't handle / break down double teams as well as Shaq / Hakeem could. I'm not hating on him. It's just the way it is. He needed a guy like Duncan to take pressure off of him.

Regarding Shaq, I'd give him the '01 and '05 MVP along with his '00 one. The '95 one makes sense only if DRob got the '94 one. I don't pay much emphasis to season awards, though.


Even though it's a little before my time, I've watched a ton of 1990 Jordan games(both regular season and playoffs), I've uploaded 2 so far and have plenty more and that's another year I really can't understand how he didn't win. His overall game was phenomenal. He had his prime athleticism and his outside shooting as well as his defense, explosiveness and playmaking and he had to carry a bigger load than any other MVP years of his save for '88(when he won 5 fewer games) and '98 with Pippen out(when he wasn't quite the individual player he was in '90).

When you consider his skills, efficiency and the fact he won 55 games while leading his team in assists, playing defense and scoring twice as many points as anyone on his team and adding 7 rebounds per game from the shooting guard position, he seems like a no-brainer pick to me. Actually, that might be the greatest scoring season of all time, it's better than Jordan's '87 and '88, IMO for a few reasons.

I think too many people get caught up in crap like "well player x won x amount of games with this cast". You really have to watch the games and see what kind of impact the player has because just looking at how "talented" the cast is can be misleading. That doesn't factor in chemistry and how well they fit into a specific system which can make a less talented cast contribute as much or more than a more talented cast.
Yeah, '90 MJ was ridiculous. Had 3 straight 45 pt games in the playoffs and torched Hawkins in the post and demolished the Bucks. He didn't particularly have a good reputation back then which is why the media probably didn't vote fo him. Barkley was lowballed by some of the voters that year (they left him of the ballot iirc). I think it's the only time someone with the most first place votes didn't win. I bolded the last paragraph for emphasis because I certainly agree with it. Too many people are caught up into stats and don't watch the games.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I wouldn't say DRob had the impact Shaq did on offense because Shaq would make defenses pay WAY MORE than he did. A true back to basket center naturally impacts the game more than a face up guy. An inside / outside game is what made Shaq and Hakeem so effective. Whenever they drew doubles, triples and all sorts of defensive attention, they were able to see the shooters, cutters and kickout for hockey assists. Robinson's game helped him a lot individually but it didn't create really well for his team. He was a good high / low passer and good off the dribble but his lack of a post game definitely hurt him. Facing up, he couldn't see where his team was save for the guy at baseline. It's why his game didn't create a lot for his team despite whatever his assist numbers say. He actually had nearly 5 apg one year but that was due to having some ball handling duties and even played some point center like Camby with the Nugz.

He had some post moves (could score with the jumphook with either hand) and Lucas made him more of a back to basket center iirc. You can see his FG% declined due to not getting enough FTA, lay ups etc with dribble penetration but the shooters benefitted cause of that.

FG% in LB years: 51, 53, 55
FG% under Lucas: 50, 51
FG% under Hill: 53, 52

When Hill arrived, so did Avery and they didn't run the offense through him anymore. Avery was more of a guy who thrived in the open court because he was lightning quick and could slash well so they ran a lot more than they used to and DRob was more of a finisher. His game definitely benefitted from that. But, as you saw, he had to create for his team in the slower, halfcourt playoff setting and he couldn't handle / break down double teams as well as Shaq / Hakeem could. I'm not hating on him. It's just the way it is. He needed a guy like Duncan to take pressure off of him.

Regarding Shaq, I'd give him the '01 and '05 MVP along with his '00 one. The '95 one makes sense only if DRob got the '94 one. I don't pay much emphasis to season awards, though.

I agree with this. A back to the basket player is going to impact a game more and because of the way those Houston and Orlando teams were built, Shaq and Olajuwon were even more valuable. Shaq would often wait for the double team or back in a little and then kick it out while Dream would often spin and draw a crowd and kick it out. Back to the basket play is the same reason why I'd take Duncan over Robinson, well that and clutch play.

And yeah, Robinson did have some post moves, but that wasn't his bread and butter. He had that kind of funny looking hook shot he'd use once in a while, it wasn't ineffective, but it wasn't a go to move, he had the turnaround jumper, he'd use an up and under sort of move which he'd often get fouled on, though it didn't seem like it often result in a field goal, usually two free throws and if there was a mismatch he'd sometimes make a quick move in there.

But Robinson seemed to face up and either shoot or drive and run the floor for a greater percentage of his baskets. Hakeem's go to move was really that baseline fadeaway and his second favorite would probably be the jump hook in the middle of the lane. He played outside as well and even had a crossover and could shoot off the dribble, but his post game and the double teams he drew were the key to the team's success. He was a good passer as well, a bit turnover prone, but aside from kicking it out to shooters he passed to cutters well.

[AirJordan23]

I agree with this. A back to the basket player is going to impact a game more and because of the way those Houston and Orlando teams were built, Shaq and Olajuwon were even more valuable. Shaq would often wait for the double team or back in a little and then kick it out while Dream would often spin and draw a crowd and kick it out. Back to the basket play is the same reason why I'd take Duncan over Robinson, well that and clutch play.

And yeah, Robinson did have some post moves, but that wasn't his bread and butter. He had that kind of funny looking hook shot he'd use once in a while, it wasn't ineffective, but it wasn't a go to move, he had the turnaround jumper, he'd use an up and under sort of move which he'd often get fouled on, though it didn't seem like it often result in a field goal, usually two free throws and if there was a mismatch he'd sometimes make a quick move in there.

But Robinson seemed to face up and either shoot or drive and run the floor for a greater percentage of his baskets. Hakeem's go to move was really that baseline fadeaway and his second favorite would probably be the jump hook in the middle of the lane. He played outside as well and even had a crossover and could shoot off the dribble, but his post game and the double teams he drew were the key to the team's success. He was a good passer as well, a bit turnover prone, but aside from kicking it out to shooters he passed to cutters well.

I'd say Robinson's lack of a post game directly correlates with his failures down the stretch. It's easier to put the clamps on a face up center when defenses tighten up during crunch time. Of course, he was mentally fragile, not assertive enough which was evident with his turnovers down the stretch and FT shooting. But, it also has something to do with his skillset. Because, teams could double him where he'd either end up taking contested jumper or make a tough pass which could lead to a turnover.

[ThaRegul8r]

If you want to look at a 60's/70's player that got robbed, I think its definitely Jerry West in 1970. Wilt only played 12 games, Elgin Baylor only played 50, and happy Hairston, a 20 ppg scorer that season only played 55 games and West averaged 30 points and 7.5 assists and won 46 games.

I've got West as my 69-70 MVP. My top two are West and Kareem.


Willis probably should've won in 69.

I've got Billy Cunningham as my 1968-69 regular season MVP.


Philadelphia really has no business being in the race. The 76ers traded Wilt Chamberlain, the greatest scorer and second-best rebounder in the history of the game, to the Lakers, and their fine coach, Alex Hannum, switched over to the ABA. Then in December 6'9" Lucious Jackson, Chamberlain's burly replacement, went out with an Achilles' tendon injury and it seemed time to deflate the basketballs and disband. Yet, there stands Philadelphia right up near the head of the class and attendance at the Spectrum is running about 2,000 a game ahead of last season. If high winds do not damage the Spectrum's roof again, the lid might be blown off by sheer fan enthusiasm.

"After Wilt was traded, the best the papers could say was we'd be a more exciting team without him," says Billy Cunningham. "That's like somebody fixing you up with an ugly blind date and then trying to hide what a loser she is by saying she's a great dancer."

The main reason for the 76ers' surprise success is Cunningham, the brash forward from Brooklyn who is known as The Kangaroo Kid or just Kang. He is only 6'6", a sapling in a courtful of redwoods, but he is the team leader in rebounds and 10th in the NBA. That, he says, is what, comes of growing up practicing on playgrounds with guys nicknamed Airplane, Helicopter and The Elevator Man.

Operating last season as one of the league's best sixth men, Cunningham scored 19 points a game. Now, as a starter (and an All-Star pick), he is averaging almost 25, some baskets coming on the long jump shot he has perfected since his college days at North Carolina but most coming in heavy traffic close to the hoop. He loves to free-lance and is much more effective now that Chamberlain is not clogging up the key.


Wilt had a good case too, though His team was probably better (or about equal since West wasn't there for 20 or so games) and he won about the same amount of games. Either of those two in 69 are good choices, though Unseld is a pretty weird choice. I've only seen him once though, so I don't have much basis to criticzie the choice.

You have to do some research into the season. Unseld won MVP because the Bullets had the fourth-worst record in the league before he got there, and after he gets there they post the league's best record. It was a then NBA-record 21 game turnaround.

[quote][I]If Philadelphia has been surprising, Baltimore has been amazing. The Bullets finished sixth and last in the Eastern Division in '68, yet they have been first almost this entire season, upping their home attendance by nearly 3,000 spectators a game. Those are solid figures, unlike the questionable ones of two or three years ago when the club was using 50� tickets and other gimmicks to pump up the gate.

The difference essentially has been one man, rookie Westley Unseld from Louisville. He is listed at 6'7", but he is really not quite 6'7", and even his own college coach thought he would have to play forward in the pros. So there he is playing the pivot for the Bullets and ranking fourth in rebounds in the NBA behind three guys 7'1", 6'9

[Yung D-Will]

Whats the point on saying this? Isnt it valid to say it just because you are a Deron Williams fan? Come on, I saw what you did there.

Like saying that is automaticlly going to discredit or make untrue/annoying that statement. Nice try.



Chris Paul in 2008 deserved the MVP.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

I'm mad you responded to that like 5 pages later

[Fatal9]

Lakers also didn't improve much after adding Wilt. Went from 52 wins to 55 wins (and Jerry West played 10 more games in '69 than in '68) and their SRS actually declined. There's a reason he was 9th in MVP voting, made absolutely no sense to give him the award and he wasn't even thought of as the best player on his own team at the time.

