How many MVPs should Kobe have won in his career?

[Electric Slide]

0? 1? 2? 7?

Discuss.

[LosScandalous]

3

I'm not going to hand pick which years I think he got robbed. He's just done so much for the NBA, hopefully they thank him often.

[Derivative]

0. every year there was someone more deserving and better than him

[Haks]

2 possibly 3

[kamil]

I'm not a Kobe fan by any means, but I'm stunned he's only got ONE.

[MMKM]

Dunno but the year he had 81, I remember Phil totally c@ck blocked him in a few games when he was on the same pace. Could have done it 3 or 4 times that year

[nathanjizzle]

2 or 3 most likely 2. lebron should only have 3, rose would have won the other one if he didnt go down with the injury.

[OJ SIMPSON 2.0]

4 MVP's at the very least.

[MMKM]

Whatever the number it really doesn't matter. Kobe's career is as dead as Trayvon Martin

[Lebron23]

2 or 3 most likely 2. lebron should only have 3, rose would have won the other one if he didnt go down with the injury.


This idiot needs to learn. Lebron could have been a 5x NBA MVP. At the age of 21 yrs.old he averaged 31.4/7.7 rpg, and almost 7 apg in the 2005-06 NBA Season. The Cavaliers won 50 games for the first time since the early 1990's. He finished 2nd in the MVP Voting.

Back on topic I think at least 2 MVP Award. 2006 and 2007 season is better than his MVP year. The lakers were just a $hitty team during that time. And Kareem Abdul Jabbar was the only player to win the MVP award on a 42 and 45 wins team.

[D-Wade316]

None actually. Dirk should have won in 06, so back-to-back MVPs. Garnett or CP3 in 08.

[Carbine]

99 - No

'00 - No (12th place in voting)

'01 - No (9th place in voting)

'02 - No (5th place in voting)

'03 - No (distant 3rd in voting)

'04 - No (5th place in voting)

'05 - No (did not receive vote)

'06 - No (4th in voting)

'07 - No (distant 3rd in voting)

'08 - Yes, he deserved it.

'09 through '13 - No

[Deuce Bigalow]

3 MVPs (06-08)

2005-06: 35.4 ppg, the highest ppg for a season during the last 25 years. Steve Nash was better? Hell no. Kobe averaged 37 ppg in the Laker wins, literally carrying a team on his back.

2006-07: 32-6-5 season average, 10 50-point games which is the most 50 point games in a single season since Wilt Chamberlain. Kobe averaged 38 ppg after the all-star break, again carrying a team on your back. Dirk was the better player that year? No way.

2007-08: Won the award.

[RRR3]

3 MVPs (06-08)

2005-06: 35.4 ppg, the highest ppg for a season during the last 25 years. Steve Nash was better? Hell no. Kobe averaged 37 ppg in the Laker wins, literally carrying a team on his back.

2006-07: 32-6-5 season average, 10 50-point games which is the most 50 point games in a single season since Wilt Chamberlain. Kobe averaged 38 ppg after the all-star break, again carrying a team on your back. Dirk was the better player that year? No way.

2007-08: Won the award.
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/3cd3cec35392d0ed174975df23e2b0de.jpg

[FLDFSU]

2 or 3 most likely 2. lebron should only have 3, rose would have won the other one if he didnt go down with the injury.


This thread has what exactly to do with Lebron?

[HoopsFanNumero1]

2 or 3 most likely 2. lebron should only have 3, rose would have won the other one if he didnt go down with the injury.

Rose didn't even deserve the one he got in 2011...

[Deuce Bigalow]

http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/3cd3cec35392d0ed174975df23e2b0de.jpg
05-06
In wins: 36.6 ppg
In losses: 33.8 ppg

06-07
In wins: 33.8 ppg
In losses: 29.3 ppg

And smh "at the expense of his team".

[ShaqAttack3234]

Two. He deserved his actual MVP, and I think he deserved 2006 over Nash. What he did that season was incredible. Truly put the team on his back. Their modest team success is quite impressive with context as well.

[Jameerthefear]

2-3

[RRR3]

This thread has what exactly to do with Lebron?
The Law of ISH states that if a thread exists long enough, one of these three people will be brought up eventually:
LBJ
KB
MJ

[RRR3]

05-06
In wins: 36.6 ppg
In losses: 33.8 ppg

06-07
In wins: 33.8 ppg
In losses: 29.3 ppg

And smh "at the expense of his team".
LOL that picture was from 2011-12 I just used it because you're a Kobe Kid and you have the avatar of that dude.:lol

[SpecialQue]

I've always thought it was strange that him and Shaq only got one.

[SuperPippen]

2, but I wouldn't argue with a third.

[plowking]

I've always thought it was strange that him and Shaq only got one.

If you actually go back, look at what the MVP criteria is based on previous winners, you'd realize they only deserve one. Well two in Shaq's case, since he deserved it over Iverson. Apart from that, what other years have they deserved it, based on the criteria assumed by other winners over the last 25-30 years?

[TonyMontana]

0.

In 2006 and 2007, he was a 7th Seed. If you can't make your team relevant your not the MVP. Whens the last time anyone got MVP with such a shitty seed? I bet it hasn't happened once in the last 30 years.

In 2008 it should have been Chris Paul. He won pretty much the same amount of games as LA while also meaning more to his team. Much higher winshares and more value to his team. Most VALUABLE player.

KG would have also been an acceptable choice. Transformed the culture in Boston.


If you actually go back, look at what the MVP criteria is based on previous winners, you'd realize they only deserve one. Well two in Shaq's case, since he deserved it over Iverson. Apart from that, what other years have they deserved it, based on the criteria assumed by other winners over the last 25-30 years?

Shaq was robbed in 2005. Him and Nash both had new teams. Shaqs old team(LA) went from Finals to lottery and they even got pieces in return for him. His new team went to contender. The Heat would have won it all in 2005 if him and Wade didn't get hurt. Team was way better than 2006.

Meanwhile Nash's old team(Dallas) actually got better with him leaving AS A FREE AGENT. Nothing in return.

[tazb]

0. every year there was someone more deserving and better than him

I said this before. Kobe wasn't the clear cut best player in the league for any season, his best season - 35 ppg, his team finished 7th in the West.

[ShaqAttack3234]

0.

In 2006 and 2007, he was a 7th Seed. If you can't make your team relevant your not the MVP. Whens the last time anyone got MVP with such a shitty seed? I bet it hasn't happened once in the last 30 years.

45 wins exceeded expectations for the 2006 Lakers, and Kobe's play that year was simply beyond everyone else. 35 ppg for a whole season is ridiculous. Phil asked Kobe to carry the offense and he did so at a level beyond what anyone could have hoped for. Teams knew he was going out there looking to drop 40-50 and they still couldn't stop him.

Once Odom finally played consistent ball in the second half of the season, the Lakers finished 19-11, a 52 win pace. Meanwhile, Kobe was still playing off the charts with averages of 36/5/5 on 46/36/87 shooting during that second half.

Meanwhile, Nash's 54 wins were still on the low end for an MVP, and despite Amare's injury, he had a much better team around him than Kobe.

The only MVP with the traditional amount of wins would be Dirk that year. Personally, I give it to Kobe, but if someone wants to give it to Dirk for his 27/9/3 season with 60 wins, I'm fine with that.


In 2008 it should have been Chris Paul. He won pretty much the same amount of games as LA while also meaning more to his team. Much higher winshares and more value to his team. Most VALUABLE player.

1.I don't see how he meant more to his team. And don't give me that nonsense about Kobe having some incredible team and Paul having garbage. Paul had David West, Tyson Chandler and Peja, and overall, a good defensive team that could shoot 3s as well as the same basic supporting cast for the entire season.

When Kobe had Pau, they were nearly unbeatable at 22-4, and earlier, Kobe overachieved as one of the better WC with a 20 year old Bynum. Even without either, the Lakers remained respectable.

You can make a case for either. But more importantly, since win shares were mentioned, I have to take this opportunity to laugh at win shares. :roll:


KG would have also been an acceptable choice. Transformed the culture in Boston.

KG had an MVP-caliber season without question. Unfortunately, he didn't get much consideration after he missed that stretch and Boston went 9-2 or something, and all of the blowouts lowered his numbers. While those things really don't take away from his impact, the voters probably would have given him more credit had he not missed that stretch and had he not rested so much in blowouts. In reality, playing a few extra meaningless minutes in games that he didn't have to would have no impact, but say 20-21 ppg, 10-11 rpg and 4 apg looks better on paper than 19/9/3.


I said this before. Kobe wasn't the clear cut best player in the league for any season

Talking about best player, and not strictly MVP, Kobe was the clear cut best player for 3 seasons. '06, '07 and '08.

[joeyjoejoe]

Probably none honestly cp3 was better in 08

[Fresh Kid]

more than Lebron:kobe:

[Scholar]

2006 & 2008.

I'm a Nash fan, but I think Kobe deserved that MVP in 2006.

[Droid101]

Talking about best player, and not strictly MVP, Kobe was the clear cut best player for 3 seasons. '06, '07 and '08.
Please, please stop quoting and responding to known trolls.

I know you're just trying to inject some knowledge and intelligence into a thread, but come on. They are not posting in earnest. They are posting in an attempt to get a rise out of fans of a particular player.

Don't indulge them.

[iamgine]

2006 was kind of an odd year. Iverson averaged 33 PPG and getting way more assists than Kobe with similar efficiency. The same Iverson who have been declining before the rule change.

[KOBE143]

Since 2006, Kobe deserved all the MVP every season.. So at least 6 MVP..

[Electric Slide]

Talking about best player, and not strictly MVP, Kobe was the clear cut best player for 3 seasons. '06, '07 and '08.
Wade was arguably better in 06.
Duncan was arguably better in 07
Lebron/KG/CP3 were arguably better in 08

Kobe was never the clear cut best player in his career, like MJ and Lebron were but I think it has more to do with competition than his dominance though.

[hawkfan]

At least 1 more.

[joeyjoejoe]

In 08 where he got mvp here's a comparison of kobe and cp3

Cp 21.1, 4, 11.6, 2.7

Kobe 28.3, 6.3, 5.4, 1.8

Stats seem fairly even but just the fact that cp was much more efficient with shooting and turnovers plus he lead the league in assists and steals that year and that's not even getting into things like win shares or per Paul probably deserved mvp

[RoundMoundOfReb]

one.

[Fresh Kid]

one.
still salty about them 81 points I see:lol :oldlol: :roll: :kobe: :roll:

[SamuraiSWISH]

He was the best player in the league, in my opinion in 2006, 2007, and 2008. Unfortunately he didn't have a team that won enough due to a lack of talent, so he wasn't allowed to win a deserving award IMO in 2006 and 2007.

2008 is probably the most deserving award, and probably given context the only one you can really give to him fairly. And unfortunately for Kobe, even that season there was questions. Kobe, CP3, and LeBron all had cases. This was Kobe's last season as the best player in the league. Context gave a case for CP3 but Kobe was still the better player. LeBron was starting to truly challenge that year, quietly though. But a deserving MVP. Especially given the way he carried the Lakers even before the Pau Gasol deal. People often forget about that ...

So 2008 is the only one we can really give him fairly. Sad but true. Sometimes context just doesn't make it work for players. See Shaq. See LeBron being the best player in 2011, but context didn't really allow him to win it.

Kobe was the best player in 2006 and 2007 but just didn't have the record to deserve it in the regular season. By 2009 and 2010 he was still in the conversation, past his prime though, but by then I think it was very safe to say LeBron had leap frogged him as the best player in the league. In 2009 LeBron firmly kind of grabbed a hold of that title.

[TonyMontana]

45 wins exceeded expectations for the 2006 Lakers, and Kobe's play that year was simply beyond everyone else. 35 ppg for a whole season is ridiculous. Phil asked Kobe to carry the offense and he did so at a level beyond what anyone could have hoped for. Teams knew he was going out there looking to drop 40-50 and they still couldn't stop him.

Once Odom finally played consistent ball in the second half of the season, the Lakers finished 19-11, a 52 win pace. Meanwhile, Kobe was still playing off the charts with averages of 36/5/5 on 46/36/87 shooting during that second half.

Meanwhile, Nash's 54 wins were still on the low end for an MVP, and despite Amare's injury, he had a much better team around him than Kobe.

The only MVP with the traditional amount of wins would be Dirk that year. Personally, I give it to Kobe, but if someone wants to give it to Dirk for his 27/9/3 season with 60 wins, I'm fine with that.

Fine

But what does this have to do with no MVP Being as low as a 7th seed in the past 30 years? I know Kareem won it one year as a .500 team(the 70s?). Whats the lowest seed a players ever won MVP as? I don't even think a 4th seed has ever won MVP in the modern era, and we're going to invite a 7th seed to the conversation?



1.I don't see how he meant more to his team. And don't give me that nonsense about Kobe having some incredible team and Paul having garbage. Paul had David West, Tyson Chandler and Peja, and overall, a good defensive team that could shoot 3s as well as the same basic supporting cast for the entire season.

When Kobe had Pau, they were nearly unbeatable at 22-4, and earlier, Kobe overachieved as one of the better WC with a 20 year old Bynum. Even without either, the Lakers remained respectable.

You can make a case for either. But more importantly, since win shares were mentioned, I have to take this opportunity to laugh at win shares. :roll:

Why are you laughing at win shares? I'm not saying win shares should be the only thing looked at, but it is easily the single most relevant statistic regarding the impact of a player. I'm not telling you to look at that alone, but 9/10 times the win share statistic supports the truth.

Kobe quit on his team before that year. That was the offeseason he was crying to the media about his teammates, demanding trades.

The reason 2008 was any different is because it was the beginning of LAs dominating frontcourt and twin towers. Even before Pau arrived to the team, Andrew Bynum was playing better than some all-stars. Never underestimate the impact of a 7 footer that plays at a high level on both ends of the court. Pau was important because Bynum is a guy that can never last an entire year, and sure enough he got hurt.

In the 2007-2008 season, the Lakers were 46-15(.754) with either a frontline of Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom. Without at least two elite bigs playing LA was only 11-10(.524) aka a similar percentage as to how they finished the previous seasons. The twin towers is why LA took off.

IF you watched any NOH game that year, I shouldn't need to waste time convincing you how important Paul was to the team. He was responsible for EVERYTHING offensively. Not one guy could create their own shot on that team, not even David West who was pretty much a pick and pop shooter like Bosh is on the current Heat. He played much different compared to his Indiana counterpart.