[1987_Lakers]

I've got West as my 69-70 MVP. My top two are West and Kareem.



I've got Billy Cunningham as my 1968-69 regular season MVP.





You have to do some research into the season. Unseld won MVP because the Bullets had the fourth-worst record in the league before he got there, and after he gets there they post the league's best record. It was a then NBA-record 21 game turnaround.



Don't agree he actually should have won MVP that season, but that's the reasoning.

TheRegul8r. Looking forward to discussions for POY for 1970 thread on realgm after Kareem wins 1971. This is Mean_Streets btw. I've got the #1 spot for '70 narrowed down to West, Kareem, Frazier, & Reed. It's a tough year. 1969 is going to be another tough year as well.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Lakers also didn't improve much after adding Wilt. Went from 52 wins to 55 wins (and Jerry West played 10 more games in '69 than in '68) and their SRS actually declined. There's a reason he was 9th in MVP voting, made absolutely no sense to give him the award and he wasn't even thought of as the best player on his own team at the time.

Good post, I didn't realize that, but I still have a problem with Unseld winning it. There are quite a few Wes Unseld games and I just can't see him as an elite player. Maybe Billy Cunningham was the best choice then considering how well he played and how Philly only dropped from 62 to 55 wins despite Wilt's departure and Luke Jackson only playing 25 games.

[ThaRegul8r]

Some MVPs that have always bugged me are '69, '70 and '73 when Unseld, Reed and Cowens won, respectively.

1969
Wes Unseld- 13.8 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 2.6 apg, 47.6 FG%, 36.2 mpg, 57 wins
Wilt Chamberlain- 20.5 ppg, 21.1 rpg, 4.5 apg, 58.3 FG%, 45.2 mpg, 55 wins

From what I've seen, Unseld just didn't seem like an MVP caliber player to me. the only things that stuck out were his rebounding and outlet passing. I really value shot blocking for a center and he wasn't a great scorer either. Unseld's team won a couple of more games and Wilt had Baylor and West but Unseld had hall of famer, Earl Monroe and a damn talented team himself, in fact, he was just their 5th leading scorer. And while I haven't seen that many games of either, from what i've seen and from what the stats suggest, comparing Wilt and Unseld's impact is a joke.

As I stated in the above post, Unseld won MVP because he sparked a NBA record 21-game turnaround, from the fourth-worst record in the league to the best record in the league. I quoted an article from the time reflecting the current sentiment at the time.

Wilt didn't win it because there was some dissension on the Lakers and problems with fit. Which you don't see from stats, which is why you have to do some research on the actual season.


If you don't want to give it to Wilt, then what about Billy Cunningham or Hal Greer? They led Philadelphia to 55 wins despite losing Wilt Chamberlain in the offseason and Luke Jackson only played 25 games.

I have Cunningham as my MVP rather than Unseld. Philadelphia wasn't expected to do anything after trading Chamberlain, and as you said, they lost Luke Jackson as well, but despite this they tied for the second-best record in the league. The reason was Cunningham.


1970
Willis Reed- 21.7 ppg, 13.9 rpg, 2 apg, 50.7 FG%, 38.1 mpg, 60 wins
Kareem- 28.8 ppg, 14.5 rpg, 4.1 apg, 51.8 FG%, 43.1 mpg 56 wins
Jerry West- 31.2 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 7.5 apg, 49.7 FG%, 42 mpg, 46 wins

Any case for Reed over Kareem?

I have Reed below both Kareem and West.


Reed's team won 4 more games, but he had a stacked team including a teammate(Walt Frazier) who was arguably better than he was. Kareem joined a 27 win expansion franchise and led them to 56 wins. And if for whatever reason, someone doesn't want to acknowledge Kareem was the MVP, atleast give it to West who had to deal with Wilt only playing 12 games, Baylor only playing 54 and Happy Hairston only playing 55. West led the league in scoring by a good margin, basically shot 50% and finished 4th in assists while being regarded as one of the best defensive guards in the league.

As previous aforementioned, my MVP is West, followed by Kareem. Looking at the logic though, I find it odd that Unseld won MVP the previous season for sparking a record turnaround, yet the very next year, Kareem leads his team to a greater turnaround and puts up much better stats while doing so, yet he only gets third.


1973
Dave Cowens- 20.5 ppg, 16.2 rpg, 4.1 apg, 45.2 FG%, 41.8 mpg, 68 wins
Kareem Abdul Jabbar- 30.2 ppg, 16.1 rpg, 5 apg, 55.4 FG%, 42.8 mpg, 60 wins

Hell, like Reed in 1970, you could argue Cowens wasn't even the best player on his own team. In fact, I'd argue Havlicek was better. He averaged 24/7/7 on 45% shooting and 86% from the line and he was on the all-defensive first team while Cowens didn't make either defensive team.

But, again, Kareem looks like the MVP. from what I've seen, he was a much better player than Cowens at both ends and was clearly the best player on his own team at that point and his second best teammate was no John Havlicek.

Cowens had no business winning over Kareem.

[PHILA]

Lakers also didn't improve much after adding Wilt. Went from 52 wins to 55 wins (and Jerry West played 10 more games in '69 than in '68) and their SRS actually declined. There's a reason he was 9th in MVP voting, made absolutely no sense to give him the award and he wasn't even thought of as the best player on his own team at the time.Plus his back and forth with Butch the entire season and the fact that he had a terrible regular season compared to his 3 full seasons with the 76ers, when he won 3 consecutive MVP's. As noted by ThaRegul8r, it is understandable why Unseld got the award, however I would agree with ShaqAttack that Billy C would be a fine choice as he proved his worth moving to the big forward slot with Luke Jackson out. Shows how powerful that '67 team was in the front court.

[ThaRegul8r]

TheRegul8r. Looking forward to discussions for POY for 1970 thread on realgm after Kareem wins 1971. This is Mean_Streets btw. I've got the #1 spot for '70 narrowed down to West, Kareem, Frazier, & Reed. It's a tough year. 1969 is going to be another tough year as well.

Oh, hey! Yeah, the next two years should provoke some interesting discussion. I've spent the week trying to get my ballot together for the next couple years. Those are my top four for 1970 as well. I haven't decided on 1969 yet. Russell will finally arrive on the scene

[jlauber]

As I stated in the above post, Unseld won MVP because he sparked a NBA record 21-game turnaround, from the fourth-worst record in the league to the best record in the league. I quoted an article from the time reflecting the current sentiment at the time.

Wilt didn't win it because there was some dissension on the Lakers and problems with fit. Which you don't see from stats, which is why you have to do some research on the actual season.



I have Cunningham as my MVP rather than Unseld. Philadelphia wasn't expected to do anything after trading Chamberlain, and as you said, they lost Luke Jackson as well, but despite this they tied for the second-best record in the league. The reason was Cunningham.



I have Reed below both Kareem and West.



As previous aforementioned, my MVP is West, followed by Kareem. Looking at the logic though, I find it odd that Unseld won MVP the previous season for sparking a record turnaround, yet the very next year, Kareem leads his team to a greater turnaround and puts up much better stats while doing so, yet he only gets third.



Cowens had no business winning over Kareem.

Chamberlain DOMINATED the other NBA centers that season, including Russell. The Lakers went 4-2 against Boston during the regular season, and in those six games, Wilt averaged 16.3 ppg and 24.0 rpg. Russell averaged 6.7 ppg and 17.0 rpg. Included in those games were one in which Chamberlain, in the middle of a 17 game scoring binge (more on that later) poured in 35 along with 19 rebounds (while Russell had a 5-16 game)...and a game in which Wilt outrebounded Russell by a staggering 42-18 margin.

I have already mentioned this before, but Chamberlain also put up a 25-38 game against Unseld (who was at 9-15.)

The Lakers did not improve considerably, but most of that could be attributed to an incompetent coach, who not only asked Wilt to play the high post, (so that a declining Baylor could roam the baseline and fire blanks), he even BENCHED Chamberlain during the season.

I have posted this many times before, but van Breda Kolf did such a horrible job with Wilt, that, at one point, Wilt was averaging 17 ppg. SI even ran article claiming that Wilt could no longer score. Of course, Wilt made them look ridiculous when he scored 60 points on the day the article hit the newstand. He followed that up with a 66 point game a few days later, and over the course of 17 straight games, he averaged 32 ppg.

CLEARLY, Wilt was the most dominating player in the game...even in that season. The numbers don't lie. He averaged 20.5 ppg (thanks again to his coach); he led the NBA in rebounding at 21.1 rpg; he averaged 4.5 apg; and he led the NBA in FG% at .583. He also had a recorded game of 23 blocks, and there is a strong possibility that he would have led the league in blocked shots.

As far as his scoring goes...his NEW coach in 69-70, Joe Mullaney, asked Wilt to become the focal point of the offense, and he responded by averaging 32.2 ppg over the course of the first nine games. Unfortunately, he went down with a horrible knee injury, and was never quite the same again. However, it was obviously apparent that Wilt could have led the NBA in scoring even as late as the 69-70 season (and he most certainly could have led the league in scoring from 66-67 thru 68-69, as well.)

For him to not even finish TENTH in the voting was yet another slap in the face of Chamberlain.

[ThaRegul8r]

Chamberlain DOMINATED the other NBA centers that season, including Russell. The Lakers went 4-2 against Boston during the regular season, and in those six games, Wilt averaged 16.3 ppg and 24.0 rpg. Russell averaged 6.7 ppg and 17.0 rpg. Included in those games were one in which Chamberlain, in the middle of a 17 game scoring binge (more on that later) poured in 35 along with 19 rebounds (while Russell had a 5-16 game)...and a game in which Wilt outrebounded Russell by a staggering 42-18 margin.

I have already mentioned this before, but Chamberlain also put up a 25-38 game against Unseld (who was at 9-15.)