KG had an MVP-caliber season without question. Unfortunately, he didn't get much consideration after he missed that stretch and Boston went 9-2 or something, and all of the blowouts lowered his numbers. While those things really don't take away from his impact, the voters probably would have given him more credit had he not missed that stretch and had he not rested so much in blowouts. In reality, playing a few extra meaningless minutes in games that he didn't have to would have no impact, but say 20-21 ppg, 10-11 rpg and 4 apg looks better on paper than 19/9/3.

Talking about best player, and not strictly MVP, Kobe was the clear cut best player for 3 seasons. '06, '07 and '08.

KG taught the Celtics how to play defense. He changed the culture of the team. You honestly think you can throw around that 9-2 record and assume they'd be on that pace for the entire season?

KG is the reason guys like James Posey, PJ Brown, and Eddie House all signed with the team for dirt cheap. People knew the Celtics were going to be special once Garnett signed there. Had it been just Pierce-Ray Allen, the Celtics are merely a 4/5 seed that MAYBE wins a series and thats that.

KG also averaged .265 WS per 48 minutes which was the second highest average during that season behind Chris Pauls .284.

Kobe was at .208.
Pau Gasol was at .239 for comparisons sake.

[Doranku]

elite bigs






Bynum-Odom


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[BBallZen83]

This thread has what exactly to do with Lebron?
Any thread dealing with kobe implicitly has to do with Lebron and vice versa. You have been on ISH long enough to know that.

[Odinn]

1.
He deserved his 2008 MVP.


His 2006 situtation is a little bit different than 2008.
- He was the best player in the league but he wasn't on a 50+ W team. When was the last time a player on a team with less than 50 W? I believe Moses Malone in 1982 was the last. He didn't have the things which an MVP should have.
- Stats wise; it was related to the rule changes.
Kobe 35.4 / 5.3 / 4.5 with 46W
LeBron 31.4 / 7.0 / 6.6 with 50W
Iverson 33.0 / 3.2 / 7.4 with 38W
Noone talks about LeBron shot at winning the MVP award? Or noone talks about Iverson's similar numbers.

Like I said, Kobe was the best player in 2005-06 season. But the MVP award related to team success, too. Nash's 'w/o Amar'e all along and still 54 wins' argument fits to it better than Kobe's 'all by himself'.

[Odinn]

Wade was arguably better in 06.
Duncan was arguably better in 07
Lebron/KG/CP3 were arguably better in 08

Kobe was never the clear cut best player in his career, like MJ and Lebron were but I think it has more to do with competition than his dominance though.
Kobe was clearly the best player in the game in 2005-06 season.

Also LeBron doesn't have any competition. Is he competing with prime Magic, prime Barkley, prime Hakeem or just we do not know? He doesn't deserve to be called alongside MJ like this. Put any player in the top 10 at their prime in this era instead of LeBron and they're the best player without a doubt.

[thabisyo]

Kobe was clearly the best player in the game in 2005-06 season.

Also LeBron doesn't have any competition. Is he competing with prime Magic, prime Barkley, prime Hakeem or just we do not know? He doesn't deserve to be called alongside MJ like this. Put any player in the top 10 at their prime in this era instead of LeBron and they're the best player without a doubt.

I agree about lebron to an extent but to flat our say Kobe was the best in 2005-06? i disagree, his stats like lebrons in Cleveland were inflated due to being the only one. Kobe was never the best player in the league. Much like Lebron nowadays, he is overrated by ESPN but ESPN overate Lebron by constant MJ comparisons, Kobe was one of the top players in the league no doubt

[Fresh Kid]

It goes to show that theres twice as many Lebron stans/kobe haters in this forum compared to Kobe stans :facepalm

[magnax1]

Kobe was the clear cut best player 06-08. Maybe you could make a case for him for another year or two too, but not clear cut.
Was probably deserving of MVP 06, and definitely 08.

[thabisyo]

It goes to show that theres twice as many Lebron stans/kobe haters in this forum compared to Kobe stans :facepalm

Atleast there isnt knicks fan boys like you. Atleast kobe fan boys bring up 5 chips, The knicks was MJ and reggie miller's bish

[Fresh Kid]

Atleast there isnt knicks fan boys like you. Atleast kobe fan boys bring up 5 chips, The knicks was MJ and reggie miller's bish
Tha same knicks that went to finals twice on miller's pacers in 94 and 99 right?:rolleyes: :facepalm

[thabisyo]

Tha same knicks that went to finals twice on miller's pacers in 94 and 99 right?:rolleyes: :facepalm

And then A kid Duncan sh1tted all over yall, like many other teams. even without MJ stopping yall :facepalm

[Fresh Kid]

And then A kid Duncan sh1tted all over yall, like many other teams. even without MJ stopping yall :facepalm
who helped duncan tho? David Robinson right? who was injured? Patrick Ewing right?:facepalm

[Nashty]

Zero. If anything he should have some LVP awards.

[Fresh Kid]

:kobe: :blah :kobe:
Zero. If anything he should have some LVP awards.

[Nash]

Kobe fans think he deserves more MVP's even though his team was low seed and bad while they can not understand why Lebron never got a championship with a bad Cleveland team and hold it against him.

[joeyjoejoe]

Kobe fans think he deserves more MVP's even though his team was low seed and bad while they can not understand why Lebron never got a championship with a bad Cleveland team and hold it against him.

But but but mo williams, give me a break

[The-Legend-24]

I think the rape trial really hurt his chances at getting more MVPs..

He should have at the very least, 2.

[Fresh Kid]

I think the rape trial really hurt his chances at getting more MVPs..

He should have at the very least, 2.
I think he should have 4.

[Mr. Jabbar]

2-3 at the very least. montana, tazb and derivative stupidity knows no boundaries as shown in this thread.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Kobe fans think he deserves more MVP's even though his team was low seed and bad while they can not understand why Lebron never got a championship with a bad Cleveland team and hold it against him.
Only a LeStan would call a team that won 61+ games back to back years "bad".

[The-Legend-24]

I think he should have 4.
Like I said at the very least 2, it's a media award, no way were they gonna give it to a guy that was on trial for rape. Him and Shaq with only 1 MVP each is straight comedy. Dude could've gotten it 3 straight years, maybe even 2009.

[Fresh Kid]

Like I said at the very least 2, it's a media award, no way were they gonna give it to a guy that was on trial for rape. Him and Shaq with only 1 MVP each is straight comedy.
yea just like with nash having 2 is pure comedy, and lebron having 4 iz just sick and pure bull.

[Nashty]

yea just like with nash having 2 is pure comedy

You're a comedy :cheers:

Suns with the same roster season before Nash finished 29-53 (.354). And in his two MVP years they were 114-40 (.740) with him, and 2-8 (.200) without him.

[Fresh Kid]

You're a comedy :cheers:

Suns with the same roster season before Nash finished 29-53 (.354). And in his two MVP years they were 114-40 (.740) with him, and 2-8 (.200) without him.
He sure didnt deserve to win that schit in 06.:no:

[KyleKong]

Just one, 2008. All other years there was a better player.

[Nashty]

He sure didnt deserve to win that schit in 06.:no:

Yeah, right, they were playing without statistically their best player Stoudemire, and still finished with the 3rd overall record, and went 0-3 when Nash was not playing.

[Trollsmasher]

The one MVP he has is more than enough and TonyMontana may have got it right with him actually deserving none.

[Haks]

/thread destroyed by kobe haters

[eklip]

What makes Kobe so great is his amazing longevity and his 5 Championships. I don't think that he deserved more than the one MVP.

I'm a fan of Dirk, so I'm obviously biased, but in my opinion Dirk deserved the MVP award in 2006. Dallas had more wins than the Lakers, the Suns and Miami and he led the league in PER, WS, WS/48 and probably (ORtg - DRtg).

[PickernRoller]

Definitely 2, arguably 3-4.

[thabisyo]

Definitely 2, arguably 3-4.

He is lucky he doesnt have
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Number_zero.jpg

[PickernRoller]

You mean to tell me he was going to rape your a-hole too. My bad man :oldlol:

[Unbiased_one]

Definitely 2, arguably 3-4.

I would love to know in which years you think it's arguable.

[cos88]

one

[Carbine]

It's revisionist history to say he deserved two. He never finished higher than a distant third in voting any year aside from the time he actually won.

'06 you can say he was the best individual player in the league, but you can't say he deserved the MVP - not based on years and years of voting history - 7th seed just doesn't cut it.

It has been over 30 years since a player won MVP without having a top 3 seed, I believe.

[nathanjizzle]

Rose didn't even deserve the one he got in 2011...

if thats what you think, then you have the wrong opinion, april 2013.

[Nevaeh]

In 08 where he got mvp here's a comparison of kobe and cp3

Cp 21.1, 4, 11.6, 2.7

Kobe 28.3, 6.3, 5.4, 1.8

Stats seem fairly even but just the fact that cp was much more efficient with shooting and turnovers plus he lead the league in assists and steals that year and that's not even getting into things like win shares or per Paul probably deserved mvp

Great post. It's really staggering how even respected posters like ShaqAttack can sometimes drink the "Offense is Everything" Kool Aid without even realizing it. And lets be real here, every top tier perimeter player's numbers spiked big time from 06-08, thanks to the league trying to generate fan interest, thanks the low scoring, low IQ style of play that was dooming the League.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Zero.

[DuMa]

0. CP3 deserved it in 08

[Nash]

Only a LeStan would call a team that won 61+ games back to back years "bad".
Do you hold it against Rose(better team) that he didn't win a championship even though his team was #1 seed in East for 2 years? #1 seed doesn't mean a thing in the playoffs. Miami has been to the finals 3 times in 3 years even though they had the best regular season record only once.

[NumberSix]

The one he has is debatable. There's really no other year he has a case.

[The Iron Fist]

Is Kobe even good enough to be in the league? Let's be real, he's the luckiest person in the history of the world. Every basket be makes is pure luck.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Wade was arguably better in 06.

Kobe was a significantly better scorer, a better offensive player overall and still the better defender at that point. Not many at all thought Wade was actually as good as Kobe yet and for good reason.


Duncan was arguably better in 07

I'll concede a case can be made for Duncan because it's not unreasonable to argue his game would be better for a championship team, and it's the age old offense vs defense argument. With that being said, at this point, I think Kobe was just more dominant.


Lebron/KG/CP3 were arguably better in 08

Definitely not Lebron or Paul. Lebron didn't shoot well enough yet, and while the MVP was debatable between Paul and Kobe, there isn't much of a case for Paul as a better player. If you want to win a title, Kobe is the clear choice over Paul.

KG is the same offense vs defense argument, but less convincing than '07 because unlike '07, Kobe was playing defense(though obviously not at the level KG did), and also on a contending team himself. It's also worth noting that the 2 previous seasons, KG wasn't in the discussion for best player so his situation probably benefits him in this discussion, while Kobe had been the consensus best player even while playing on bad teams.


Fine

But what does this have to do with no MVP Being as low as a 7th seed in the past 30 years? I know Kareem won it one year as a .500 team(the 70s?). Whats the lowest seed a players ever won MVP as? I don't even think a 4th seed has ever won MVP in the modern era, and we're going to invite a 7th seed to the conversation?

All that means is it was a weak year for MVP candidates. Why do you think Chauncey Billups was getting a good amount of MVP talk that year? Dirk was the only player that fits the traditional criteria for wins and individual play at 27/9/3 on a 60 win team. If someone wants to argue for him, then fine.


Why are you laughing at win shares? I'm not saying win shares should be the only thing looked at, but it is easily the single most relevant statistic regarding the impact of a player. I'm not telling you to look at that alone, but 9/10 times the win share statistic supports the truth.

Win shares shouldn't be looked at, period. These recent made up formula stats are ridiculous for basketball. This same stat has Clyde Drexler as the Rockets best player over Hakeem in the '95 playoffs when Hakeem arguably had the GOAT playoff run.

If you can prove you know how win shares are calculated AND explain why you think this method makes sense, then I can respect that. Until then, I'll just continue to laugh.


Kobe quit on his team before that year. That was the offeseason he was crying to the media about his teammates, demanding trades.

Yeah, I remember. "I'll play on pluto", Bulls rumors, booed at Staples on opening night ect. The difference is, it didn't affect the season. Kobe went out, did his job, helped his team overachieve, dominated individually and made his teammates better.


The reason 2008 was any different is because it was the beginning of LAs dominating frontcourt and twin towers. Even before Pau arrived to the team, Andrew Bynum was playing better than some all-stars. Never underestimate the impact of a 7 footer that plays at a high level on both ends of the court. Pau was important because Bynum is a guy that can never last an entire year, and sure enough he got hurt.

The Lakers didn't have twin towers during the 2008 season. Odom is a 6'10" forward who was only 2 years removed from playing a lot of small forward, and he had played a decent amount of guard with the Clippers. Bynum and Gasol of course never played together, and when they finally did the following season, it was clear that the Gasol/Odom combo was much more effective than the Bynum/Gasol combo.

Before Bynum was done for the season, LA was 25-11, a 57 win pace, slightly ahead of Paul's Hornets even then, and 2nd in the West just a half game behind Phoenix at the time.

These were LA's top 4 scorers during those 36 games.

Kobe- 27 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.1 apg, 3.1 TO, 2.1 spg, 44.1 FG%, 56.1 TS%, 36.5 mpg, 36 games
Odom- 13.5 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 2.5 apg, 2.1 TO, 0.9 spg, 48.5 FG%, 54.5 TS%, 36.2 mpg, 31 games
Bynum 13.1 ppg, 10.2 rpg, 1.7 apg, 1.5 TO, 2.1 bpg, 63.6 FG%, 65.9 TS%, 28.8 mpg, 35 games
Fisher- 12.4 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 3.5 apg, 1.2 TO, 1.1 spg, 47.8 FG%, 59.6 TS%, 26.6 mpg, 36 games

The reality about these players was that Odom wasn't playing all that well. Certainly not near all-star level. If you remember this team you'll know that Odom didn't take off until Gasol arrived with the consensus being that he was finally in a role he was comfortable in as the 3rd guy.

What Bynum excelled at was finishing. He was more mobile and athletic before the knee injuries, though he wasn't much of a post player yet. The potential was there, but he wasn't utilized much as a post player. He was a good rebounder and shot blocker, but not a defensive anchor. Only time Bynum has been a defensive anchor was after the all-star break in 2011.

Fisher was essentially a combo guard who was shooting really well at the time. When he was younger, he had been a solid defender, but at 33 with all the quick point guards in the league, he was average at best by this point, and I'm being generous.

After that, they had great players such as Kwame Brown, Luke Walton and Jordan Farmar.


In the 2007-2008 season, the Lakers were 46-15(.754) with either a frontline of Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom. Without at least two elite bigs playing LA was only 11-10(.524) aka a similar percentage as to how they finished the previous seasons. The twin towers is why LA took off.

Because without Bynum or Gasol, Kobe's cast was bad. The fact that he kept them respectable for a quarter of the season without either is very impressive, and a big reason they were able to get the number 1 seed.

Kobe averaged 31.6 ppg, 7.3 rpg and 5.7 apg without Gasol or Bynum on 47.2% shooting. And yet while doing that to keep the team afloat, he still wasn't completely going out of the offense or playing "Kobe-ball." He still played as much of a team-oriented game as he could and didn't disrupt the team's chemistry.

That's the story of 2008 Kobe. The most talented individual player in the game, but who held back much of his individual brilliance he had displayed the 2 previous years to make his teammates better, but took over at will when his team needed it.

Even Gasol wasn't as good as he was during the back to back titles. Following the '08 finals, he put on weight and got noticeably stronger and tougher in the low post, defensively and on the boards.


IF you watched any NOH game that year, I shouldn't need to waste time convincing you how important Paul was to the team. He was responsible for EVERYTHING offensively. Not one guy could create their own shot on that team, not even David West who was pretty much a pick and pop shooter like Bosh is on the current Heat. He played much different compared to his Indiana counterpart.

This is precisely why ball-dominant star point guards continue to be overrated despite never winning anything. West, Chandler and Peja all benefited from playing with Paul, but they were all fine players themselves who complemented Paul's game.

Kobe made his teammates better as well. Why do you virtually every Laker shooter and role player shot better than ever?

Sasha Vujacic- Shot 45.4%, easily the best of his career with his second best % being 40.2% which he shot in 2010 and 2011. He also shot 43.7% on 3s, well ahead of his second best 3 point season with was 37.3% in 2007.

Vladimir Radmanovic- Shot 45.3%, well ahead of his second best season which was 43.1% in 2011. His 40.6 3P% is also the best of his career just edging out the 40.5% he shot in 2011.

Derek Fisher- Shot 43.6%, just behind the 43.7% he shot in 2003 for the best of his career. Also shot 40.6% on 3s, barely behind the 41.3% he shot in 2002 for the best of his career.

Jordan Farmar- Shot 46.1%, easily the best of his career other than the 46.7% he shot in 39 games with the 2012 Nets.

It's fine if you prefer Paul, as I said, it's debatable. You acting like Kobe didn't have a case is where your agenda shows. As well as you acting like Kobe had some super team and Paul had scrubs.


KG taught the Celtics how to play defense. He changed the culture of the team. You honestly think you can throw around that 9-2 record and assume they'd be on that pace for the entire season?

KG is the reason guys like James Posey, PJ Brown, and Eddie House all signed with the team for dirt cheap. People knew the Celtics were going to be special once Garnett signed there. Had it been just Pierce-Ray Allen, the Celtics are merely a 4/5 seed that MAYBE wins a series and thats that.

I'm not disputing any of this. I agree with you. I said it seemed that 9-2 stretch hurt KG's MVP case with the voters, not me. I'm always critical of MVP voters not looking deep enough, and this is a good example.


KG also averaged .265 WS per 48 minutes which was the second highest average during that season behind Chris Pauls .284.

Kobe was at .208.
Pau Gasol was at .239 for comparisons sake.

Once again...win shares... :roll:

Wait, win shares.....per 48 minutes... :roll: :oldlol: :roll:

The Gasol example from 2008 is yet another reason to laugh at this nonsense.

[Bucket_Nakedz]

he deserved one more.

[Unbiased_one]

Win shares shouldn't be looked at, period. These recent made up formula stats are ridiculous for basketball. This same stat has Clyde Drexler as the Rockets best player over Hakeem in the '95 playoffs when Hakeem arguably had the GOAT playoff run.

If you can prove you know how win shares are calculated AND explain why you think this method makes sense, then I can respect that. Until then, I'll .

Win shares are calculated by quotienting out marginal gains in offense (and defense) over marginal win values. It's not necessarily a method that I agree with, as it produces strong anomalous effects in small sample sizes (which is why it should not be used to analyse individual playof runs). Icahn provide some explanation of why these 'exponential' anomalies happen if you want.

It does however have extremely strong predictive abilities in the regular season (this is to be somewhat taken with a pinch of salt as the formulae have been semi-adjusted taking into account their results when applied to a number of past seasons). In terms of seasons that were not use to adjust the formula, we can define the statistic 'cumulative win shares' which is the simple sum of individual win shares across a team. This statistic (divided by 3) gives a prediction of the number of wins that team has. It's very accurate (standard deviation 3.41 which means 95 percent of the time it returns a prediction within 7 wins of a teams actual total...the stat team average win margin when normalise returns an sd of 6.93).

Obviously CWS (and thus WS) is only a proxy variable for individual contribution. But so is ppg (and all pther counting stats). And WS is the best one we have.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Winshares are a joke. I hope nobody thinks Kobe had more impact than PEAK Shaq during the 2001 playoffs... because winshares says he does. :oldlol:

[Unbiased_one]

Winshares are a joke. I hope nobody thinks Kobe had more impact than PEAK Shaq during the 2001 playoffs... because winshares says he does. :oldlol:

In small sample sizes they are essentially useless. In a typical 20 game run they have a normalised error of about 70 percent. Over 82 games it's about 2 percent.

[TonyMontana]

Win shares shouldn't be looked at, period. These recent made up formula stats are ridiculous for basketball. This same stat has Clyde Drexler as the Rockets best player over Hakeem in the '95 playoffs when Hakeem arguably had the GOAT playoff run.

If you can prove you know how win shares are calculated AND explain why you think this method makes sense, then I can respect that. Until then, I'll just continue to laugh.



Once again...win shares...

Wait, win shares.....per 48 minutes...

The Gasol example from 2008 is yet another reason to laugh at this nonsense.

I shouldn't need to explain the stat with the heaviest influence among NBA front offices. Here is the explanation for you to educate yourself in easy to read format.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

Just because you dont like the stat and it doesn't push your agenda doesn't mean it doesn't work. I notice Kobe stans never like win shares, because the stat realizes that high volume scorers dont help the team in ways other than scoring. :oldlol:

As for Hakeem his 95 playoff run is VERY overrated. So is Hakeems efficiency. Hakeem has fancy moves, but Ill tell you what. He is a VERY high volume shooter for a center. He took 26 shots in those playoffs to get his points. I don't know any bigman that needed that many shot attempts to get theirs. I know for a fact Shaq didn't. Feel free to check any other modern ones.

For every Hakeem-Clyde I can give you 50 examples where win shares supports who the clear cut more important player was. If you want to play that game you can keep finding examples where its flawed and Ill show you where it works. We'll see who gets more



Because without Bynum or Gasol, Kobe's cast was bad. The fact that he kept them respectable for a quarter of the season without either is very impressive, and a big reason they were able to get the number 1 seed.

Kobe averaged 31.6 ppg, 7.3 rpg and 5.7 apg without Gasol or Bynum on 47.2% shooting. And yet while doing that to keep the team afloat, he still wasn't completely going out of the offense or playing "Kobe-ball." He still played as much of a team-oriented game as he could and didn't disrupt the team's chemistry.

That's the story of 2008 Kobe. The most talented individual player in the game, but who held back much of his individual brilliance he had displayed the 2 previous years to make his teammates better, but took over at will when his team needed it.

Even Gasol wasn't as good as he was during the back to back titles. Following the '08 finals, he put on weight and got noticeably stronger and tougher in the low post, defensively and on the boards.


No other team in the league had twin towers like Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom. Thats why LA became a dominant team. I already showed you the record when LA only has one elite big playing.
46-15(.754) with Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom
11-10(.524) with only one of those bigs, same boat as the previous seasons.

Don't tell me Kobe suddenly figured out how to make his teammates better either. Thats a load of shit.

Without the additional all-star esque bigman playing LA is the same team they were the last two years. That was the difference, not Kobes play.

Tell me how Kobe makes anyone better. Never has and never will. The only one he makes better is himself looking for where he can score. We are not talking about LeBron who has unrivaled vision for the floor. We are not talking about a dominant bigman who collapses the defense, and helps his team on defense by giving them an additonal layer of defense in front of the rim.

Kobe doesn't make anyone else better. He is entirely dependent on his teammates. You will never see him leading deep playoff runs without other hall of famers on his team.

This is partly why Kobe is the only "all-time great" in NBA History to NEVER win a playoff series unless he is the overwhelming favorite. :oldlol: He doesn't give you that x factor of being able to will a team by himself. He effects one area of the game, high volume scoring.

Here are his stats in elimination games. He shits the bed completely when he faces adversity. You will not get great performances from Kobe unless your team is overwhelmingly more stacked.

Kobe Bryant EG Averages:(credit to ISH member WayofWade for both of these stats)
22.3 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 3.7 APG, 1.2 SPG, .6 BPG, 3.0 TOPG, 41.4 FG%, 27.5 3P%, 77.9 FT%

And for the Game 7s that winner takes all

Kobe Bryant G7 Stats:
21.4 PPG, 7.1 RPG, 5.1 APG, .9 SPG, 1.6 BPG, 2.0 TOPG, 39.5 FG%, 32.4 3P%, 70.2 FT%

Most overhyped star ever.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Great post. It's really staggering how even respected posters like ShaqAttack can sometimes drink the "Offense is Everything" Kool Aid without even realizing it. And lets be real here, every top tier perimeter player's numbers spiked big time from 06-08, thanks to the league trying to generate fan interest, thanks the low scoring, low IQ style of play that was dooming the League.

How does me picking Kobe over Paul suggest offense is everything when Kobe was at least as good of a defender as Paul, if not better, and able to grab 2.3 more rebounds per game than Paul due to size?


Win shares are calculated by quotienting out marginal gains in offense (and defense) over marginal win values. It's not necessarily a method that I agree with, as it produces strong anomalous effects in small sample sizes (which is why it should not be used to analyse individual playof runs). Icahn provide some explanation of why these 'exponential' anomalies happen if you want.

It does however have extremely strong predictive abilities in the regular season (this is to be somewhat taken with a pinch of salt as the formulae have been semi-adjusted taking into account their results when applied to a number of past seasons). In terms of seasons that were not use to adjust the formula, we can define the statistic 'cumulative win shares' which is the simple sum of individual win shares across a team. This statistic (divided by 3) gives a prediction of the number of wins that team has. It's very accurate (standard deviation 3.41 which means 95 percent of the time it returns a prediction within 7 wins of a teams actual total...the stat team average win margin when normalise returns an sd of 6.93).

Obviously CWS (and thus WS) is only a proxy variable for individual contribution. But so is ppg (and all pther counting stats). And WS is the best one we have.

No, I mean how much weight is given to each part of the game, how defense is measured ect.

It's far from the best stat we have. Only stats that are worth anything are ppg, rpg, apg, TO per game, spg and bpg as well as shooting % stats such as FG%, eFG% and TS%, +/- and offensive rating/defensive rating for teams. Well, similarly, looking out a team's rebounding margin can be very useful, and more specific stats such as opponents 3P% or opponents FG% in the paint as well as team 3P% can tell you things about these team's specific strengths.

But all of these stats have one thing in common, you can explain exactly how they're calculated in 5-10 seconds. They're not formulas with numerous subjective adjustments or that bring the inventor of the formula's biases into the equation.

But as with all stats, they're only useful with context.

You can pick a random season and see some of the ridiculous results win shares come up with. TonyMontana unintentionally did it with Kobe and Gasol in '08, and the Olajuwon/Drexler example is even worse.

But I'll take 2001 for example. Shaq is number 1, which makes sense, but after that, it all falls apart. Dirk Nowitzki who wasn't even in his prime yet comes in 2nd at a time when he wasn't even a top 10 player, more like top 15. Ray Allen comes in 3rd, again a borderline top 10 player at best. Prime Tim Duncan is just 4th behind these 2 players who nobody on earth thought were comparable to Duncan at the time. Past his prime Karl Malone is 5th, Steve Francis is 7th and past his prime David Robinson is 9th despite averaging slightly less than 30 mpg and ahead of Iverson and Kevin Garnett who were both in their primes.

I could literally pick any year, and the results look laughable.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

In small sample sizes they are essentially useless. In a typical 20 game run they have a normalised error of about 70 percent. Over 82 games it's about 2 percent.

None of these 'adjusted stats' should be used exclusively (or primarily) for evaluating players. They're fine to look at in conjunction with a bunch of other stats, but in the end, they are ALL majorly flawed without proper context.

See ShaqAttack's example for the 2001 season..

[joeyjoejoe]

Thanks neva, shaqattack I think it's hard to argue odom being more of a backcourt player when he averaged 10.6 rebounds and a block per game also one could argue Paul was better offensively due to better fg perc and assists, I see you don't like win shares which Paul lead the league in that year but what about per (Paul was 2nd), if you look up top 50 single seasons in per you will see a lot of mj lbj shaq wilt and only two times has a pg made it cp in 08 and 09 that's some pretty good company to keep

[chazzy]

Great post. It's really staggering how even respected posters like ShaqAttack can sometimes drink the "Offense is Everything" Kool Aid without even realizing it.
Yeah because CP3 is some significantly impactful defender compared to a prime Kobe :oldlol:

And lets be real here, every top tier perimeter player's numbers spiked big time from 06-08, thanks to the league trying to generate fan interest, thanks the low scoring, low IQ style of play that was dooming the League.
What relevance does this have in a comparison between two perimeter players in the same year?

[ShaqAttack3234]

I shouldn't need to explain the stat with the heaviest influence among NBA front offices. Here is the explanation for you to educate yourself in easy to read format.
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html[/url

No, I want YOU to explain exactly how it's calculated and why YOU think it's a good stat. I suspect you use it when convenient, and like many others do with these formulas, haven't even bothered to think about why it is or isn't valid, and just assume it is because it's out there.


Just because you dont like the stat and it doesn't push your agenda doesn't mean it doesn't work. I notice Kobe stans never like win shares, because the stat realizes that high volume scorers dont help the team in ways other than scoring. :oldlol:

So what is my agenda here? And are you calling me a Kobe stan? The reasons I don't like these type of stats have nothing to do with any agenda.