The Lakers did not improve considerably, but most of that could be attributed to an incompetent coach, who not only asked Wilt to play the high post, (so that a declining Baylor could roam the baseline and fire blanks), he even BENCHED Chamberlain during the season.

I have posted this many times before, but van Breda Kolf did such a horrible job with Wilt, that, at one point, Wilt was averaging 17 ppg. SI even ran article claiming that Wilt could no longer score. Of course, Wilt made them look ridiculous when he scored 60 points on the day the article hit the newstand. He followed that up with a 66 point game a few days later, and over the course of 17 straight games, he averaged 32 ppg.

CLEARLY, Wilt was the most dominating player in the game...even in that season. The numbers don't lie. He averaged 20.5 ppg (thanks again to his coach); he led the NBA in rebounding at 21.1 rpg; he averaged 4.5 apg; and he led the NBA in FG% at .583. He also had a recorded game of 23 blocks, and there is a strong possibility that he would have led the league in blocked shots.

Which doesn't change what I said about dissension and problems of fit. Just as I've said repeatedly said that Shaq didn't win MVP in 2000-01 because of his part in the feud.

[jlauber]

Which doesn't change what I said about dissension and problems of fit. Just as I've said repeatedly said that Shaq didn't win MVP in 2000-01 because of his part in the feud.

I am not arguing with your point on "dissension", since the majority of the problem was his idiotic coach. My point, though, was that Wilt was STILL the most dominant player in the game. Too bad he didn't have Mullaney in the 68-69 season.

[dwadefan11]

There's just really no excuse for Nash having two... I love Nash but its just crazy:banana: :pimp:

[jlauber]

There's just really no excuse for Nash having two... I love Nash but its just crazy:banana: :pimp:

I'm a Kobe fan, and I really think he was the best player in the NBA over the last half of the decade of the 00's...but I can see a good argument for Nash and Nowitzki in their MVP seasons. I can use Hank Aaron as an example. He only won ONE MVP award in his career, but he was consistently a great player.

[dwadefan11]

I'm a Kobe fan, and I really think he was the best player in the NBA over the last half of the decade of the 00's...but I can see a good argument for Nash and Nowitzki in their MVP seasons. I can use Hank Aaron as an example. He only won ONE MVP award in his career, but he was consistently a great player.

I love Kobe too... It just seems wrong that he only has one mvp when guys like nash have 2... But I guess its all about NBA first team anyway

[magnax1]

You have to do some research into the season. Unseld won MVP because the Bullets had the fourth-worst record in the league before he got there, and after he gets there they post the league's best record. It was a then NBA-record 21 game turnaround.

I know, but even then it seems a bit odd to me. He just doesn't seem like an MVP caliber player to me, but like I said, I've only watched one game, so its not really fair for me to judge him. I was just saying, it seemed like there were other players who deserved it more, mostly just going off stats and wins. He didn't even make an all NBA team after that season.

[Shep]

He got outrebounded by 2.6 rebounds per game and he got outrebounded by 6 in the most important game of the season while Ewing matched his offensive production. And considering Ewing was injured, yes, it is a surprise and disappointment that he'd get thoroughly outrebounded like that.
mourning outscored ewing by 7 points per game, shot the ball 8% better from the field, stole the ball 60% more than ewing, and blocked around 2 and a half times the number of shots ewing blocked

I'm not saying he should be punished, but maintaing that average over a full season would be more meaningful to me from a historical perspective. Mourning himself had averaged 4 blocks through the first half of the 1999-2000 season while playing 47 games in that first half.
that was a full season that year. 50 games.

Right, because we can also measure through statistics the impact of teams doubling Shaq
not enough of an impact obviously, because the lakers could only manage a 4th seed and got swept out of the playoffs, while ending the playoffs with a 3-5 record.

10.7 is 97.3% of 11, 1.7 is 70.8% of 2.4. You see the difference?

oh so you're using my way of differentiating between stats now. ok well o'neals 1.7 bpg was a measly 43% of zo's 3.9 bpg, destroying any advantage o'neal has anywhere else

I'm basing it on Shaq being a much more dominant offensive player who was clearly a much more productive and efficient player. Shaq was a much better scorer and passer and pretty much equal on the boards that year. Mourning blew him away as a defensive player, but Shaq also blew Mourning away as an offensive player and atleast dominated one playoff series and got to the 2nd round.
you're basing mourning being a much better player than o'neal on all of that? strange..

As far as the Lakers regular season record? Don't forget about the distractions that team faced. Dennis Rodman being the most memorable one, but they also had to adjust to a midseason trade of Eddie Jones for Glen Rice in what was a short season to begin with and they had 3 different head coaches that year.
distractions? :oldlol: sounds more like excuses to me

Yet neither were there in the second round. If we're basing it on production for the entire playoffs then Shaq's 26.6 ppg, 11.6 rpg, 2.3 apg and 2.9 bpg look pretty good, no?
yes, it looked very good. perhaps he would've been ranked higher than mourning if he played like this during the regular season

Shaq also lost to a much better team so supporting casts are relative
:facepalm

but atleast Hardaway contributed with his assists. And atleast Shaq was able to step up to clinch the series vs Houston with 37 points, 11 rebounds, 3 blocks and 3 assists on 14/22 shooting despite Glen Rice being out, Kobe shooting 9/25 and having more shot attempts than points(though he contributed in other areas) and the rest of the starting lineup combining for 11 points on 5/15 shooting.
but then he didn't show up for the next series, in which he got swept out of the playoffs for the 5th time in his last 6 seasons

also

:roll: @ o'neal over robinson for the 1995 mvp. o'neal wasn't even the second most valuable that season.

[EarlTheGoat]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

I'm mad you responded to that like 5 pages later

So?

3 smileys show insecurity.

[triangleoffense]

So?

3 smileys show insecurity.

Some posters just like to use a ton of smileys for over-exaggeration/their own twisted agenda.

:roll: :roll: :roll: for emphasis.

[ShaqAttack3234]

:roll: @ o'neal over robinson for the 1995 mvp. o'neal wasn't even the second most valuable that season.

Ok, who was 2nd then? :oldlol:

Shaq and Robinson were close to me that season. Depends on what value you more, offense, or defense. Shaq's offensive impact was superior and you can see this statistically or by watching the games when you'll see that the key to Orlando's team was throwing the ball into Shaq in the post and Shaq either scoring or waiting for the double and kicking the ball out to a shooter or swinging the ball the ball around to the open shooter. Despite also having a very good guard in Penny Hardaway, Orlando's strengths were posting scoring and 3 point shooting and Shaq had a huge hand in that.

Shaq led the league in scoring, finished 2nd in FG%, 3rd in rebounding and 6th in blocks. He definitely had an MVP caliber year.

Robinson was 3rd in scoring, 4th in blocks, 6th in rebounding and 15th in steals and FG%. He also had an MVP caliber year.

It's not laughable to give it to either. They both won a lot of games and had a big impact on both ends.

I mean you're a good poster, but some of your MVP choices, like Shawn Marion in 2005, are more puzzling than Shaq in '95, though I think Shaq and Robinson could basically be co MVPs, if you want to use San Antonio's record as the tiebreaker then that's fine. Same with Olajuwon and Robinson in '94.

Well, atleast you agree on '90, '99, '00 and '01. I'm assuming you agree with Duncan in '02 and '03, Garnett in '04 and Lebron in '09 and '10.

[Shep]

Ok, who was 2nd then?
karl malone

lets be real here. robinson easily put up better numbers, only missed 1 game, led his team to the best record in the nba in a harder conference, was one of the best 2 or 3 defenders in the league, and had a worse supporting cast.

robinson in '95 was the clearest choice for mvp since larry bird won in '86

I mean you're a good poster, but some of your MVP choices, like Shawn Marion in 2005, are more puzzling than Shaq in '95, though I think Shaq and Robinson could basically be co MVPs, if you want to use San Antonio's record as the tiebreaker then that's fine. Same with Olajuwon and Robinson in '94.
i don't know why you'd have an issue with marion being the '05 mvp, although co mvp between marion and dirk nowtizki would've also been acceptable. and robinson deserved the '94 mvp aswell.

Well, atleast you agree on '90, '99, '00 and '01. I'm assuming you agree with Duncan in '02 and '03, Garnett in '04 and Lebron in '09 and '10.
yes, these are all correct

[ShaqAttack3234]

lets be real here. robinson easily put up better numbers, only missed 1 game, led his team to the best record in the nba in a harder conference, was one of the best 2 or 3 defenders in the league, and had a worse supporting cast.

I wouldn't say he easily put up better numbers. O'Neal outscored him 29.3 ppg to 27.6 ppg, outrebounded him 11.4 to 10.8, shot 58.3% to Robinson's 53% and while Robinson had a 2.9 to 2.7 apg advantage, he turned the ball over 2.9 times compared to Shaq's 2.6 making the small assist advantage negligible. Robinson blocked 3.2 shots compared to Shaq's 2.4 and had 1.7 steals compared to Shaq's 0.9, though, but statistically, he doesn't look better overall.

As far as casts? Not a huge difference. Shaq had a much better number 2 guy in Penny, but Robinson had a good cast overall.


robinson in '95 was the clearest choice for mvp since larry bird won in '86

I have no problem with Robinson winning it, I have a tough time deciding between Shaq and Robinson for that year myself. Shaq was the better offensive player and rebounder, but Robinson was easily the better defender and he did win more games, however I'm factoring in Orlando's system which as I noted, relied heavily on Shaq.


i don't know why you'd have an issue with marion being the '05 mvp, although co mvp between marion and dirk nowtizki would've also been acceptable. and robinson deserved the '94 mvp aswell.

Marion just seems like a really odd choice for MVP. I mean in '05, Nash and Stoudemire were regarded as the Suns two best players. Marion was an excellent, versatile player who played well within the system and could score without dominating the ball, defend multiple positions and rebound, but he wasn't on the level of MVP players, in my opinion.