As for Hakeem his 95 playoff run is VERY overrated. So is Hakeems efficiency. Hakeem has fancy moves, but Ill tell you what. He is a VERY high volume shooter for a center. He took 26 shots in those playoffs to get his points. I don't know any bigman that needed that many shot attempts to get theirs. I know for a fact Shaq didn't. Feel free to check any other modern ones.

Know any modern big men who averaged 33 ppg for a playoff run of at least 15 games? In fact, Hakeem is one of only 3 players in NBA history to average at least 33 over at least 15 playoff games. The others are Rick Barry in '67 and Jordan who did it in '89, '90, '92 and '93.

Hakeem also shot 53% and had a TS% of 56 so his efficiency wasn't lacking. :oldlol: at his '95 run being overrated. He beat teams that won 60, 59, 62 and 57 without HCA in any of them and dominated from start to finish. The only series he didn't completely dominate was the WCSF when he still averaged 30/9/4/2.

When teams weren't adequate with their double teams, he destroyed them such as the WCF when he annihilated David Robinson with arguably the greatest series a player has had. Check out game 2 of the finals as well. Shaq tried to guard Dream 1 on 1 and ends up in foul trouble while Hakeem and the Rockets run away with the game in the first half.

Dream also dropped 40 in an elimination game 4 vs Utah and followed that up by coming up huge down the stretch and finishing with 33/10/4 to lead a comeback victory and win the series in game 5.

Overall, Dream dropped 40 five times during that postseason. which doesn't include the 39/17/5 game that eliminated the Spurs.

Either way, even if it was overrated, there's no way Clyde was as good as Hakeem during that run.


For every Hakeem-Clyde I can give you 50 examples where win shares supports who the clear cut more important player was. If you want to play that game you can keep finding examples where its flawed and Ill show you where it works. We'll see who gets more

No. Although the primary issuing is using a stat when you can't support why you like it in the first place(which you haven't so far) not the results. Though the results have enough extremely questionable results to make the stat questionable as it is.

Aside from the Hakeem/Clyde '95 postseason example (and win shares per 48 minutes which you used before has Clyde as the Rockets better regular season player so add that to list), I'll bring up that Kobe led the '01 Lakers in win shares during the playoffs. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you don't agree with that.

Plus, I already brought up a few from 2001 before, but I'll focus in on this one in particular. Dirk over Duncan. This was before Dirk was even in his prime while Tim was a top 2-3 player.

Now tell me what argument there is for Dirk being above Duncan. He was a more efficient scorer, that's it, while scoring slightly less, but on Don Nelson's Mavs who were known for their offensive while Duncan was on a slow-defensive minded team.

Meanwhile, Duncan was an elite defensive player while Dirk was a poor defender at the time, and Duncan was also a much better rebounder outrebounding Dirk by more than 3 boards per game. Even Duncan's defensive stats were much better with just 0.1 fewer spg, but 1.1 extra bpg. Of course, Duncan's Spurs won 5 more games as well.

Here's another from the 2001 playoffs. According to win shares, Dikembe Mutombo wasn't just better than Iverson, he was far better with 3.8 win shares to AI's 2.7. In fact, Derek Fisher was barely behind Iverson at 2.5 win shares despite playing in 6 fewer playoff games, and sure enough, ahead of him in win shares per 48 minutes.

Most of those examples are from just 2001 excluding the 2008 Kobe/Gasol you foolishly brought up and I used against win shares and the Hakeem/Drexler example from 1995. If you look year to year countless examples where the result is not just questionable, but downright laughable could be brought up.


No other team in the league had twin towers like Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom. Thats why LA became a dominant team. I already showed you the record when LA only has one elite big playing.

Once again, Odom wasn't a tower. By the way, West/Chandler was a better PF/C duo than Odom/Bynum.

Calling Odom an elite big man is a joke. Especially during the early portion of the year with Bynum when Odom wasn't even playing like a borderline all-star.

As for Bynum, he was undoubtedly playing well, but he wasn't even going to be an all-star center, and wasn't an elite center yet, much less an elite big man.


46-15(.754) with Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom
11-10(.524) with only one of those bigs, same boat as the previous seasons.

So in other words, when Kobe has some a few quality players, LA are elite, but when he has a trash supporting cast they're just decent. Big surprise. :facepalm

You could do the same thing for Chris Paul.

Hornets with Chandler in 2009: 30-15 (.667)
Hornets without Chandler in 2009: 19-19

Hm, I guess Paul needs an "elite" big man just as much as Kobe. :roll:


Don't tell me Kobe suddenly figured out how to make his teammates better either. Thats a load of shit.

The results I posted previously speak for themselves, and so does the eye test.


Without the additional all-star esque bigman playing LA is the same team they were the last two years. That was the difference, not Kobes play.

Kobe was playing at an extremely high level in previous years so this isn't an indictment on Kobe's value to the Lakers.


Tell me how Kobe makes anyone better. Never has and never will. The only one he makes better is himself looking for where he can score. We are not talking about LeBron who has unrivaled vision for the floor. We are not talking about a dominant bigman who collapses the defense, and helps his team on defense by giving them an additonal layer of defense in front of the rim.

Kobe made his teammates better by being such a big scoring threat he was the primary focus of opposing defenses, yet he was making the right pass most of the time in '08, and he was a skilled passer. He consistently set up the shooters, as well as both Bynum earlier and Gasol later when his penetration forced opposing big men to help, or with numerous lobs to both big men. He also knew how to run the triangle, and played effectively within it.

Aside from that, it was a theme throughout '08 for Kobe to not look for his shot as much in many games early to get his teammates, particular the shooters going, but to take over late. Hence those shooters having career years.

As far as Kobe making teammates better, here's a quote from Phil Jackson during the 2001 playoffs that says it very well.



I think it's the best that I've ever seen a player of mine play with an overall court game. I'm asking him to do so much, and he's accomplishing it. I never asked Michael to be a playmaker. That's the greatest player that I've ever had, that I could consider the greatest player in the game, and I never asked him to be a playmaker in those terms. I asked him to be playmaker when he was doubled or tripled. But Kobe has to set up the offense, to advance the ball, to read the defense, to make other players happy, and he's doing a great job of that.


Kobe doesn't make anyone else better. He is entirely dependent on his teammates. You will never see him leading deep playoff runs without other hall of famers on his team.

Kobe consistently has had just 1 hall of famer on his teams so making it plural is deceptive, and very few lead deep playoff runs without at least 1 hall of famer, and when they do, it's usually a deep team, a team in a weak conference, or both.

[1987_Lakers]

The fact that Kobe had such a shitty supporting cast robbed him of 2 MVPs. If the Lakers won 50 games in '06 & '07 he would easily have 3 MVPs under his belt.

[longtime lurker]

Kobe should have minimum 2 MVP's, probably 3 before voters found a reason not to vote for him. The guys who vote for MVP's are ****ing idiots.

[longtime lurker]

The fact that Kobe had such a shitty supporting cast robbed him of 2 MVPs. If the Lakers won 50 games in '06 & '07 he would easily have 3 MVPs under his belt.

One could argue that the reason he was able to put up such nice stats is because he had a shitty supporting cast that didn't take away from his touches.

[I<3NBA]

zero. he should have zero.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Thanks neva, shaqattack I think it's hard to argue odom being more of a backcourt player when he averaged 10.6 rebounds and a block per game

I never said Odom was a backcourt player. Just that he wasn't a traditional big man or a "tower."


I see you don't like win shares which Paul lead the league in that year but what about per (Paul was 2nd), if you look up top 50 single seasons in per you will see a lot of mj lbj shaq wilt and only two times has a pg made it cp in 08 and 09 that's some pretty good company to keep

I don't like PER either. Granted, it's better than win shares, but as with all formula stats, I don't have any use for them and don't understand the fascination with them.

PER in particular overrates players on slow-paced teams. Paul is a good example because PER credits him for the Hornets slow-paced and assumes he had fewer opportunities to put up numbers than Kobe on the relatively fast-paced Lakers. In fact, the opposite is true since Paul was exceptionally ball-dominant with the entire offense going through him and a ton of screen/rolls as opposed to Kobe playing in the triangle for LA.

PER also overrates players who don't play a lot of minutes. Manu is a good example. He had a slightly higher PER than Kobe in this same 2008 season. The problem is, this assumes he could keep up that production in Kobe's minutes, when there's nothing to suggest he could since Manu coming off the bench in fewer minutes allowed him to play his trademark all out style for a greater percentage of those minutes, with some coming against second units. That same all out style that leads Manu to wear down or get injured at some point during almost every season, including those 2008 playoffs. More importantly, anyone who watched them knows Kobe was a much better player than Manu.

[thabisyo]

zero. he should have zero.

The fact that he is he has one, he should be forever grateful

[TonyMontana]

No, I want YOU to explain exactly how it's calculated and why YOU think it's a good stat. I suspect you use it when convenient, and like many others do with these formulas, haven't even bothered to think about why it is or isn't valid, and just assume it is because it's out there.

The chances of me explaining an elementary statistic to you is about the same as you never sticking another heroine needle in your arm.

You don't like it because it doesn't suit your argument. Time to move on.



Hakeem also shot 53% and had a TS% of 56

So we got this guy talking shit about win shares and then he comes in here with ANOTHER advanced statistic in true shooting percentage. So your just going to pick and choose which advanced stats you like and disregard ones if they dont help your argument? :oldlol: Too easy.

Not surprised you failed to list any other bigman that ever took 26+ shot attempts per game or even address it. :oldlol:




Most of those examples are from just 2001 excluding the 2008 Kobe/Gasol you foolishly brought up and I used against win shares and the Hakeem/Drexler example from 1995. If you look year to year countless examples where the result is not just questionable, but downright laughable could be brought up.

Win shares does exactly what it says. Measures a players contribution to the team in terms of WINS. If you want to know the formula I gave you the link to educate yourself. I suggest you use it.

In 2001 Shaq and Kobe had the exact same win shares per 48 for the playoffs(.260). Kobes TOTAL WS is a tiny bit higher because he played 15 or so more minutes over the entire course of the playoffs. Shaq had the higher WS in the regular season(bigger sample size) and the Finals(where he won Finals MVP and dominated the DPOY).

But 2001 Kobe was the best Kobe ever played. He was at his absolute athletic peak and was a lockdown defender. He was confident enough to dominate, but not confident enough to take Shaqs touches away to the point where it was detrimental to the team. He played well to be on footing with Shaq for the Western conference playoffs. A lot of that was also because the Lakers played Portland, SAC, and SAS. All teams that were built with size to try and contain Shaq.

Why are you comparing Duncan and Dirk, they are not on the same team which is what we are doing here.
:wtf:
Different situations can lead to different results. I can easily argue Dirk was more valuable to his Mavericks team than Duncan was to his Spurs team that also had David Robinson still playing at a high level.

Allen Iverson is another extremely overrated player like Kobe Bryant. The 2001 Sixers were special because of their rebounding and defense. Iverson had all of the responsibility offensively, but what does it matter if you are inefficient in how you perform your role? :no: Dikembe Mutombo was the top rebounder in the league and the top defensive anchor winning the DPOY award. I'll take that over a high volume shooter that barely meets 40% shooting anyday. Not thinking twice. Typical Kobe stan that thinks scoring is the most important thing towars winning games while ignoring efficiency. :oldlol:



Once again, Odom wasn't a tower. By the way, West/Chandler was a better PF/C duo than Odom/Bynum.

Lamar Odom was 6'10. He was robbed of an all-star year in 2003-2004 while with the Miami Heat. He averaged 17 PPG and 10 RPG before Kobe put the shackles on him in Los Angeles. This guy was very talented and certainly an elite player that was still in his prime.

If I'm guaranteed health with Bynum I take Bynum/Odom easily over 2008 Chandler/West. And if I'm not guaranteed health it doesn't matter because top 3 bigman in the NBA Pau Gasol will be coming over to help me out anyway.



So in other words, when Kobe has some a few quality players, LA are elite, but when he has a trash supporting cast they're just decent. Big surprise. :facepalm

You could do the same thing for Chris Paul.

Hornets with Chandler in 2009: 30-15 (.667)
Hornets without Chandler in 2009: 19-19

Hm, I guess Paul needs an "elite" big man just as much as Kobe. :roll:

Kobe gets the respect of top ten players by most basketball fans. So I am going to hold him in that regard. His problem isn't he isn't as good as any of those guys.

Lamar Odom is better than anyone LeBron played with in Cleveland, but guess what? LeBron NEVER lost in the first round. "WAH WAH Kobe had to play the Suns!!". Tough ****ing shit, maybe he should have worked harder during the regular season to get a quality seed like LeBron did. And before you say the East was weaker, I can get you the Cavs records vs East/West. Cleveland ha a better record vs the West EVERY year.

I am not even going to mention how Kobe had Phil Jackson, the GOAT coach(guess I am now). Without him, Kobe couldn't even make the playoffs with Caron Butler, Lamar Odom, and Brian Grant, the same cast ROOKIE Wade took to the 2nd round. :oldlol:

****ing pathetic. Real top ten players like Shaq/Duncan/LeBron would never fail to get past the first round during 3 years of their prime like Kobe did.

And why are you bringing up 2009 Chris Paul. I am not arguing he should have won the MVP that year. 2008 dipshit. We all know LeBron was King in 2009 and rightfully so.



Kobe made his teammates better by being such a big scoring threat he was the primary focus of opposing defenses, yet he was making the right pass most of the time in '08, and he was a skilled passer. He consistently set up the shooters, as well as both Bynum earlier and Gasol later when his penetration forced opposing big men to help, or with numerous lobs to both big men. He also knew how to run the triangle, and played effectively within it.

Aside from that, it was a theme throughout '08 for Kobe to not look for his shot as much in many games early to get his teammates, particular the shooters going, but to take over late. Hence those shooters having career years.

Shit dude, Kobe knew the triangle?

:oldlol:

Yeah so did every single player on that team. It doesn't mean I'm going to credit Jordan Farmar for making people better.

Kobe was an even bigger scoring threat in 2006 so why didn't that attract even more attention?

Oh wait, because Kobe doesn't win unless he has by far the most overwhelmingly stacked cast in the league. From 2008-2010 the Lakers were so far ahead of anyone else talent wise in the West it was a joke. There was ONE team that was comparable and it was the Boston Celtics. Guess what happened when Kobe played them? He CHOKED in 2008 when the Celtics were healthy, and won rings in 2009-2010 when the Celtics got plauged by injuries in their frontcourts. He still had that 2010 series where he shot 40% and had the 6/24 Game 7. :oldlol:



As far as Kobe making teammates better, here's a quote from Phil Jackson during the 2001 playoffs that says it very well.


Pippen was the triangle facilitator on the Bulls, not Jordan. This quote means nothing since Jordan never had to be put in that role.

[TheBigVeto]

0
/thread

[PickernRoller]

Never seen an unhealthy of a poster as Tony aka RG. There is some serious dementia when you write this kind of shit, for fun:


The chances of me explaining an elementary statistic to you is about the same as you never sticking another heroine needle in your arm.

You don't like it because it doesn't suit your argument. Time to move on.



So we got this guy talking shit about win shares and then he comes in here with ANOTHER advanced statistic in true shooting percentage. So your just going to pick and choose which advanced stats you like and disregard ones if they dont help your argument? :oldlol: Too easy.

Not surprised you failed to list any other bigman that ever took 26+ shot attempts per game or even address it. :oldlol:




Win shares does exactly what it says. Measures a players contribution to the team in terms of WINS. If you want to know the formula I gave you the link to educate yourself. I suggest you use it.

In 2001 Shaq and Kobe had the exact same win shares per 48 for the playoffs(.260). Kobes TOTAL WS is a tiny bit higher because he played 15 or so more minutes over the entire course of the playoffs. Shaq had the higher WS in the regular season(bigger sample size) and the Finals(where he won Finals MVP and dominated the DPOY).

But 2001 Kobe was the best Kobe ever played. He was at his absolute athletic peak and was a lockdown defender. He was confident enough to dominate, but not confident enough to take Shaqs touches away to the point where it was detrimental to the team. He played well to be on footing with Shaq for the Western conference playoffs. A lot of that was also because the Lakers played Portland, SAC, and SAS. All teams that were built with size to try and contain Shaq.

Why are you comparing Duncan and Dirk, they are not on the same team which is what we are doing here.
:wtf:
Different situations can lead to different results. I can easily argue Dirk was more valuable to his Mavericks team than Duncan was to his Spurs team that also had David Robinson still playing at a high level.

Allen Iverson is another extremely overrated player like Kobe Bryant. The 2001 Sixers were special because of their rebounding and defense. Iverson had all of the responsibility offensively, but what does it matter if you are inefficient in how you perform your role? :no: Dikembe Mutombo was the top rebounder in the league and the top defensive anchor winning the DPOY award. I'll take that over a high volume shooter that barely meets 40% shooting anyday. Not thinking twice. Typical Kobe stan that thinks scoring is the most important thing towars winning games while ignoring efficiency. :oldlol:



Lamar Odom was 6'10. He was robbed of an all-star year in 2003-2004 while with the Miami Heat. He averaged 17 PPG and 10 RPG before Kobe put the shackles on him in Los Angeles. This guy was very talented and certainly an elite player that was still in his prime.

If I'm guaranteed health with Bynum I take Bynum/Odom easily over 2008 Chandler/West. And if I'm not guaranteed health it doesn't matter because top 3 bigman in the NBA Pau Gasol will be coming over to help me out anyway.



Kobe gets the respect of top ten players by most basketball fans. So I am going to hold him in that regard. His problem isn't he isn't as good as any of those guys.

Lamar Odom is better than anyone LeBron played with in Cleveland, but guess what? LeBron NEVER lost in the first round. "WAH WAH Kobe had to play the Suns!!". Tough ****ing shit, maybe he should have worked harder during the regular season to get a quality seed like LeBron did. And before you say the East was weaker, I can get you the Cavs records vs East/West. Cleveland ha a better record vs the West EVERY year.

I am not even going to mention how Kobe had Phil Jackson, the GOAT coach(guess I am now). Without him, Kobe couldn't even make the playoffs with Caron Butler, Lamar Odom, and Brian Grant, the same cast ROOKIE Wade took to the 2nd round. :oldlol:

****ing pathetic. Real top ten players like Shaq/Duncan/LeBron would never fail to get past the first round during 3 years of their prime like Kobe did.

And why are you bringing up 2009 Chris Paul. I am not arguing he should have won the MVP that year. 2008 dipshit. We all know LeBron was King in 2009 and rightfully so.



Shit dude, Kobe knew the triangle?

:oldlol:

Yeah so did every single player on that team. It doesn't mean I'm going to credit Jordan Farmar for making people better.

Kobe was an even bigger scoring threat in 2006 so why didn't that attract even more attention?

Oh wait, because Kobe doesn't win unless he has by far the most overwhelmingly stacked cast in the league. From 2008-2010 the Lakers were so far ahead of anyone else talent wise in the West it was a joke. There was ONE team that was comparable and it was the Boston Celtics. Guess what happened when Kobe played them? He CHOKED in 2008 when the Celtics were healthy, and won rings in 2009-2010 when the Celtics got plauged by injuries in their frontcourts. He still had that 2010 series where he shot 40% and had the 6/24 Game 7. :oldlol:



Pippen was the triangle facilitator on the Bulls, not Jordan. This quote means nothing since Jordan never had to be put in that role.


I shouldn't need to explain the stat with the heaviest influence among NBA front offices. Here is the explanation for you to educate yourself in easy to read format.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

Just because you dont like the stat and it doesn't push your agenda doesn't mean it doesn't work. I notice Kobe stans never like win shares, because the stat realizes that high volume scorers dont help the team in ways other than scoring. :oldlol:

As for Hakeem his 95 playoff run is VERY overrated. So is Hakeems efficiency. Hakeem has fancy moves, but Ill tell you what. He is a VERY high volume shooter for a center. He took 26 shots in those playoffs to get his points. I don't know any bigman that needed that many shot attempts to get theirs. I know for a fact Shaq didn't. Feel free to check any other modern ones.

For every Hakeem-Clyde I can give you 50 examples where win shares supports who the clear cut more important player was. If you want to play that game you can keep finding examples where its flawed and Ill show you where it works. We'll see who gets more



No other team in the league had twin towers like Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom. Thats why LA became a dominant team. I already showed you the record when LA only has one elite big playing.
46-15(.754) with Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom
11-10(.524) with only one of those bigs, same boat as the previous seasons.

Don't tell me Kobe suddenly figured out how to make his teammates better either. Thats a load of shit.

Without the additional all-star esque bigman playing LA is the same team they were the last two years. That was the difference, not Kobes play.

Tell me how Kobe makes anyone better. Never has and never will. The only one he makes better is himself looking for where he can score. We are not talking about LeBron who has unrivaled vision for the floor. We are not talking about a dominant bigman who collapses the defense, and helps his team on defense by giving them an additonal layer of defense in front of the rim.

Kobe doesn't make anyone else better. He is entirely dependent on his teammates. You will never see him leading deep playoff runs without other hall of famers on his team.

This is partly why Kobe is the only "all-time great" in NBA History to NEVER win a playoff series unless he is the overwhelming favorite. :oldlol: He doesn't give you that x factor of being able to will a team by himself. He effects one area of the game, high volume scoring.

Here are his stats in elimination games. He shits the bed completely when he faces adversity. You will not get great performances from Kobe unless your team is overwhelmingly more stacked.

Kobe Bryant EG Averages:(credit to ISH member WayofWade for both of these stats)
22.3 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 3.7 APG, 1.2 SPG, .6 BPG, 3.0 TOPG, 41.4 FG%, 27.5 3P%, 77.9 FT%

And for the Game 7s that winner takes all

Kobe Bryant G7 Stats:
21.4 PPG, 7.1 RPG, 5.1 APG, .9 SPG, 1.6 BPG, 2.0 TOPG, 39.5 FG%, 32.4 3P%, 70.2 FT%

Most overhyped star ever.


Fine

But what does this have to do with no MVP Being as low as a 7th seed in the past 30 years? I know Kareem won it one year as a .500 team(the 70s?). Whats the lowest seed a players ever won MVP as? I don't even think a 4th seed has ever won MVP in the modern era, and we're going to invite a 7th seed to the conversation?



Why are you laughing at win shares? I'm not saying win shares should be the only thing looked at, but it is easily the single most relevant statistic regarding the impact of a player. I'm not telling you to look at that alone, but 9/10 times the win share statistic supports the truth.

Kobe quit on his team before that year. That was the offeseason he was crying to the media about his teammates, demanding trades.

The reason 2008 was any different is because it was the beginning of LAs dominating frontcourt and twin towers. Even before Pau arrived to the team, Andrew Bynum was playing better than some all-stars. Never underestimate the impact of a 7 footer that plays at a high level on both ends of the court. Pau was important because Bynum is a guy that can never last an entire year, and sure enough he got hurt.

...............do not fit

[joeyjoejoe]

Shaqattack kobe played a total of 30 seconds a game extra that year and I can see a case for kobe to be mvp but am a bit suprised that an intelligent dude like yourself doesn't see much of a case for paul, to each their own I guess

[ShaqAttack3234]

The chances of me explaining an elementary statistic to you is about the same as you never sticking another heroine needle in your arm.

You don't like it because it doesn't suit your argument. Time to move on.

EXACTLY what I thought. You didn't do it because you CAN'T. And more importantly you can't explain why YOU think the method is a good one. All you do is resort to petty insults which shows how frustrated you get when I ask you a simple question.


So we got this guy talking shit about win shares and then he comes in here with ANOTHER advanced statistic in true shooting percentage. So your just going to pick and choose which advanced stats you like and disregard ones if they dont help your argument? :oldlol: Too easy.

TS% = shooting efficiency except with 3s and free throws accounted for and 1 free throw treated as the equivalent of 0.44 FGA. Big difference when I can explain the statistic that easily. Why is it a relevant statistic? Because 3s are worth more than 2s, and because free throws are possessions as well and a way to score points.

See, that wasn't so hard, was it?


Not surprised you failed to list any other bigman that ever took 26+ shot attempts per game or even address it. :oldlol:

Because it's ridiculous to discredit Hakeem for taking a lot of shots. No shit he took a lot of shots, he averaged 33. And the important thing is he carried his team to a title against ridiculously tough competition.


Win shares does exactly what it says. Measures a players contribution to the team in terms of WINS. If you want to know the formula I gave you the link to educate yourself. I suggest you use it.

And how exactly does it measure a player's contributions to wins and why do YOU think this is a good method


In 2001 Shaq and Kobe had the exact same win shares per 48 for the playoffs(.260). Kobes TOTAL WS is a tiny bit higher because he played 15 or so more minutes over the entire course of the playoffs. Shaq had the higher WS in the regular season(bigger sample size) and the Finals(where he won Finals MVP and dominated the DPOY).

Ah, I see, when win shares fail, you go to your back up, win shares per 48 minutes, which still has Shaq/Kobe as equal, and then you make excuses for the outcome.


But 2001 Kobe was the best Kobe ever played. He was at his absolute athletic peak and was a lockdown defender. He was confident enough to dominate, but not confident enough to take Shaqs touches away to the point where it was detrimental to the team. He played well to be on footing with Shaq for the Western conference playoffs. A lot of that was also because the Lakers played Portland, SAC, and SAS. All teams that were built with size to try and contain Shaq.

It was not the best Kobe has played. For the same type of all around game over a longer stretch, check 2008, except that also featured a more diverse scoring skill set from Kobe and him accomplishing this as the primary focus of opposing defenses on a nightly basis.


Why are you comparing Duncan and Dirk, they are not on the same team which is what we are doing here.

So win shares are only good now for players on the same team?


I can easily argue Dirk was more valuable to his Mavericks team than Duncan was to his Spurs team that also had David Robinson still playing at a high level.

No you can't, especially since that Dallas team had an all-star 2 guard in Michael Finley who averaged just 0.3 fewer ppg than Dirk in addition to Steve Nash who was already becoming a very good point guard and had a 16/7 season on 49/41/90 shooting.

More importantly, Duncan was not only an elite defender and rebounder, but one of the better low post scorers and passing big men with a nice face up game as well. So there's no way to argue Dirk in 2001 made a bigger impact.


Allen Iverson is another extremely overrated player like Kobe Bryant. The 2001 Sixers were special because of their rebounding and defense. Iverson had all of the responsibility offensively, but what does it matter if you are inefficient in how you perform your role? :no: Dikembe Mutombo was the top rebounder in the league and the top defensive anchor winning the DPOY award. I'll take that over a high volume shooter that barely meets 40% shooting anyday. Not thinking twice. Typical Kobe stan that thinks scoring is the most important thing towars winning games while ignoring efficiency. :oldlol:

Regardless of whether Iverson is overrated, he's a hell of a lot better and more important to his team than Derek Fisher.


Lamar Odom was 6'10. He was robbed of an all-star year in 2003-2004 while with the Miami Heat. He averaged 17 PPG and 10 RPG before Kobe put the shackles on him in Los Angeles. This guy was very talented and certainly an elite player that was still in his prime.

So wait, you get on me for using 2009 as an example for Chris Paul and the 2008 season, yet bring up Odom's play on a completely different team 4 years earlier? :oldlol:

Oh, and since you hate inefficient players so much, I'd like to remind you Odom shot 43% in 2004 as well as 29% on 3s and 74% from the line. On a side note, it's hilarious to hear a Lebron stan talking about shackling. Chris Bosh averaged 24/11 the year before Lebron "shackled" him. Larry Hughes averaged 22/6/5/3 the year before Lebron "shackled" him as well. :oldlol: Antawn Jamison was also averaging 21/9 in Washington in 2010 before he was "shackled" by Lebron.


If I'm guaranteed health with Bynum I take Bynum/Odom easily over 2008 Chandler/West. And if I'm not guaranteed health it doesn't matter because top 3 bigman in the NBA Pau Gasol will be coming over to help me out anyway.

That's nice, doesn't change the fact that West was clearly better than Odom in 2008, and Chandler was better than Bynum.


Lamar Odom is better than anyone LeBron played with in Cleveland, but guess what? LeBron NEVER lost in the first round. "WAH WAH Kobe had to play the Suns!!". Tough ****ing shit, maybe he should have worked harder during the regular season to get a quality seed like LeBron did. And before you say the East was weaker, I can get you the Cavs records vs East/West. Cleveland ha a better record vs the West EVERY year.

We're comparing Kobe and Chris Paul, no? If Kobe had those elite defenses and played in a weak conference maybe we could compare his team success to Lebron's in Cleveland. Of course, getting out of the 1st round is a lot easier when you face a 41-41 Wizards team without their 2 best players Arenas and Butler.


And why are you bringing up 2009 Chris Paul. I am not arguing he should have won the MVP that year. 2008 dipshit. We all know LeBron was King in 2009 and rightfully so.

Because 2009 shows Chris Paul at about the same level with and without his "elite" big man. He had his "elite" big man for all of 2009, actually 2 of them along with one of the top 3 point shooters in the game.