I can live with Dirk winning that MVP, he had a phenomenal season and led his team to a better record than it looked like they'd win on paper and was by far the best player on his own team unlike the candidates on the Suns and Heat. Garnett had the best individual season, but missing the playoffs took him out of the running and Duncan missed too many games.

McGrady had a decent case because Houston traded 3 key players to get him and improved their record from 45-37 to 51-31 and McGrady came up big in the clutch and put up excellent numbers, but Houston's record wasn't quite good enough compared to the Mavs, Suns and Heat for me to give it to him.


yes, these are all correct

Ok, what about '91 and '92, '96, '97 and '98? I got Jordan for each season. Malone was close in '97 and '98, but in '98, despite a decline in numbers, Jordan played through a well documented injury to his shooting hand and led Chicago to a 26-12 record without Pippen while Malone's record without Stockton was not nearly as stellar.

Nowitzki was the correct choice for MVP in 2007 because it's a regular season award, I don't really have an MVP for 2006, Magic is my pick for '87 and '89, I'm undecided on Jordan and Bird for '88, Bird was deserving of his 3 actual MVPs and I really haven't gone back much farther than that except Walton only playing 58 games in '78 makes his MVP seem incorrect and Kareem deserved his MVPs and also should have won in '70 and '73.

[Shep]

I wouldn't say he easily put up better numbers. O'Neal outscored him 29.3 ppg to 27.6 ppg, outrebounded him 11.4 to 10.8, shot 58.3% to Robinson's 53% and while Robinson had a 2.9 to 2.7 apg advantage, he turned the ball over 2.9 times compared to Shaq's 2.6 making the small assist advantage negligible. Robinson blocked 3.2 shots compared to Shaq's 2.4 and had 1.7 steals compared to Shaq's 0.9, though, but statistically, he doesn't look better overall.
but scoring and rebounding are the 2 easiest stats to accumulate, so what little advantage o'neal has over robinson in that area gets decimated by robinson's advantage in the hard to get stats, like assists, steals, and blocks. and what advantage o'neal has on fg% is wiped out by robinson's advantage in ft%, as evident in robinson's ts% being 60% to o'neal's 59%. all this points to robinson having a clear advantage statistically.

As far as casts? Not a huge difference. Shaq had a much better number 2 guy in Penny, but Robinson had a good cast overall.
shaq had a point guard who was easily better than robinson's pg, a shooting guard who was easily better, and a better, more rounded power forward. the only advantage robinson had was sean elliott.

I have no problem with Robinson winning it, I have a tough time deciding between Shaq and Robinson for that year myself. Shaq was the better offensive player and rebounder, but Robinson was easily the better defender and he did win more games, however I'm factoring in Orlando's system which as I noted, relied heavily on Shaq.
i have an easy time deciding between robinson and o'neal. voters would have a tought choice choosing between karl malone and shaquille o'neal for runner up

Marion just seems like a really odd choice for MVP. I mean in '05, Nash and Stoudemire were regarded as the Suns two best players. Marion was an excellent, versatile player who played well within the system and could score without dominating the ball, defend multiple positions and rebound, but he wasn't on the level of MVP players, in my opinion.
stoudemire was close to marion during the regular season, but nash wasn't. both played better than marion in the playoffs which is probably why people think they were better (stoudemire was better after/as a result of the playoffs) because some people only remember what they saw last, or because more people watched the playoffs than they did the regular season.

marion put up 19.4ppg, 11.3rpg, 1.9apg, 2.0spg, and 1.5 bpg, shot 48%fg, 33%3p, and 83%ft, while missing only 1 game, and being the best player on the team with the most wins. he put up great overall numbers while normally guarding the teams best player, whether he was a big man or a perimeter player. and he put up great overall numbers while the coach ran zero plays for him. he was the type of guy who did all the little things, or the dirty work..loose balls, deflections, filling lanes, being in the right spots etc, and he did it more effectively than almost anyone could in nba history.

Ok, what about '91 and '92, '96, '97 and '98?
jordan is the mvp for all of those years except '98, where it is karl malone

Malone was close in '97 and '98, but in '98, despite a decline in numbers, Jordan played through a well documented injury to his shooting hand and led Chicago to a 26-12 record without Pippen while Malone's record without Stockton was not nearly as stellar.
yeh, but for the games stockton missed the jazz starting five consisted of malone, jeff hornacek, then trash like howard eisley, greg foster, and adam keefe filling in the remainding 3 spots, and thats after bryon russell got benched for playing so shit they thought they'd bench him for adam keefe :roll: . chicago meanwhile had toni kukoc to step into the spot vacated by pippen.

Nowitzki was the correct choice for MVP in 2007 because it's a regular season award, I don't really have an MVP for 2006
tim duncan

Magic is my pick for '87 and '89
jordan was the '89 mvp. co mvp with magic is also acceptable.

I'm undecided on Jordan and Bird for '88
jordan quite easily here

Bird was deserving of his 3 actual MVPs
and '82

I really haven't gone back much farther than that except Walton only playing 58 games in '78 makes his MVP seem incorrect
george gervin

Kareem deserved his MVPs and also should have won in '70 and '73.
yes, also '79

[ShaqAttack3234]

but scoring and rebounding are the 2 easiest stats to accumulate, so what little advantage o'neal has over robinson in that area gets decimated by robinson's advantage in the hard to get stats, like assists, steals, and blocks. and what advantage o'neal has on fg% is wiped out by robinson's advantage in ft%, as evident in robinson's ts% being 60% to o'neal's 59%. all this points to robinson having a clear advantage statistically.

I don't agree with you that scoring and rebounding are the 2 easiest stats to accumulate and wouldn't Robinson's slightly higher turnover average cancel out his slightly higher assist average?


shaq had a point guard who was easily better than robinson's pg, a shooting guard who was easily better, and a better, more rounded power forward. the only advantage robinson had was sean elliott.

True, but you also have to look at how the team succeeded. Obviously, first option was throw the ball into Shaq in the post as evidenced by his league-leading 29.3 ppg, but a large part of their success was their 3 point shooting and Shaq's double teams also contributed to that.

Watching the games and looking at the numbers, both had monster seasons and were worthy of MVP so I won't argue with your selection of Robinson. Regardless of supporting casts on paper(which doesn't factor in team chemistry coaching ect.), 1 player didn't seem clearly superior or more valuable to his team than the other to me. Olajuwon was better than either, but Houston's record and Olajuwon's injury took him out of the running and he didn't prove his superiority until the playoffs.


marion put up 19.4ppg, 11.3rpg, 1.9apg, 2.0spg, and 1.5 bpg, shot 48%fg, 33%3p, and 83%ft, while missing only 1 game, and being the best player on the team with the most wins. he put up great overall numbers while normally guarding the teams best player, whether he was a big man or a perimeter player. and he put up great overall numbers while the coach ran zero plays for him. he was the type of guy who did all the little things, or the dirty work..loose balls, deflections, filling lanes, being in the right spots etc, and he did it more effectively than almost anyone could in nba history.

Stoudemire averaged 26 ppg, 8.9 rpg, 1.6 bpg and 1 spg and had an amazing TS% of 61.7%.

But the Suns were just 2-5 without Nash and in those games Marion's production declined to 13.7 ppg and 10.9 rpg on 38.9% shooting. Everyone who watched the Suns knows Nash made the game easier for his teammates and Marion was no exception. Which isn't to say that Marion wasn't a great, versatile player.

But I don't think anyone on the Suns was the MVP, to me, it was between Dirk and either Shaq or Wade(depending on who you attribute more of the Heat's success to)


jordan is the mvp for all of those years except '98, where it is karl malone

yeh, but for the games stockton missed the jazz starting five consisted of malone, jeff hornacek, then trash like howard eisley, greg foster, and adam keefe filling in the remainding 3 spots, and thats after bryon russell got benched for playing so shit they thought they'd bench him for adam keefe :roll: . chicago meanwhile had toni kukoc to step into the spot vacated by pippen.

Fair enough, many say alternate Malone and Jordan's actual MVPs and it's close enough that again I won't argue.


tim duncan

I know they won 63 games, but he had a down season due to the plantar fasciitis. His game was hurt by this except for his rebounding and passing. Overall, he averaged 18.6 ppg, 11 rpg, 3.2 apg and 2 bpg, but his efficiency was subpar for his position at 48.4% from the field and 62.9% from the line.


jordan was the '89 mvp. co mvp with magic is also acceptable.

Jordan did do everything for his team, I guess co-mvps is fair.


and '82

Agreed


george gervin

Looks like the best candidate due to Kareem and Walton's injuries. Though he'd have to be one of the weaker MVPs.


yes, also '79

Didn't realize it until you mentioned it, but I'll agree, definitely a better all around player than Moses and his team won as many games.

[Shep]

I don't agree with you that scoring and rebounding are the 2 easiest stats to accumulate and wouldn't Robinson's slightly higher turnover average cancel out his slightly higher assist average?
points and rebounds are the 2 easiest stats because because there is/was 101 and 42 of them happening every game, for each team, this is obviously not the case for assists, steals, and blocks.
yes, robinson's turnovers evaporate his assists advantage, but o'neal stole the ball almost half the amount of robinson, and only blocked three quarters the amount robinson did.

True, but you also have to look at how the team succeeded. Obviously, first option was throw the ball into Shaq in the post as evidenced by his league-leading 29.3 ppg, but a large part of their success was their 3 point shooting and Shaq's double teams also contributed to that.
yeh, then you have to look at how their key teammates career's would've turned out if they didn't have those respective players to piggyback. avery johnson, for example, was a league journey man before he played with robinson and robinson turned him into one of the best point guards in the nba. sean elliott couldn't average more than 12 points on the worst team in the nba before robinson gift wrapped him a job on the spurs roster. these two players rightfully owe robinson atleast 50% of all their career earnings.