Shit dude, Kobe knew the triangle?

:oldlol:

Yeah so did every single player on that team. It doesn't mean I'm going to credit Jordan Farmar for making people better.

Did every player on the team have to run it?


Kobe was an even bigger scoring threat in 2006 so why didn't that attract even more attention?

He did, but he was told specifically by his coach to carry the offense because the young, and not very talented team around him had to learn the triangle.


Oh wait, because Kobe doesn't win unless he has by far the most overwhelmingly stacked cast in the league. From 2008-2010 the Lakers were so far ahead of anyone else talent wise in the West it was a joke. There was ONE team that was comparable and it was the Boston Celtics. Guess what happened when Kobe played them? He CHOKED in 2008 when the Celtics were healthy, and won rings in 2009-2010 when the Celtics got plauged by injuries in their frontcourts. He still had that 2010 series where he shot 40% and had the 6/24 Game 7. :oldlol:

:oldlol: at by far the most stacked cast. Regardless, Kobe had 3 great playoff runs in a row for 3 consecutive finals appearances and back to back rings. That's what matters.



Pippen was the triangle facilitator on the Bulls, not Jordan. This quote means nothing since Jordan never had to be put in that role.

I didn't post the quote to compare Kobe to Jordan. I posted it because Phil praises Kobe not only setting up the offense and reading the defense, but making the other players happy. You had previously stated Kobe has never made his teammates better.


Shaqattack kobe played a total of 30 seconds a game extra that year and I can see a case for kobe to be mvp but am a bit suprised that an intelligent dude like yourself doesn't see much of a case for paul, to each their own I guess

I never said Paul didn't have a case. Quite the contrary, I said it was debatable. I personally prefer Kobe, but don't have a problem with those who chose Paul. My only issue is with those stating Kobe didn't have a case for the award.

[HelterSkelter]

Sorry to say, but only 1 or 2.

99-03
hard to get the vote if he's playing with the most dominant player in the league.

04-05
NO.

'06
he got robbed. To me, he was the clear MVP. They were only 45-37 but that year he was THAT good.

'07
he was THAT good again, but he's not getting the vote if his team is only 42-40.

'08
he was deserving although it could've also went to Chris Paul, who was more deserving IMO. But I guess it's justice for '06.

07-13
NO.

[Optimus Prime]

At least 2. Kobe was flat-out robbed in 05-06. :kobe:

[SilkkTheShocker]

At least 2. Kobe was flat-out robbed in 05-06. :kobe:

No, actually he wasn't.

[DMAVS41]

?????

1

Kobe was never...ever...ever...robbed of a MVP award.

[LJJ]

One sounds about right. He's closer to winning 0 than winning 2 though.

[I<3NBA]

?????

1

Kobe was never...ever...ever...robbed of a MVP award.
when was that? never at any point in his NBA career was Kobe ever the best or the most valuable. the time he was the most valuable on his team, his team sucked.

so not once has he deserved the award.

[DMAVS41]

when was that? never at any point in his NBA career was Kobe ever the best or the most valuable. the time he was the most valuable on his team, his team sucked.

so not once has he deserved the award.

08

[Mr Know It All]

2008 was the only year he had a legitimate argument (individual play + team play). I still would have picked Chris Paul over him that year.

[Magic 32]

2008 was the only year he had a legitimate argument (individual play + team play). I still would have picked Chris Paul over him that year.

Reasons?

Kobe won the head-to-head battles
Kobe had better stats
Kobe won more games
Kobe had to deal with 3 teams (one with Bynum, one with Pau, and on his own) because of injuries and trades, and he had a winning record with all of them.

There is no argument for CP3 at all!!!

[3LiftHeatCurse]

2006 was kind of an odd year. Iverson averaged 33 PPG and getting way more assists than Kobe with similar efficiency. The same Iverson who have been declining before the rule change.

2006 was the year the NBA changed to a composite basketball. Most players hated it, but the numbers showed that scoring was up all across the league.

After that season, the NBA went back to the regular basketball, and Kobe has never equaled those scoring feats since.

[3LiftHeatCurse]

To answer the thread : 0

2008 was Chris Paul's MVP and everyone knew at the time he was robbed.

[Magic 32]

"After that season, the NBA went back to the regular basketball, and Kobe has never equaled those scoring feats since."

Another idiot who missed the second half of the 2007 season.

[TonyMontana]

EXACTLY what I thought. You didn't do it because you CAN'T. And more importantly you can't explain why YOU think the method is a good one. All you do is resort to petty insults which shows how frustrated you get when I ask you a simple question.

You sound mad, I'm sitting here enjoying myself.


TS% = shooting efficiency except with 3s and free throws accounted for and 1 free throw treated as the equivalent of 0.44 FGA. Big difference when I can explain the statistic that easily. Why is it a relevant statistic? Because 3s are worth more than 2s, and because free throws are possessions as well and a way to score points.

See, that wasn't so hard, was it?

Ah a formulated statistic? But wait, isn't this what you said earlier?


These recent made up formula stats are ridiculous for basketball.

I guess it's not so ridiculous when it helps you push your agenda.
:oldlol:


It was not the best Kobe has played. For the same type of all around game over a longer stretch, check 2008, except that also featured a more diverse scoring skill set from Kobe and him accomplishing this as the primary focus of opposing defenses on a nightly basis.

2001 Kobe > any Kobe

It was the peak of his athletisicm, and he was as good as it gets in terms of lockdown defenders. Also averaged 28 PPG on 46% shooting which was as efficient as he ever was. You can disagree if you want, I'm just educating you.


So win shares are only good now for players on the same team?

No you can't, especially since that Dallas team had an all-star 2 guard in Michael Finley who averaged just 0.3 fewer ppg than Dirk in addition to Steve Nash who was already becoming a very good point guard and had a 16/7 season on 49/41/90 shooting.

More importantly, Duncan was not only an elite defender and rebounder, but one of the better low post scorers and passing big men with a nice face up game as well. So there's no way to argue Dirk in 2001 made a bigger impact.

I guess you ran out of teammates after 2 examples so you had to start looking at random stars in random years. :oldlol:

Michael Finley and Steve Nash are both overrated. They are both guards that play average-to piss poor defense and never impact the game as much as they'd like you to believe. It is not a coincidence that Dallas got better when they lost each of those players FOR NOTHING and Dirk was given more touches to shoulder the load.

Give Dirk David Robinson instead of those guards and I guarantee they'd better Duncans 4 additional wins. The formula doesn't lie. David Robinson had .246 WS/48 minutes and Finley had .119 and Nash with .169.

For someone that doesn't know the formula .119 is nothing special at all. Win shares takes into account the true value of high volume shooters and Finley was a scorer who averaged 21.5 PPG on 18.9 FGA. In other words, terrible for a guy whos niche role was scoring the basketball and offered nothing else.



So wait, you get on me for using 2009 as an example for Chris Paul and the 2008 season, yet bring up Odom's play on a completely different team 4 years earlier?

Oh, and since you hate inefficient players so much, I'd like to remind you Odom shot 43% in 2004 as well as 29% on 3s and 74% from the line. On a side note, it's hilarious to hear a Lebron stan talking about shackling. Chris Bosh averaged 24/11 the year before Lebron "shackled" him. Larry Hughes averaged 22/6/5/3 the year before Lebron "shackled" him as well. Antawn Jamison was also averaging 21/9 in Washington in 2010 before he was "shackled" by Lebron.

The iniital argument is 2008 MVP, Kobe or Chris Paul.

I am not talking about 2009 Kobe and trying to discredit him for his 08 award because it is irrelevant.

I am talking about Lamar Odom and showing how he flourished in a different environment. Those drugs must have really gotten to your head. :wtf:

Lamar Odom averaged 17-10 on a team that GOT TO THE 2nd ROUND.

Chris Bosh put up empty numbers on non-playoff teams an first round fodder. 2 of his 3 20-10 years were 2010 and 2009. Both resulted in non-playoff appearences. As you can see more touches for Bosh IS NOT a good thing.



That's nice, doesn't change the fact that West was clearly better than Odom in 2008, and Chandler was better than Bynum.


Andrew Bynum: .230 WS/48 (Gasol was also at .230 WS/48)
Lamar Odom: .159 WS/48

Chandler: .170 WS/48
West: .140 WS/48


46-15(.754) with Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom
11-10(.524) with only one of those bigs, same boat as the previous seasons.

As you can see the high win share totals by LAs frontcourt are reflected upon in the teams WIN total with a Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom frontcourt compared to the .500 team with only one.



We're comparing Kobe and Chris Paul, no? If Kobe had those elite defenses and played in a weak conference maybe we could compare his team success to Lebron's in Cleveland. Of course, getting out of the 1st round is a lot easier when you face a 41-41 Wizards team without their 2 best players Arenas and Butler.

We are, but if you can tell these arguments go off in different directions(HAKEEM, SHAQ/KOBE, etc.). You trying to wiesel out of talking about this bit?

I already exposed the myth about the weak conference, but since you want to push it enjoy these statistics. Your responses are quite predictable and the typical cookie-cutter garbage you pick up from ISHdiots(or maybe vice versa).


2007 Caveliers: 50-32(.610)
Vs East: 31-21(.596)
Vs West: 19-11(.633)

2008 Cavaliers: 45-37(.549)
Vs East: 28-24(.538)
Vs West: 17-10(.629)

2008-09 Cavaliers Record: 66-16(.804)
Vs East: 40-12 (.769)
Vs West: 26-6(.813)

2009-10 Cavaliers Record: 61-21(.744)
Vs East: 38-14(.730)
Vs West: 23-7(.767)

LeBrons Cleveland teams would be have even more wins if they played against the no defense West teams more often.



at by far the most stacked cast. Regardless, Kobe had 3 great playoff runs in a row for 3 consecutive finals appearances and back to back rings. That's what matters.

Whats so funny?
:wtf:

Care to englighten us on what teams had comparable talent to LA from those years? It was Boston and Boston owned them the one year they weren't hurt. :oldlol:

The Kobe Lakers can't win if the series is up in the air, only when they are more stacked. Thats because Kobe himself is overrated. I already showed you how his little dick shrinks in Game 7s/elimination games. Can't handle adversity, he is the ultimate frontrunner that will play well when everything is going well for his team.

[Solefade]

Dude only deserved 1, he wasn't clear cut in any other year.

[kennethgriffin]

if you truly hate someone enough. you can find a way to argue against their mvp chances for any single season. its all opinion to begin with and the criteria changes seemingly every season

people on this board are just idiots

i could say "lebron never deserved one."

kobe in 2009
dwight in 2010
durant in 2012
durant in 2013


lebron = 0 time mvp


all an mvp vote is about is "whos the medias favorite player out of the top 3 performers of the year"



kobe never had a fair shot after his rape trial/shaq breakup

the media gave him a lifetime achivement mvp cause they felt like a bag of d*cks for snubbing him


steve nash robbed kobe, dirk robbed kobe, lebron robbed kobe.

period

06,07,08,09 = kobe was the best player in the nba by f*cking far.. lebron was raw as hell, he was a pure brute force offensive foul charging piece of sh*t flopper 1 thow choke artist before the 2012 season when he finally learned how to play basketball the right way


f*ck this thread

[red1]

kobe>lebron

[Nevaeh]

if you truly hate someone enough. you can find a way to argue against their mvp chances for any single season. its all opinion to begin with and the criteria changes seemingly every season



Sure, whatever you say grif, kinda like you're trying to do in this next quote:


06,07,08,09 = kobe was the best player in the nba by f*cking far.. lebron was raw as hell, he was a pure brute force offensive foul charging piece of sh*t flopper 1 thow choke artist before the 2012 season when he finally learned how to play basketball the right way


f*ck this thread



Funny thing is Tony Montana just posted legit reasons why Lebron actually deserved MVPs over Kobe right above you. Take a look:


2007 Caveliers: 50-32(.610)
Vs East: 31-21(.596)
Vs West: 19-11(.633)

2008 Cavaliers: 45-37(.549)
Vs East: 28-24(.538)
Vs West: 17-10(.629)

2008-09 Cavaliers Record: 66-16(.804)
Vs East: 40-12 (.769)
Vs West: 26-6(.813)

2009-10 Cavaliers Record: 61-21(.744)
Vs East: 38-14(.730)
Vs West: 23-7(.767)

LeBrons Cleveland teams would be have even more wins if they played against the no defense West teams more often.


If you weren't so emotional, and hell bent on typing just to see your own posts on ISH so often, you would have seen that.

[kennethgriffin]

Sure, whatever you say grif, kinda like you're trying to do in this next quote:





Funny thing is Tony Montana just posted legit reasons why Lebron actually deserved MVPs over Kobe right above you. Take a look:



If you weren't so emotional, and hell bent on typing just to see your own posts on ISH so often, you would have seen that.


you're only proving my point for me

like i said. a criteria can change any given year for the media to make a guy mvp

if the team is so important. how did lebron win in 2012 when his team didnt even have a top 3 record in the nba

how did jordan win his first mvp when the bulls werent even a top 5 team

[HoopsFanNumero1]

You sound mad, I'm sitting here enjoying myself.


Ah a formulated statistic? But wait, isn't this what you said earlier?



I guess it's not so ridiculous when it helps you push your agenda.
:oldlol:


2001 Kobe > any Kobe

It was the peak of his athletisicm, and he was as good as it gets in terms of lockdown defenders. Also averaged 28 PPG on 46% shooting which was as efficient as he ever was. You can disagree if you want, I'm just educating you.


I guess you ran out of teammates after 2 examples so you had to start looking at random stars in random years. :oldlol:

Michael Finley and Steve Nash are both overrated. They are both guards that play average-to piss poor defense and never impact the game as much as they'd like you to believe. It is not a coincidence that Dallas got better when they lost each of those players FOR NOTHING and Dirk was given more touches to shoulder the load.

Give Dirk David Robinson instead of those guards and I guarantee they'd better Duncans 4 additional wins. The formula doesn't lie. David Robinson had .246 WS/48 minutes and Finley had .119 and Nash with .169.

For someone that doesn't know the formula .119 is nothing special at all. Win shares takes into account the true value of high volume shooters and Finley was a scorer who averaged 21.5 PPG on 18.9 FGA. In other words, terrible for a guy whos niche role was scoring the basketball and offered nothing else.



The iniital argument is 2008 MVP, Kobe or Chris Paul.

I am not talking about 2009 Kobe and trying to discredit him for his 08 award because it is irrelevant.

I am talking about Lamar Odom and showing how he flourished in a different environment. Those drugs must have really gotten to your head. :wtf:

Lamar Odom averaged 17-10 on a team that GOT TO THE 2nd ROUND.

Chris Bosh put up empty numbers on non-playoff teams an first round fodder. 2 of his 3 20-10 years were 2010 and 2009. Both resulted in non-playoff appearences. As you can see more touches for Bosh IS NOT a good thing.



Andrew Bynum: .230 WS/48 (Gasol was also at .230 WS/48)
Lamar Odom: .159 WS/48

Chandler: .170 WS/48
West: .140 WS/48


46-15(.754) with Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom
11-10(.524) with only one of those bigs, same boat as the previous seasons.

As you can see the high win share totals by LAs frontcourt are reflected upon in the teams WIN total with a Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom frontcourt compared to the .500 team with only one.



We are, but if you can tell these arguments go off in different directions(HAKEEM, SHAQ/KOBE, etc.). You trying to wiesel out of talking about this bit?

I already exposed the myth about the weak conference, but since you want to push it enjoy these statistics. Your responses are quite predictable and the typical cookie-cutter garbage you pick up from ISHdiots(or maybe vice versa).


2007 Caveliers: 50-32(.610)
Vs East: 31-21(.596)
Vs West: 19-11(.633)

2008 Cavaliers: 45-37(.549)
Vs East: 28-24(.538)
Vs West: 17-10(.629)

2008-09 Cavaliers Record: 66-16(.804)
Vs East: 40-12 (.769)
Vs West: 26-6(.813)

2009-10 Cavaliers Record: 61-21(.744)
Vs East: 38-14(.730)
Vs West: 23-7(.767)

LeBrons Cleveland teams would be have even more wins if they played against the no defense West teams more often.



Whats so funny?
:wtf:

Care to englighten us on what teams had comparable talent to LA from those years? It was Boston and Boston owned them the one year they weren't hurt. :oldlol:

The Kobe Lakers can't win if the series is up in the air, only when they are more stacked. Thats because Kobe himself is overrated. I already showed you how his little dick shrinks in Game 7s/elimination games. Can't handle adversity, he is the ultimate frontrunner that will play well when everything is going well for his team.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[red1]

if you truly hate someone enough. you can find a way to argue against their mvp chances for any single season. its all opinion to begin with and the criteria changes seemingly every season

people on this board are just idiots

i could say "lebron never deserved one."

kobe in 2009
dwight in 2010
durant in 2012
durant in 2013


lebron = 0 time mvp


all an mvp vote is about is "whos the medias favorite player out of the top 3 performers of the year"



kobe never had a fair shot after his rape trial/shaq breakup

the media gave him a lifetime achivement mvp cause they felt like a bag of d*cks for snubbing him


steve nash robbed kobe, dirk robbed kobe, lebron robbed kobe.

period

06,07,08,09 = kobe was the best player in the nba by f*cking far.. lebron was raw as hell, he was a pure brute force offensive foul charging piece of sh*t flopper 1 thow choke artist before the 2012 season when he finally learned how to play basketball the right way


f*ck this thread
To be fair though kenny, 2009 lebron> any version of kobe so it is a bit of a stretch to say that kobe was robbed

[ShaqAttack3234]

You sound mad, I'm sitting here enjoying myself.

Funny, because I'm not the one throwing out irrelevant insults to distract from the subject. The reality is, you claim it's so elementary yet if that's the case, you could quickly shut me up by answering the question.


Ah a formulated statistic? But wait, isn't this what you said earlier?

I've said in the past, I have a general rule for stats in basketball, if you can't explain how it's calculated in about 10 seconds, it's worthless. I can do that


I guess it's not so ridiculous when it helps you push your agenda.
:oldlol:

Keep reaching, I can and did explain exactly why I think TS% is a valid stat. Unlike the true formula stats like win shares and PER, it can be explained quickly and isn't subjective with the exception of the 0.44 FT thing which produces a small margin for error.


2001 Kobe > any Kobe

It was the peak of his athletisicm, and he was as good as it gets in terms of lockdown defenders. Also averaged 28 PPG on 46% shooting which was as efficient as he ever was. You can disagree if you want, I'm just educating you.

2001 playoffs was roughly as good from an all around standpoint as he's ever been, right there with the 2008 version. Difference being 2008 Kobe sustained it for an entire year, was by far the best player on his own team and in a leadership role both on and off the court in addition to being noticeably more skilled than the 2001 version.


I guess you ran out of teammates after 2 examples so you had to start looking at random stars in random years. :oldlol:

What do you mean random stars and random years, I ran off examples from 2001, and picked Dirk and Duncan since win shares had Dirk second that year. Not random at all.


Michael Finley and Steve Nash are both overrated. They are both guards that play average-to piss poor defense and never impact the game as much as they'd like you to believe. It is not a coincidence that Dallas got better when they lost each of those players FOR NOTHING and Dirk was given more touches to shoulder the load.

Yes, and Dirk was a bad defender back then as well. Finley wasn't a true superstar, but he could impact games. The previous year as the Mavs best player, he led Dallas to a respectable 40-42 record which exceeded expectations while playing the season plantar fasciitis. In fact, Don Nelson was set to retire until Dallas finished 15-5 with Finley leading the way.

Of course your example given with Dirk shouldering more of the load is irrelevant because he was NOWHERE near the same player in 2001 that he was in '05 or '06, while Finley had also clearly declined significantly from his prime by the time he left Dallas. Not to mention the Don Nelson era was over by that point and the Mavs changed their style completely.

Now answer this question. It seems like you're trying to somehow argue Dirk and Duncan were comparable players in 2001? Is that the case? Do you believe this?


Give Dirk David Robinson instead of those guards and I guarantee they'd better Duncans 4 additional wins. The formula doesn't lie. David Robinson had .246 WS/48 minutes and Finley had .119 and Nash with .169.

Actually, the formula does lie because win shares per 48 minutes have David Robinson as the best player in 2001. Just think about how ridiculous that is. On top of that, it's beyond stupid to use a per minute stat for a 35 year old center who had already had a major back injury and was averaging slightly under 30 mpg.

What Robinson was at that point was an elite defender, still top 5, imo, a solid rebounder, but a player whose offense consisted almost entirely of a few easy baskets either off put backs or high/low plays with Duncan and a decent mid-range jumper here or there. But also a player who couldn't give you star minutes anymore.


For someone that doesn't know the formula .119 is nothing special at all. Win shares takes into account the true value of high volume shooters and Finley was a scorer who averaged 21.5 PPG on 18.9 FGA. In other words, terrible for a guy whos niche role was scoring the basketball and offered nothing else.

Finley was a good scorer and shooter, athletic and pretty solid as far as rebounding and passing as well.


The initial argument is 2008 MVP, Kobe or Chris Paul.

I am not talking about 2009 Kobe and trying to discredit him for his 08 award because it is irrelevant.

I am talking about Lamar Odom and showing how he flourished in a different environment. Those drugs must have really gotten to your head. :wtf:

Lamar Odom averaged 17-10 on a team that GOT TO THE 2nd ROUND.

Chris Bosh put up empty numbers on non-playoff teams an first round fodder. 2 of his 3 20-10 years were 2010 and 2009. Both resulted in non-playoff appearences. As you can see more touches for Bosh IS NOT a good thing.

Raptors were a respectable 40-42 in 2010, and terrible once he left. In 2008, they were a solid 37-31 when he played a terrible 4-11 without him, and in 2007, they won 47 games. He's not a first tier star, and never was, but he was right around that second tier top 15ish range, and good enough to lead a really bad team to a respectable record in the East.

By the way, Larry Hughes 22/6/5/3 season also came on a second round team that included...guess who? Antawn Jamison putting up 20/8 himself.


Andrew Bynum: .230 WS/48 (Gasol was also at .230 WS/48)
Lamar Odom: .159 WS/48

Chandler: .170 WS/48
West: .140 WS/48

Ok, you win, David Robinson was the best player in the NBA in 2001. :bowdown:

As far as Chandler vs Bynum. Pretty easy to compare them. Bynum had more ability offensively, but most of it was raw, and irrelevant to how he played in 2008. Both primarily got lobs and garbage baskets and ended up with low double figures on extremely high %. Both were got a lot of rebounds, but Chandler was unquestionably the superior defender.

As far as West, money on his mid-range jumpers, much better shooter than Odom, better post player and interior player as well and tougher overall. Most importantly, he was far more consistent and a 20+ ppg scorer. Odom is the classic example of a jack of all trades, master of none, and an example of a guy who for years has looked like a star one night and is invisible the next. He can flourish as a 3rd option, but West was unquestionably the superior 2nd option.


46-15(.754) with Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom
11-10(.524) with only one of those bigs, same boat as the previous seasons.

As you can see the high win share totals by LAs frontcourt are reflected upon in the teams WIN total with a Bynum-Odom or Gasol-Odom frontcourt compared to the .500 team with only one.

Fortunately for Paul, he had the luxury of never having to play without either of his elite big men for an extended period of time, or Peja for that matter.


We are, but if you can tell these arguments go off in different directions(HAKEEM, SHAQ/KOBE, etc.). You trying to wiesel out of talking about this bit?

Nah, I'm just tired of your boring Lebron agenda. For the record, I actually do think the version of Lebron the past 5 seasons is a better player than Kobe. I just find it ridiculous to act like Lebron can walk on water and do no wrong while apparently, nothing Kobe accomplishes matters.


I already exposed the myth about the weak conference, but since you want to push it enjoy these statistics. Your responses are quite predictable and the typical cookie-cutter garbage you pick up from ISHdiots(or maybe vice versa).


2007 Caveliers: 50-32(.610)
Vs East: 31-21(.596)
Vs West: 19-11(.633)

2008 Cavaliers: 45-37(.549)
Vs East: 28-24(.538)
Vs West: 17-10(.629)

2008-09 Cavaliers Record: 66-16(.804)
Vs East: 40-12 (.769)
Vs West: 26-6(.813)

2009-10 Cavaliers Record: 61-21(.744)
Vs East: 38-14(.730)
Vs West: 23-7(.767)

LeBrons Cleveland teams would be have even more wins if they played against the no defense West teams more often.

I'll admit, you actually did bring some substance to the discussion for the first time with this. Although he'd be playing those teams more each season so the sample size would increase significantly.


Whats so funny?
:wtf:

Care to englighten us on what teams had comparable talent to LA from those years? It was Boston and Boston owned them the one year they weren't hurt. :oldlol:

The Kobe Lakers can't win if the series is up in the air, only when they are more stacked. Thats because Kobe himself is overrated. I already showed you how his little dick shrinks in Game 7s/elimination games. Can't handle adversity, he is the ultimate frontrunner that will play well when everything is going well for his team.

Whether the Lakers were truly stacked is debatable. They were far from the deepest team, but Boston clearly had more talent and was more well built in '08 with the big 3 + role players.

2010 Celtics and Lakers were pretty even as far as talent, both had up and down regular seasons. Lakers had the clear advantage as far as top 2 players, but Boston had more all-star caliber players with Rondo's emergence.

Even in 2009, the Nuggets were very talented with Melo and Billups(both all-nba players that season), a talented high-scoring sixth man in Jr, a 15/8, 60 FG% center in Nene, K-Mart who was still a strong finisher and very good defender at the 4 who provided both interior defense and mobility/versatility at that end, plus role players like Dahntay Jones for perimeter defense as well as Chris Anderson for shot blocking and hustle play.

[kennethgriffin]

To be fair though kenny, 2009 lebron> any version of kobe so it is a bit of a stretch to say that kobe was robbed

not in the slightest

lebron pre 2012 had no jumper, no post moves, no clutch, traveled all the time. ran people over ( without a call ) and forced the issue to pad stats all the time by running the clock down for a kick out 3

he was raw at the time. he could put up great numbers and win a ton of regular season games. but better than kobe overall, top to bottom? na

not in your wildest dreams

[PickernRoller]

To be fair though kenny, 2009 lebron> any version of kobe so it is a bit of a stretch to say that kobe was robbed

To be fair. Lebron, your idol, disagrees with you. I tend to agree with Lebron.

[Force]

ZERO, crazy but true.

He won before his 4th ring. The voters are all on camera saying that Kobe doesn't deserve to retire without an MVP, it's about time, it was a sympathy grandfather vote. All those ESPN guys who vote officially are on camera saying that's why they are voting for Kobe. Just stating facts.

[red1]

not in the slightest

lebron pre 2012 had no jumper, no post moves, no clutch, traveled all the time. ran people over ( without a call ) and forced the issue to pad stats all the time by running the clock down for a kick out 3

he was raw at the time. he could put up great numbers and win a ton of regular season games. but better than kobe overall, top to bottom? na

not in your wildest dreams
The only accurate thing you posted was the lack of post game which he didnt even need back then since he was able to blow by every player in the league. 2009 was lebron at his absolute athletic peak, his first step and ability to blow past players fell off dramatically since then. It was also his clutchest year when it comes to jumpshooting. He made both of his only gamewinning attempts not to mention numerous other clutch plays

[thabisyo]

For the Last time!!!!!!!!!


Kobe deserves ZERO

























it is not hard to understand..... ZERO
:banghead:

[havoc33]

Actually, Kobe deserved two (in 06 and 08). But what the heck, who cares about the MVP award anyway. The moment they started changing the definition of what the MVP should be it lost all credibility. It has gone from best player in the league (MJ), not again, we need to vote for someone else (Barkley, Malone), best player on top team (Duncan), feel good story of the season (Rose), who makes his teammates better (Nash), hurray we can vote for a white guy again!! (Nash, twice) etc etc Now it's just a popularity vote from hypocritical sports journalists.

We can all blame MJ for this. It was because of him that the criteria started to change. If it weren't for the fact that journalists got bored of voting for him, he would should have been the MVP every year from 91 and out (not counting his basketball sabbatical and washington years of course).

[DMAVS41]

Actually, Kobe deserved two (in 06 and 08). But what the heck, who cares about the MVP award anyway. The moment they started changing the definition of what the MVP should be it lost all credibility. It has gone from best player in the league (MJ), not again, we need to vote for someone else (Barkley, Malone), best player on top team (Duncan), feel good story of the season (Rose), who makes his teammates better (Nash), hurray we can vote for a white guy again!! (Nash, twice) etc etc Now it's just a popularity vote from hypocritical sports journalists.

We can all blame MJ for this. It was because of him that the criteria started to change. If it weren't for the fact that journalists got bored of voting for him, he would should have been the MVP every year from 91 and out (not counting his basketball sabbatical and washington years of course).