Watching the games and looking at the numbers, both had monster seasons and were worthy of MVP so I won't argue with your selection of Robinson. Regardless of supporting casts on paper(which doesn't factor in team chemistry coaching ect.), 1 player didn't seem clearly superior or more valuable to his team than the other to me. Olajuwon was better than either, but Houston's record and Olajuwon's injury took him out of the running and he didn't prove his superiority until the playoffs.
one of those players was worthy of mvp and his name stars with david, and doesn't end in o'neal. i'm sure you'll be able to figure out the rest. robinson was clearly more valuable, and the clearest cut mvp since ''86. karl malone was also more valuable than o'neal.

Stoudemire averaged 26 ppg, 8.9 rpg, 1.6 bpg and 1 spg and had an amazing TS% of 61.7%.
i'll take marion's 19.4ppg, 11.3rpg, 1.9apg, 2.0spg, 1.5bpg, and only 1.5topg with great defense and intangibles

But the Suns were just 2-5 without Nash and in those games Marion's production declined to 13.7 ppg and 10.9 rpg on 38.9% shooting. Everyone who watched the Suns knows Nash made the game easier for his teammates and Marion was no exception. Which isn't to say that Marion wasn't a great, versatile player.
yeh, and in the 1 game marion missed they lost by 20 at home. nash went 2-10 from the floor. sure nash made the game easier for marion, but marion also made the game easier for nash.

I know they won 63 games, but he had a down season due to the plantar fasciitis. His game was hurt by this except for his rebounding and passing. Overall, he averaged 18.6 ppg, 11 rpg, 3.2 apg and 2 bpg, but his efficiency was subpar for his position at 48.4% from the field and 62.9% from the line.
i don't buy into this down year. his production decreased from the season prior, but only minimally, he was still tim duncan, he still led the spurs to a western conference best 63 wins, he still played 80 games, and he still was the best defender in the nba

[ShaqAttack3234]

yeh, then you have to look at how their key teammates career's would've turned out if they didn't have those respective players to piggyback. avery johnson, for example, was a league journey man before he played with robinson and robinson turned him into one of the best point guards in the nba. sean elliott couldn't average more than 12 points on the worst team in the nba before robinson gift wrapped him a job on the spurs roster. these two players rightfully owe robinson atleast 50% of all their career earnings.

Out of curiosity would you say this same logic applies to Hedo Turkoglu and Dwight Howard? Borderline starter before playing with Howard, makes a big leap the year Howard hits superstardom despite Turkoglu already being 28 years old, then he goes to Toronto and he declines a ton.


yeh, and in the 1 game marion missed they lost by 20 at home. nash went 2-10 from the floor. sure nash made the game easier for marion, but marion also made the game easier for nash.

I wouldn't call 1 game much of a sample size. Granted, 7 games isn't that much either, but when a team is 60-15 with a player and 2-5 without him it does suggest how valuable he does and so does the turnaround from the season before. Of course there are other factors like Stoudemire playing 25 more games and naturally improving like most players do in their 3rd seasons as well as the addition of Quentin Richardson, but the big difference was Nash.

Now, personally, I don't think Nash deserved the MVP, but I do think he was the MVP of his team. It is important to point out though that the Suns were 22-33 with Stoudemire in 2004 and 7-20 without him and of course he improved in 2005.


i don't buy into this down year. his production decreased from the season prior, but only minimally, he was still tim duncan, he still led the spurs to a western conference best 63 wins, he still played 80 games, and he still was the best defender in the nba

Duncan was noticeably less mobile and athletic due to the injury, I'm sure this is the reason for his lower FG% and possibly the reason that his fouls per 36 minutes were higher than any year other than his rookie season.

And Duncan's production dropped pretty noticeably from the year before(when he also battled injuries), from 20.3 ppg to 18.6, from 2.6 bpg to 2.0 bpg, his assist went from 2.7 to 3.2, but his turnovers also went from 1.9 to 2.5, his FG% dropped from 49.6% to 48.4% and his TS% dropped from 54% to 52.3%. And then the next year, his scoring average rose to 20 ppg, his assists were marginally higher(though the slight increase in turnovers make that negligible), his blocks went up to 2.4 per game, his FG% went way up to 54.6% and his TS% was up to 57.9%.

Duncan wasn't his usual consistent self in 2006 offensively, he had 3 months where he shot over 50% like usual, but other months where he shot 45.7%, 44.9% and even 38.6%.

[Funky Pool]

Jason Kidd should have been MVP in 2002, the Nets were the ugliest team in the NBA before his arrrival, and they became the top team in the East.

Iverson in 2005. This year he was unstoppable and carried the Sixers on his shoulders all season long, with buzzer beaters and big games to qualify the sixers for the playoffs, + a 60 points game against Orlando.

[SCdac]

Duncan was noticeably less mobile and athletic due to the injury, I'm sure this is the reason for his lower FG% and possibly the reason that his fouls per 36 minutes were higher than any year other than his rookie season.

And Duncan's production dropped pretty noticeably from the year before(when he also battled injuries), from 20.3 ppg to 18.6, from 2.6 bpg to 2.0 bpg, his assist went from 2.7 to 3.2, but his turnovers also went from 1.9 to 2.5, his FG% dropped from 49.6% to 48.4% and his TS% dropped from 54% to 52.3%. And then the next year, his scoring average rose to 20 ppg, his assists were marginally higher(though the slight increase in turnovers make that negligible), his blocks went up to 2.4 per game, his FG% went way up to 54.6% and his TS% was up to 57.9%.

Duncan wasn't his usual consistent self in 2006 offensively, he had 3 months where he shot over 50% like usual, but other months where he shot 45.7%, 44.9% and even 38.6%.

MVP is def a regular season award, and Duncan was noticeably effected by Plantar fasciitis in the 2006 season...

but damn, watching him average 32.2 PPG, 11.7 RPG, 3.7 APG, and 2.6 BPG against the 60-win Mavericks was just awesome and impressive, considering he was on injured heels.

It really showed that, hey, "I'm absolutely still one of the best big men in this game".

After losing 3 straight games to the Mavs, on the brink of elimation, Duncan came out with a blazing fire making his first 12 shots. 3 in the first quarter, and 8 shots in the second to score 17 of the final 18 spurs points of that quarter. He broke the 30 point mark 4 times in that series - after breaking that mark only 3 times in the regular season. It says alot about him, and how the Spurs and their players treat the regular season with a certain amount of restraint and inhibition (in terms of logging big minutes, etc).

[ShaqAttack3234]

MVP is def a regular season award, and Duncan was noticeably effected by Plantar fasciitis in the 2006 season...

but damn, watching him average 32.2 PPG, 11.7 RPG, 3.7 APG, and 2.6 BPG against the 60-win Mavericks was just awesome and impressive, considering he was on injured heels.

It really showed that, hey, "I'm absolutely still one of the best big men in this game".

After losing 3 straight games to the Mavs, on the brink of elimation, Duncan came out with a blazing fire making his first 12 shots. 3 in the first quarter, and 8 shots in the second to score 17 of the final 18 spurs points of that quarter. He broke the 30 point mark 4 times in that series - after breaking that mark only 3 times in the regular season. It says alot about him, and how the Spurs and their players treat the regular season with a certain amount of restraint and inhibition (in terms of logging big minutes, etc).

:eek: I knew he dominated the series, but I didn't know he put up numbers like that! I may have to watch the series again. I had previously stated that the 2003 WCF was the best I've seen Duncan play, but that series may challenge that.

[SCdac]

:eek: I knew he dominated the series, but I didn't know he put up numbers like that! I may have to watch the series again. I had previously stated that the 2003 WCF was the best I've seen Duncan play, but that series may challenge that.

He was incredible in that series. As was Nowiztki. One of the best head-to-head matchups of this decade. It was one of this best series for sure, Greg Popovich versus his former player in Avery Johnson... Around that time, this "new ISH board" had just been created, I remember getting in quite a few heated arguments because I though Dirk was getting BS preferential treatment by the refs (but whatever). I was just amazed that a "hurt" Duncan could perform like one of the best players in the league, and the Mavs tried multiple defenders on him through out the series (Damp, Diop, Van Horn, etc). It wasn't up there with his 2003 performances (because and Parker and Ginobili were also pretty sick in 2006), but it showed that his offense was still very much there, elite, and effective, more so than regular season generally indicates. His numbers always rose in the most meaningful games (playoffs).

[ShaqAttack3234]

He was incredible in that series. As was Nowiztki. One of the best head-to-head matchups of this decade. It was one of this best series for sure, Greg Popovich versus his former player in Avery Johnson... Around that time, this "new ISH board" had just been created, I remember getting in quite a few heated arguments because I though Dirk was getting BS preferential treatment by the refs (but whatever). I was just amazed that a "hurt" Duncan could perform like one of the best players in the league, and the Mavs tried multiple defenders on him through out the series (Damp, Diop, Van Horn, etc). It wasn't up there with his 2003 performances (because and Parker and Ginobili were also pretty sick in 2006), but it showed that his offense was still very much there, elite, and effective, more so than regular season generally indicates. His numbers always rose in the most meaningful games (playoffs).

Actually, aside from stamina and durability, the only real difference in Duncan's game from his prime is defense. That's why he had those 2 monster rebounding games last year(26 and 27, iirc). He's not taking guys off the dribble and dunking on guys the same way, but he can still get his points at a similar rate per minute.

It's funny how stats are the knock on Duncan.

2002- 25.5 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.5 bpg, 50.8 FG%, 79.9 FT%

2nd in rebounding, 4th in blocks, 5th in scoring and 9th in FG%.

He led a team with not that much talent to 58 wins as well. What more could you ask? And that was on a team with a pace factor of 90. If you get yoru big man top 5 in scoring, rebounding and shot blocking, that's amazing, nevermind top 10 in FG% while shooting 80% at the line and getting to the line frequently. Not to mention the intangibles which were second to none.

[GoSpursGo1984]

i see it the same way.
Clear cut MVP 09 and 10 is Lebron.
No Wade, no Kobe, or someone else.

Durant deserved the mvp last year. He scored 30ppg and 7 rebounds while leading a team that won 23 games the year before to 50 wins. The Cavs lost 5 more games in 2009-2010 then 2008-2009 so James did not improve the team from last year. James may have had better stats but it is obvious Durant was the most valuable.

[Shep]

Out of curiosity would you say this same logic applies to Hedo Turkoglu and Dwight Howard? Borderline starter before playing with Howard, makes a big leap the year Howard hits superstardom despite Turkoglu already being 28 years old, then he goes to Toronto and he declines a ton.
it definately seems howard had an impact on turkoglu, but i wouldn't say its close to robinson's impact on johnson or elliott

I wouldn't call 1 game much of a sample size. Granted, 7 games isn't that much either, but when a team is 60-15 with a player and 2-5 without him it does suggest how valuable he does and so does the turnaround from the season before. Of course there are other factors like Stoudemire playing 25 more games and naturally improving like most players do in their 3rd seasons as well as the addition of Quentin Richardson, but the big difference was Nash.
well marion can't be punished for only missing 1 game, so its not his fault that there is no more evidence. what evidence we have is 1 game, so if you want to discuss how a team performed without a certain player 1 game is what will be discussed. i don't even like the whole idea of arguing how a team performed when a player was out injured, because if that player wants to be as valuable as possible to a team, he will miss zero games, and playing in 81 games is obviously more valuable than playing in 75.

Now, personally, I don't think Nash deserved the MVP, but I do think he was the MVP of his team. It is important to point out though that the Suns were 22-33 with Stoudemire in 2004 and 7-20 without him and of course he improved in 2005.
nash wasn't even a top 10 point guard before he joined shawn marion and the phoenix suns, after his first season he was the best point guard in the nba.

Duncan was noticeably less mobile and athletic due to the injury, I'm sure this is the reason for his lower FG% and possibly the reason that his fouls per 36 minutes were higher than any year other than his rookie season.

:lol reaching. to put things into perspective lets compare his '06 season to his peak season ('03) per36:

'03: 21.3ppg, 11.8rpg, 3.6apg, 0.6spg, 2.7bpg, 2.8topg
'06: 19.2ppg, 11.4rpg, 3.3apg, 0.9spg, 2.1bpg, 2.6topg

not that much difference at all

And Duncan's production dropped pretty noticeably from the year before(when he also battled injuries), from 20.3 ppg to 18.6, from 2.6 bpg to 2.0 bpg, his assist went from 2.7 to 3.2, but his turnovers also went from 1.9 to 2.5, his FG% dropped from 49.6% to 48.4% and his TS% dropped from 54% to 52.3%. And then the next year, his scoring average rose to 20 ppg, his assists were marginally higher(though the slight increase in turnovers make that negligible), his blocks went up to 2.4 per game, his FG% went way up to 54.6% and his TS% was up to 57.9%.
the spurs also dropped from 63 wins to 58 wins, and duncan was more valuable in the regular season in '06. either way, we are not comparing duncan to duncan here, we are comparing duncan to his competition.

Duncan wasn't his usual consistent self in 2006 offensively, he had 3 months where he shot over 50% like usual, but other months where he shot 45.7%, 44.9% and even 38.6%.
thats ok, the spurs went 7-3, 11-3, and 9-2 in those months

[ShaqAttack3234]

it definately seems howard had an impact on turkoglu, but i wouldn't say its close to robinson's impact on johnson or elliott

Regardless, it's pretty funny that some on this message board have called Turkoglu the best player on the '09 Magic. :lol


well marion can't be punished for only missing 1 game, so its not his fault that there is no more evidence. what evidence we have is 1 game, so if you want to discuss how a team performed without a certain player 1 game is what will be discussed. i don't even like the whole idea of arguing how a team performed when a player was out injured, because if that player wants to be as valuable as possible to a team, he will miss zero games, and playing in 81 games is obviously more valuable than playing in 75.

This is a good point, it isn't fair to penalize a player for playing more games, but Nash's absence did prove how valuable he was to the team.


nash wasn't even a top 10 point guard before he joined shawn marion and the phoenix suns, after his first season he was the best point guard in the nba.

I don't think it was so much Marion that made him take the next step. He just had a season this year that was comparable statistically to his first in Phoenix and that's at 35 years old compared to 30 when he first joined the team.


:lol reaching. to put things into perspective lets compare his '06 season to his peak season ('03) per36:

'03: 21.3ppg, 11.8rpg, 3.6apg, 0.6spg, 2.7bpg, 2.8topg
'06: 19.2ppg, 11.4rpg, 3.3apg, 0.9spg, 2.1bpg, 2.6topg

not that much difference at all

Except per 36 can be useful, however Duncan was able to play more minutes in '03 which was a difference in terms of being able to be out there and produce more. Popovich started limiting his minutes for a reason, look at '04 and '05 when he missed a significant amount of games for the first time and in '06, '09 and '10 his production dropped quite a bit after the break. This suggests to me that his stamina isn't what it was during his MVP years.

And aside from the 2.1 more points per 36, his scoring efficiency was also much better in '03.


thats ok, the spurs went 7-3, 11-3, and 9-2 in those months

Which makes you wonder how good the supporting cast was.

Dirk won 60 games with a weaker cast and averaged 27/9. Nash led his team to 54 wins despite Stoudemire's absence and averaged 18.8 ppg, 4.2 rpg and 10.5 apg on incredible efficiency(51% from the field, 44% on 3s, 92% from the line and he had a TS% of 63%). Kobe averaged over 35 ppg(9 more ppg than his second and 3rd scorers combined), a journeyman scrub Smush Parker turned into a decent PG playing alongside him and he led a Lakers team to 45 wins despite many expecting them to miss the playoffs.

[Shep]

Regardless, it's pretty funny that some on this message board have called Turkoglu the best player on the '09 Magic
yeh that is funny. especially considering that was dwight howard's peak season, and rashard lewis was also better.

This is a good point, it isn't fair to penalize a player for playing more games, but Nash's absence did prove how valuable he was to the team.
not really, considering your value is zero to the team when you are sitting in street clothes. plus a lot of other factors come into play with regards to how/why that team won/lost games in those circumstances.

I don't think it was so much Marion that made him take the next step. He just had a season this year that was comparable statistically to his first in Phoenix and that's at 35 years old compared to 30 when he first joined the team.
yes, statistically similar, but he isn't close to the player he was in '05

Except per 36 can be useful, however Duncan was able to play more minutes in '03 which was a difference in terms of being able to be out there and produce more. Popovich started limiting his minutes for a reason, look at '04 and '05 when he missed a significant amount of games for the first time and in '06, '09 and '10 his production dropped quite a bit after the break. This suggests to me that his stamina isn't what it was during his MVP years.
yes, which is why i don't like using the perminute argument, but the fact is all this talk about how far off his peak he was in '06 gets destroyed by the very same stat. obviously duncan wasn't as good in '06 as he was in '03 mostly due to the fact that he couldn't play major minutes, but he was still duncan. 3 years didn't turn him into some old guy who could barely make it up and down the court. and again, we are talking about duncan vs his competition here, not duncan in '06 vs duncan in other years.

And aside from the 2.1 more points per 36, his scoring efficiency was also much better in '03.
:lol a whole 2 points huh. this is the equivalent of michael jordan in 1988 and jordan in 1989.

Which makes you wonder how good the supporting cast was.
no. it should make you wonder how many different ways duncan could affect the outcome of a game in spite of struggling from the field.

Dirk won 60 games with a weaker cast and averaged 27/9.
fantastic year by dirk, he did enough to be second most valuable that season. he didn't really have a weaker cast either.

Nash led his team to 54 wins despite Stoudemire's absence and averaged 18.8 ppg, 4.2 rpg and 10.5 apg on incredible efficiency(51% from the field, 44% on 3s, 92% from the line and he had a TS% of 63%).
nash wasn't even the most valuable player on his team, he played on the fastest paced team in the league (the spurs were among the slowest), and he played no defense. likely wasn't even top 10.

Kobe averaged over 35 ppg(9 more ppg than his second and 3rd scorers combined), a journeyman scrub Smush Parker turned into a decent PG playing alongside him and he led a Lakers team to 45 wins despite many expecting them to miss the playoffs.
45 wins isn't enough to be in discussion, no matter how bad the supporting cast. perhaps bryant showed his true worth by almost getting outplayed by lamar odom in the playoffs.

rounding out the top five were:
3. lebron james
4. chauncey billups
5. ben wallace

[ShaqAttack3234]

yeh that is funny. especially considering that was dwight howard's peak season, and rashard lewis was also better.

:roll: That's what i told the idiot too. He kept going on about Turkoglu being clutch and being 6'10" and seeing over the defense or some shit and how Dwight was like Tyson Chandler. It's the same nutcase who goes all over the internet and gets banned from various message boards for trying to convince everyone that Yao Ming is still better than Dwight. If you search Yao Ming and Dwight howard topics on the internet you'll see him posting on three or four different message boards about it.

By the way, which season do you think was better? Howard's 2008 or 2010 season?


not really, considering your value is zero to the team when you are sitting in street clothes. plus a lot of other factors come into play with regards to how/why that team won/lost games in those circumstances.

Eh, Nash was still a bigger key to their success to me in terms of the team's style in terms of their fastbreak and making everyone around him better like the 3 point shooters, Stoudemire in pick and rolls and Marion who liked to play off the ball. I viewed Marion as the perfect complement to Nash because he had great chemistry, gave Phoenix another finisher, was versatile enough to guard anyone from Tony Parker to Tracy McGrady or Dirk Nowitzki, but I don't see Phoenix winning that many games without Nash.


yes, statistically similar, but he isn't close to the player he was in '05

But putting up a season superior to any of his in Dallas at 35 years old tells me that it was more a case of the system fitting his style of play better, hence the improvement.


yes, which is why i don't like using the perminute argument, but the fact is all this talk about how far off his peak he was in '06 gets destroyed by the very same stat. obviously duncan wasn't as good in '06 as he was in '03 mostly due to the fact that he couldn't play major minutes, but he was still duncan. 3 years didn't turn him into some old guy who could barely make it up and down the court. and again, we are talking about duncan vs his competition here, not duncan in '06 vs duncan in other years.

I'm not saying Duncan was some scrub, I just don't think his production warranted an MVP, though I do give him credit for playing through the injury. Now, if I was ranking best players that year, including the playoffs, Duncan would be high up the list due to his postseason.


no. it should make you wonder how many different ways duncan could affect the outcome of a game in spite of struggling from the field..


fantastic year by dirk, he did enough to be second most valuable that season. he didn't really have a weaker cast either.

I'd take Parker, Ginobili, Finley, Bowen and Barry on the perimeter over Terry, Howard(59 games), Stackhouse(55 games), Daniels(62 games) and Harris(56 games).

Even with players constantly missing games, Nowitzki kept them going at or near a 60 win pace. They were 16-7 without Howard, 19-8 without Stackhouse, 17-3 without Daniels with only Devin Harris' absence(15-11) dropping their win percentage down noticeably.

The difference in centers is pretty negligible, though Dallas has the edge, however that is one point for Duncan's value, the fact that he could play both PF and C at an elite level.


nash wasn't even the most valuable player on his team, he played on the fastest paced team in the league (the spurs were among the slowest), and he played no defense. likely wasn't even top 10.

They played at the fastest pace because that was how the team won games and several players had career years alongside Nash, seasons that I didn't see them approach without him. And Nash was the key to their fastbreak team.


45 wins isn't enough to be in discussion, no matter how bad the supporting cast. perhaps bryant showed his true worth by almost getting outplayed by lamar odom in the playoffs.

You have Jordan as the '89 MVP and his team only won 89 games, granted, he was better than Bryant in most aspects of the game, but there wasn't a player with as good of a season in '06 as Magic in '89 for Kobe to compete with either.


rounding out the top five were:
3. lebron james
4. chauncey billups
5. ben wallace

Two players from the same team? Eh, I guess with a team like the Pistons, it was always hard to single out one player, Ben Wallace was the MVP of their team when they won the title, IMO.

The MVP that year was between Kobe and Nowitzki.

[Shep]

That's what i told the idiot too. He kept going on about Turkoglu being clutch and being 6'10" and seeing over the defense or some shit and how Dwight was like Tyson Chandler. It's the same nutcase who goes all over the internet and gets banned from various message boards for trying to convince everyone that Yao Ming is still better than Dwight. If you search Yao Ming and Dwight howard topics on the internet you'll see him posting on three or four different message boards about it.
thats ridiculous. the last time ming was better than howard was 2007

By the way, which season do you think was better? Howard's 2008 or 2010 season?
howard in '10 was quite clearly better

Eh, Nash was still a bigger key to their success to me in terms of the team's style in terms of their fastbreak and making everyone around him better like the 3 point shooters, Stoudemire in pick and rolls and Marion who liked to play off the ball. I viewed Marion as the perfect complement to Nash because he had great chemistry, gave Phoenix another finisher, was versatile enough to guard anyone from Tony Parker to Tracy McGrady or Dirk Nowitzki, but I don't see Phoenix winning that many games without Nash.
i didn't see phoenix winning too many games without one of those three guys, marion, stoudemire, or nash simply because they all complimented eachother perfectly.

to get a gauge of marions real worth lets take a look at how the suns played before and after he got traded for shaquille o'neal in 2008

before the trade phoenix's record was 34-14, or on pace for 58 wins, which would've been the best record in the west.

after the trade phoenix went 21-13, or on pace for 51 wins, which would've been good enough for 8th place in the west.

nash with marion: 17.4ppg, 3.5rpg, 11.9apg (34-14)
nash without marion: 16.3ppg, 3.5rpg, 10.2apg (21-13)

so instead of a #1 seed, they ultimately ended up with a #4 seed en route to a 4-1 destroying in the first round of the playoffs at the hands of san antonio, with nash averaging a paltry 16 points and 8 assists after averaging 19 and 13 in the previous playoffs.

But putting up a season superior to any of his in Dallas at 35 years old tells me that it was more a case of the system fitting his style of play better, hence the improvement.
definately.

I'm not saying Duncan was some scrub, I just don't think his production warranted an MVP, though I do give him credit for playing through the injury.
duncan's game has never been about production, it has been about his presence out on the floor, and his defense. regardless, if you had never saw a nba game, then you watched every game of 2006 you definately would pick duncan for mvp due to not having any pre conceived notions about what to expect from him. 19 points, 11 rebounds, 3 assists, and 2 blocks is nothing to sneeze at, especially on a 63 win team.

Now, if I was ranking best players that year, including the playoffs, Duncan would be high up the list due to his postseason
his postseason was ok. i have him ranked fifth overall that season.

I'd take Parker, Ginobili, Finley, Bowen and Barry on the perimeter over Terry, Howard(59 games), Stackhouse(55 games), Daniels(62 games) and Harris(56 games).
terry was better than parker, howard was better than ginobili, especially after how well they performed in the playoffs. san antonio had pretty much nothing after those 3 guys, and dallas had decent players like devin harris, erick dampier, and desagana diop.

Even with players constantly missing games, Nowitzki kept them going at or near a 60 win pace. They were 16-7 without Howard, 19-8 without Stackhouse, 17-3 without Daniels with only Devin Harris' absence(15-11) dropping their win percentage down noticeably.
so harris is the mvp, according to logic of shaqattack huh :D

They played at the fastest pace because that was how the team won games and several players had career years alongside Nash, seasons that I didn't see them approach without him. And Nash was the key to their fastbreak team.
so if everyone played at the same pace the suns would lose. because of this they will get punished because of the fact that there are alot more opportunites to accumulate statistics in this system. nash was useless without finishers and guys who could shoot, so he was only half being the key. nash also had career years playing alongside these people.

You have Jordan as the '89 MVP and his team only won 89 games, granted, he was better than Bryant in most aspects of the game, but there wasn't a player with as good of a season in '06 as Magic in '89 for Kobe to compete with either.
:roll: @comparing jordan's '89 to bryant's '06 in terms of mvp. first of all there was the astronomic advantage jordan has over bryant statistically:

jordan: 32.5ppg, 8rpg, 8apg, 2.9spg, 0.8bpg, 61%ts
bryant: 35.4ppg, 5.3rpg, 4.5apg, 1.8spg, 0.4bpg, 56%ts

then there was the clear advantage jordan has over bryant defensively

then there is the 1 more game jordan played, and the 2 more wins.

and duncan had a stronger mvp year in '06 than either jordan or magic did in '89.

Two players from the same team? Eh, I guess with a team like the Pistons, it was always hard to single out one player, Ben Wallace was the MVP of their team when they won the title, IMO.
yeh, plus the pistons won 64 games that season, so more than 1 player deserves alot of credit, and billups and wallace were very close overall. yeh i've got wallace as a top 4 mvp in '04, and also finals mvp

The MVP that year was between Kobe and Nowitzki.
kobe wasn't even top 9

[ShaqAttack3234]

howard in '10 was quite clearly better

That's what I thought after watching a lot of Magic games this year, though I noticed a decline from 2009. Though Howard's 2008 season looks better statistically which shows how numbers can be deceptive.


i didn't see phoenix winning too many games without one of those three guys, marion, stoudemire, or nash simply because they all complimented eachother perfectly.

Which makes it hard to give any of them MVP when you have 3 players so valuable to one team.


to get a gauge of marions real worth lets take a look at how the suns played before and after he got traded for shaquille o'neal in 2008

before the trade phoenix's record was 34-14, or on pace for 58 wins, which would've been the best record in the west.

after the trade phoenix went 21-13, or on pace for 51 wins, which would've been good enough for 8th place in the west.

nash with marion: 17.4ppg, 3.5rpg, 11.9apg (34-14)
nash without marion: 16.3ppg, 3.5rpg, 10.2apg (21-13)

so instead of a #1 seed, they ultimately ended up with a #4 seed en route to a 4-1 destroying in the first round of the playoffs at the hands of san antonio, with nash averaging a paltry 16 points and 8 assists after averaging 19 and 13 in the previous playoffs.

Yeah, but after a 3-6 start after the trade, they finished 15-5, unfortunately because of how close the West was that year, they ended up facing the same team who had knocked them out of the playoffs 2 of the last 3 seasons.


so harris is the mvp, according to logic of shaqattack huh :D

:lol It's funny, Harris didn't even impress me much that season, I would've thought they would've struggled more in Howard's absence.


so if everyone played at the same pace the suns would lose. because of this they will get punished because of the fact that there are alot more opportunites to accumulate statistics in this system. nash was useless without finishers and guys who could shoot, so he was only half being the key. nash also had career years playing alongside these people.

Well, you've made a good case for Nash never being MVP-worthy.


:roll: @comparing jordan's '89 to bryant's '06 in terms of mvp. first of all there was the astronomic advantage jordan has over bryant statistically:

jordan: 32.5ppg, 8rpg, 8apg, 2.9spg, 0.8bpg, 61%ts
bryant: 35.4ppg, 5.3rpg, 4.5apg, 1.8spg, 0.4bpg, 56%ts

then there was the clear advantage jordan has over bryant defensively

then there is the 1 more game jordan played, and the 2 more wins.

Smush Parker couldn't even get minutes the previous year and in the one season he did get a decent amount of minutes back in 2002-2003, he averaged 6.2 ppg, 1.8 rpg, 2.5 apg and 0.7 spg on 40.2% shooting on a terrible Cavs team.

Fast forward to 2005-2006 when he was playing alongside Kobe and he averages 11.5 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.7 apg and 1.7 spg on 44.% shooting while making 1.5 3s per game at a percentage of 36.6%. He also cut down his turnovers from that 2002-2003 season despite doubling his minutes.

After leaving the Lakers in 2007-2008, he split time between the Heat and Clippers and he averaged just 5.9 ppg 1.7 rpg and 1.8 apg on a pathetic 34.8% shooting on two of the worst teams in the league while his turnovers per 36 minutes rose as well.

Chris Mihm also averaged a career high 10.2 ppg that year and his 50.1 shooting percentage was one of only 2 times he shot over 50%, the other being the season before, also alongside Bryant.

Kobe carried a team expected to be in the lottery, he did so while posting the highest scoring average since 1987 and he did so while not taking away from his teammates, in fact, several borderline scrubs had career years only to be out of the league, or struggling for minutes since leaving the Lakers.

For examples of Kobe's amazing season, look no further than his 81 point game which sparked a comeback victory over Toronto, or his complete dominance when he had 62 points in 3 quarters while outscoring a 60 win Mavs team through 3 and sitting out the 4th rather than stat-padding.

He didn't win that many games for an MVP candidate, but he did everything you could expect with that cast. Out of all of the other players on that roster, only Lamar Odom was a talented player.


yeh, plus the pistons won 64 games that season, so more than 1 player deserves alot of credit, and billups and wallace were very close overall. yeh i've got wallace as a top 4 mvp in '04, and also finals mvp

The Pistons defense at their peak in that 2004 season really was amazing and the key to that championship team, and you have to look at who anchored that defense to find the MVP of that team. These days, you don't see many players who aren't big scorers leading their team, but Wallace was an exception. That's a case where you have to basically throw stats out the window and look at how that team played.

[Shep]

Which makes it hard to give any of them MVP when you have 3 players so valuable to one team.
i don't find it hard, especially when the team finishes with the best record in the league. i have both marion and stoudemire in my top 4 for mvp that season.

Yeah, but after a 3-6 start after the trade, they finished 15-5,
:oldlol:

unfortunately because of how close the West was that year, they ended up facing the same team who had knocked them out of the playoffs 2 of the last 3 seasons.
yes, very unfortunate that a 55 win team gets booted out in the first round of the playoffs, winning only 1 game. especially after advancing to the second round (including 2 conference finals appearances) in each of the past 3 years.

It's funny, Harris didn't even impress me much that season, I would've thought they would've struggled more in Howard's absence.
yeh, but they only won 4 games over teams with a better than .500 record without howard

Well, you've made a good case for Nash never being MVP-worthy.
:cheers:

Smush Parker couldn't even get minutes the previous year and in the one season he did get a decent amount of minutes back in 2002-2003, he averaged 6.2 ppg, 1.8 rpg, 2.5 apg and 0.7 spg on 40.2% shooting on a terrible Cavs team.

Fast forward to 2005-2006 when he was playing alongside Kobe and he averages 11.5 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.7 apg and 1.7 spg on 44.% shooting while making 1.5 3s per game at a percentage of 36.6%. He also cut down his turnovers from that 2002-2003 season despite doubling his minutes.
as you know, the point guard in the triangle offense does not have a great role, and pretty much any point guard can play that role. chucky fricken atkins had that same role a year earlier, and derek fisher has made a career out of doing not much of anything. no other team would want these players naturally - fisher tried going to golden state then utah and failed both times, and atkins can't get minutes on the worst team. so smush parker doing that does not surprise me, especially when you are giving him mvp type minutes.

After leaving the Lakers in 2007-2008, he split time between the Heat and Clippers and he averaged just 5.9 ppg 1.7 rpg and 1.8 apg on a pathetic 34.8% shooting on two of the worst teams in the league while his turnovers per 36 minutes rose as well.
destroyed

Chris Mihm also averaged a career high 10.2 ppg that year and his 50.1 shooting percentage was one of only 2 times he shot over 50%, the other being the season before, also alongside Bryant.
his statistical improvement was consistant with his minutes increase. give any center 26 minutes a night and 99% of them will give you atleast 10 points and 6 rebounds.

Kobe carried a team expected to be in the lottery, he did so while posting the highest scoring average since 1987 and he did so while not taking away from his teammates, in fact, several borderline scrubs had career years only to be out of the league, or struggling for minutes since leaving the Lakers.
kobe definately took away from lamar odom, the lakers second best player, who had his lowest point per minute production of his life, and who was only "allowed" to attempt a pathetic 11 shots per game in 40 minutes of court time. you think thats bad? what about the fact that poor lamar was shooting the best percentage of his career, and still he gets punished because kome wants his 30 shots?

kobe also was almost outplayed in the playoffs by odom, had the highest attempted field goals since jordan averaged 37 1987, and the highest usage % in history.

For examples of Kobe's amazing season, look no further than his 81 point game which sparked a comeback victory over Toronto, or his complete dominance when he had 62 points in 3 quarters while outscoring a 60 win Mavs team through 3 and sitting out the 4th rather than stat-padding.
2 remarkable games no doubt, what about the other 80.

if bryant was told his starting 5 would consist of a power forward coming off a 8/5 season, a small forward coming off a 8/4 season, his second best player (who was good for 12/13/3) was just traded for a 30 year old 7th man who would be his starting center, and his point guard, well his point guard could still be smush parker for the 2006 season i doubt he would've even shown up for training camp. this is what michael jordan had to deal with entering the 1989 nba season.

He didn't win that many games for an MVP candidate, but he did everything you could expect with that cast. Out of all of the other players on that roster, only Lamar Odom was a talented player.
and by everything you mean scoring. ok so he scored alot, but scoring is only 1 part of the game. if we're talking purely stats, lebron james, and allen iverson both had more impressive seasons. talking about pure value to a winning cause and tim duncan, dirk nowitzki, lebron james, chauncey billups, ben wallace, shawn marion, dwyane wade, rasheed wallace, and elton brand were all more valuable to their teams.

[ShaqAttack3234]

:oldlol:

:confusedshrug: Teams need some time to gel after a big trade, no?


yeh, but they only won 4 games over teams with a better than .500 record without howard

Good find, makes a bit more sense.


as you know, the point guard in the triangle offense does not have a great role, and pretty much any point guard can play that role. chucky fricken atkins had that same role a year earlier, and derek fisher has made a career out of doing not much of anything. no other team would want these players naturally - fisher tried going to golden state then utah and failed both times, and atkins can't get minutes on the worst team. so smush parker doing that does not surprise me, especially when you are giving him mvp type minutes.

Glad you agree about Derek Fisher's career, I've been arguing for years that he's a streaky combo guard with horrible shot selection who has hit a few clutch shots. Many people try to make him out to be some great player.


his statistical improvement was consistant with his minutes increase. give any center 26 minutes a night and 99% of them will give you atleast 10 points and 6 rebounds.

Fair enough


kobe definately took away from lamar odom, the lakers second best player, who had his lowest point per minute production of his life, and who was only "allowed" to attempt a pathetic 11 shots per game in 40 minutes of court time. you think thats bad? what about the fact that poor lamar was shooting the best percentage of his career, and still he gets punished because kome wants his 30 shots?

Actually, it's funny you bring that up. I looked up his numbers without Kobe from 2004-2007 a while back and he averaged 20.5 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 5.9 apg and 1.2 bpg in 40 mpg and the Lakers were 10-10 in those games. Didn't read much into it at that time, but you may have a point. Then again, ever since his Clipper days, Odom has been known to be inconsistent.


kobe also was almost outplayed in the playoffs by odom, had the highest attempted field goals since jordan averaged 37 1987, and the highest usage % in history.

I won't penalize Kobe for taking a ton of shots, it resulted in a 45-37 record.


2 remarkable games no doubt, what about the other 80.

Six 50+ point games, twenty seven 40+ point games and the Lakers were 18-9 when Kobe scored atleast 40. He had five games with 5+ steals and the Lakers were 5-0 in those games. The Lakers were also 3-1 when Kobe had a double double. Basically the vast majority of the Lakers wins came with Kobe having a big game.


if bryant was told his starting 5 would consist of a power forward coming off a 8/5 season, a small forward coming off a 8/4 season, his second best player (who was good for 12/13/3) was just traded for a 30 year old 7th man who would be his starting center, and his point guard, well his point guard could still be smush parker for the 2006 season i doubt he would've even shown up for training camp. this is what michael jordan had to deal with entering the 1989 nba season.

No doubt Jordan's season was better, I don't think many people other than useless trash like griffmoney and The Logo would dispute that, but Jordan's competition for MVP in '89 was tougher thanks to a stellar season by Magic Johnson.


and by everything you mean scoring. ok so he scored alot, but scoring is only 1 part of the game. if we're talking purely stats, lebron james, and allen iverson both had more impressive seasons. talking about pure value to a winning cause and tim duncan, dirk nowitzki, lebron james, chauncey billups, ben wallace, shawn marion, dwyane wade, rasheed wallace, and elton brand were all more valuable to their teams.

I think you're taking it too far with some of the players you named such as the guys from the Pistons and Marion.

I do give you credit for not favoring the big names, though and coming to your own conclusions.

But I can't see how Wade had a better case for MVP during the regular season than Kobe. The Heat were just 10-11 with Wade and without Shaq and they won 52 games total in a weaker conference.

I seem to agree with you on the vast majorities of MVP selections, but I still can't see Duncan as the 2006 MVP, though I think he has a stronger case than I initially did.

On a side note, not that he's a legit candidate, but a player that I think got overlooked in 2006 was Pau Gasol. 20.4 ppg, 8.9 rpg, 4.6 apg and 1.9 bpg on 50.3% shooting on a 49 win team. He led the team in scoring, rebounding and assists by significant margins and aside from Damon Stoudamire who played 27 games with the team and averaged just 0.1 more apg than Pau, no Memphis player averaged more assists.