Kobe absolutely did not deserve the MVP in 06. He has a case, alebit a fragile one, for best player in the league...but absolutely no case for MVP.

[Unbiased_one]

Actually, Kobe deserved two (in 06 and 08). But what the heck, who cares about the MVP award anyway. The moment they started changing the definition of what the MVP should be it lost all credibility. It has gone from best player in the league (MJ), not again, we need to vote for someone else (Barkley, Malone), best player on top team (Duncan), feel good story of the season (Rose), who makes his teammates better (Nash), hurray we can vote for a white guy again!! (Nash, twice) etc etc Now it's just a popularity vote from hypocritical sports journalists.

We can all blame MJ for this. It was because of him that the criteria started to change. If it weren't for the fact that journalists got bored of voting for him, he would should have been the MVP every year from 91 and out (not counting his basketball sabbatical and washington years of course).

If the MVP were given for 'best player in the league' or 'most important player in the league', kobe would still only have an argument for one.

[Optimus Prime]

The Kobe hate is off the charts. That 05-06 Lakers team wins single digit games without Kobe playing out of his mind.

:kobe:

[GoSpursGo1984]

Kobe defintly deserved the MVP he got. Pau Gasol got traded that year so he only played 27 regular season with the Lakers. Sure when Gasol got there he averaged 19 points but he also only average 8 rebounds a game. Kobe only had 1 other player average more then 15ppg Paul had 2. Lets not forget that the Hornets that year did not even out right win their division they had the same record as the Spurs in their own division.

[Mr Feeny]

Kobe defintly deserved the MVP he got. Pau Gasol got traded that year so he only played 27 regular season with the Lakers. Sure when Gasol got there he averaged 19 points but he also only average 8 rebounds a game. Kobe only had 1 other player average more then 15ppg Paul had 2. Lets not forget that the Hornets that year did not even out right win their division they had the same record as the Spurs in their own division.

As a lakers fan I definitely think that Kobe didn't deserve it that year. With the stacked team we had, I think we finished 1-2 wins ahead of NO who had Chris Paul carrying West and Chandler and fillers. For me, as a Laker fan, Chris Paul definitely deserved it:applause:

[Lebron23]

Only 1.

Lebron should have been the MVP in 2006. 31/7/7 on a 50 wins team.

[Mr Feeny]

Only 1.

Lebron should have been the MVP in 2006. 31/7/7 on a 50 wins team.

Lebron should have 6 total I think. 2006, 2009-2013.

[Lebron23]

Lebron should have 6 total I think. 2006, 2009-2013.

I agree.

[stalkerforlife]

He's a top 5 player of all time.

I'd say 5 or so.

Stat junkies have ruined the MVP award, though.

[Smoke117]

Uh...zero. He only got one in 08 because of pity and career stats. He legit never actually earned one. He literally stole the MVP from Chris Paul...which maybe is really why all these kobe stan twats hate on him so much...because anyone who knows basketball knows CP3 should have been MVP in 2008...so they have to bring down the down the man now in some attempt to raise up Kobe...yes it's pathetic. When were Kobe stans ever not pathetic though? Exactly.

[Nick Young]

atleast 7.

[Nick Young]

Uh...zero. He only got one in 08 because of pity and career stats. He legit never actually earned one. He literally stole the MVP from Chris Paul...which maybe is really why all these kobe stan twats hate on him so much...because anyone who knows basketball knows CP3 should have been MVP in 2008...so they have to bring down the down the man now in some attempt to raise up Kobe...yes it's pathetic. When were Kobe stans ever not pathetic though? Exactly.
Is Chris Paul the same choke artist who lost by 60 at home in the playoffs to the Carmelo Nuggets?

You really want that choke artist having an MVP award?:confusedshrug:

[Smoke117]

Is Chris Paul the same choke artist who lost by 60 at home in the playoffs to the Carmelo Nuggets?

You really want that choke artist having an MVP award?:confusedshrug:


http://static.stereogum.com/uploads/2011/10/topgunbaby9.gif

Like I would even give a moron like you a legit response...step off. Stick with the retards, son. You want to discuss basketball with me...make a username and never tell me who you were before, child.

[TheBigVeto]

Big fat 0

[Nick Young]

http://static.stereogum.com/uploads/2011/10/topgunbaby9.gif

Like I would even give a moron like you a legit response...step off. Stick with the retards, son. You want to discuss basketball with me...make a username and never tell me who you were before, child.
Let me guess-you're a Rockets fan. Don't stop believin', boy :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Smoke117]

Let me guess-you're a Rockets fan. Don't stop believin', boy :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

http://ak-hdl.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/webdr06/2013/9/12/9/anigif_enhanced-buzz-24694-1378991155-16.gif

Heat actually playboy...you know with the guy who has shit on Kobe for their entire careers...Dwyane Wade.

[Magic 32]

Lebron should have been the MVP in 2006. 31/7/7 on a 50 wins team.

You should have to win at least 60+ games in the East to get MVP considerations.

Another reason why Iverson did not deserve his MVP. He was the only player in the east to win the MVP with less than 60 wins in the post-Jordan era.


50+ if you play in the west
60+ if you play in the east

Minimum requirement.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

2 for sure but I could see an argument for 4 total

[West-Side]

3 MVPs (06-08)

2005-06: 35.4 ppg, the highest ppg for a season during the last 25 years. Steve Nash was better? Hell no. Kobe averaged 37 ppg in the Laker wins, literally carrying a team on his back.

2006-07: 32-6-5 season average, 10 50-point games which is the most 50 point games in a single season since Wilt Chamberlain. Kobe averaged 38 ppg after the all-star break, again carrying a team on your back. Dirk was the better player that year? No way.

2007-08: Won the award.

I find it funny how people will quickly point out that Chris Paul "deserved" it over Kobe in 08'; yet Kobe was clearly the better player and actual won a title, when Paul can't even sniff a finals berth.

But pretend like Steve Nash deserved it over Kobe in 06' and 07'.
Why? Because his team was better?

Kobe carried a bunch of losers on his back those years...literally once they left Kobe their careers ended.

Think about it; Smush Parker, Luke Walton, Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm.
Where the **** are these guys? Did anyone even hear their names since 09'??

Vlad Radmanovic? **** I can't even remember the other players on those teams besides Lamar who was inconsistent as hell.

[Mr Feeny]

Uh...zero. He only got one in 08 because of pity and career stats. He legit never actually earned one. He literally stole the MVP from Chris Paul...which maybe is really why all these kobe stan twats hate on him so much...because anyone who knows basketball knows CP3 should have been MVP in 2008...so they have to bring down the down the man now in some attempt to raise up Kobe...yes it's pathetic. When were Kobe stans ever not pathetic though? Exactly.

Agree with this actually. Surprisingly enough, given how long Kobe played at a top level throughout his career, it's definitely arguable that there isn't a single season in which he deserved MVP.

[West-Side]

Agree with this actually. Surprisingly enough, given how long Kobe played at a top level throughout his career, it's definitely arguable that there isn't a single season in which he deserved MVP.

Kobe was far and away the best player in the league in 2006 and 2007. He should have won the MVP at least one of those years.

In 2009; he led his team to 65 wins. The playoff teams in the west (besides LA) had on average 52 wins that year. LeBron won 66 games for Cleveland; the 8th seed in the east won 39 games that year. On average, playoff teams in the east had 46 wins.

LeBron couldn't even make the finals that year; yet Kobe took out Orlando in 5 games.

He could have EASILY won the MVP that year too, but of course the NBA will keep sucking off LeBron James.

In 2009; Kobe wins his 2nd straight title and again LeBron is no where to be seen. Instead, Kobe beat the team LeBron couldn't, yet again.

LA won 57 games that year, Cleveland won 61.
In the west; the 8th seed had 50 wins. In fact all playoff teams had 50+ wins in the west.

In the east? Where LeBron plays?
The 8th seed won 41 games and only 3 other teams won 50+ games besides Cleveland.

Kobe had to go through all that just to reach the finals; LeBron couldn't even reach the finals.

Kobe certainly put up numbers those two years worthy of the MVP.
The man should have at least 2 MVP's and could have had as many as 5 if people actually evaluated the context better; instead of "Oh look LeBron's numbers look so pretty, and he won more games; lets just continue tossing him MVP awards." :rolleyes:

Than you have to remember, Kobe wasting 7/8 years playing behind Shaquille; so obviously him not leading his own team and playing next to the most dominant player in the league, he didn't have a great shot at the MVP those years either.

[Hey Yo]

Than you have to remember, Kobe wasting 7/8 years playing behind Shaquille; so obviously him not leading his own team and playing next to the most dominant player in the league, he didn't have a great shot at the MVP those years either.
But that's what Kobe wanted. He didn't want to build his own team in the East. He wanted to play with Shaq and the 2nd most successful franchise in league history.

He could have signed elsewhere after his rookie contract was up and have his own team but instead wanted to ride the coattails of the most dominant player in the league and coach to championships

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

About 2.

I would have given him the MVP in 2006 and 2008.

My argument for 2006 would be his stats, impact, and the fact LA with Smush Parker and Kwame Brown made the playoffs in the West.

[ShawkFactory]

Kobe was far and away the best player in the league in 2006 and 2007. He should have won the MVP at least one of those years.

In 2009; he led his team to 65 wins. The playoff teams in the west (besides LA) had on average 52 wins that year. LeBron won 66 games for Cleveland; the 8th seed in the east won 39 games that year. On average, playoff teams in the east had 46 wins.

LeBron couldn't even make the finals that year; yet Kobe took out Orlando in 5 games.

He could have EASILY won the MVP that year too, but of course the NBA will keep sucking off LeBron James.

In 2009; Kobe wins his 2nd straight title and again LeBron is no where to be seen. Instead, Kobe beat the team LeBron couldn't, yet again.

LA won 57 games that year, Cleveland won 61.
In the west; the 8th seed had 50 wins. In fact all playoff teams had 50+ wins in the west.

In the east? Where LeBron plays?
The 8th seed won 41 games and only 3 other teams won 50+ games besides Cleveland.

Kobe had to go through all that just to reach the finals; LeBron couldn't even reach the finals.

Kobe certainly put up numbers those two years worthy of the MVP.
The man should have at least 2 MVP's and could have had as many as 5 if people actually evaluated the context better; instead of "Oh look LeBron's numbers look so pretty, and he won more games; lets just continue tossing him MVP awards." :rolleyes:

Than you have to remember, Kobe wasting 7/8 years playing behind Shaquille; so obviously him not leading his own team and playing next to the most dominant player in the league, he didn't have a great shot at the MVP those years either.
I disagree on Lebron vs Kobe in those years. I won't get too much into because whats the point but I was a fan of both players and I saw a definite shift in power in the 09-10 season...like right in front of everyone's face. Bron, along with his numbers, started besting Kobe in their head-to-head matchups, which is an important factor to me. One of the main reasons I still don't have Durant definitively ahead of Lebron.

LA still won...they had the best overall squad in the league. Bron was the best player in the NBA in 2010 though.

[West-Side]

I disagree on Lebron vs Kobe in those years. I won't get too much into because whats the point but I was a fan of both players and I saw a definite shift in power in the 09-10 season...like right in front of everyone's face. Bron, along with his numbers, started besting Kobe in their head-to-head matchups, which is an important factor to me. One of the main reasons I still don't have Durant definitively ahead of Lebron.

LA still won...they had the best overall squad in the league. Bron was the best player in the NBA in 2010 though.

I'm just saying Kobe won 65 & 57 games for his team; won titles; had great all around numbers and made it out of the west (beating 10 50+ win teams in the process), to make it to the NBA finals and win both times.

Both years; LeBron received the award over Kobe.
Kobe was most definitely a strong MVP candidate and if you carefully consider the context of those two years; you can easily give him the MVP.

In 06' on sheer dominance alone and the fact that he made the playoffs with a historically terrible squad should have been enough for him to dethrone Nash; especially after nearly eliminating his squad in the playoffs. The man scored 50 points and his shitty ass teammates still couldn't finish off game 6 by simply grabbing a defensive rebound. :facepalm

2006, 2008, 2009, 2010; he could have easily won the MVP award. He was easily better than Dirk in 2007; but because Dallas won like 25 more games that year, I can understand Dirk winning it. That's the same year Kobe outscored Dallas through 3 quarters (62-61).

From 2001 to 2004; if he never played with Shaquille, he had the skill set to maybe win one MVP award if he had the right team around him.

Fact is; both Kobe & Shaq should have won more MVPs in their careers.

[JT123]

Kobe has never been the league's most valuable player.

[ClipperRevival]

I'm just saying Kobe won 65 & 57 games for his team; won titles; had great all around numbers and made it out of the west (beating 10 50+ win teams in the process), to make it to the NBA finals and win both times.

Both years; LeBron received the award over Kobe.
Kobe was most definitely a strong MVP candidate and if you carefully consider the context of those two years; you can easily give him the MVP.

In 06' on sheer dominance alone and the fact that he made the playoffs with a historically terrible squad should have been enough for him to dethrone Nash; especially after nearly eliminating his squad in the playoffs. The man scored 50 points and his shitty ass teammates still couldn't finish off game 6 by simply grabbing a defensive rebound. :facepalm

2006, 2008, 2009, 2010; he could have easily won the MVP award. He was easily better than Dirk in 2007; but because Dallas won like 25 more games that year, I can understand Dirk winning it. That's the same year Kobe outscored Dallas through 3 quarters (62-61).

From 2001 to 2004; if he never played with Shaquille, he had the skill set to maybe win one MVP award if he had the right team around him.

Fact is; both Kobe & Shaq should have won more MVPs in their careers.

Kobe has little case for 2009 and 2010. His PER was much lower than Bron's (historically great in both years) and yes, that does matter. Bron did more with less. By 2010, Kobe was clearly past his prime and declined noticeably from 2009 even though the numbers don't point to it. He lost a half step of quickness.

I can see 2006 because, like you said, he was so historically dominant in scoring and did carry a scrub team to the playoffs but that's it.

[West-Side]

Kobe has little case for 2009 and 2010. His PER was much lower than Bron's (historically great in both years) and yes, that does matter. Bron did more with less. By 2010, Kobe was clearly past his prime and declined noticeably from 2009 even though the numbers don't point to it. He lost a half step of quickness.

I can see 2006 because, like you said, he was so historically dominant in scoring and did carry a scrub team to the playoffs but that's it.

I don't know; I think Kobe's 2009 season overall was just more impressive.
He helped LA to 65 wins in a MUCH tougher conference (1 less than LeBron); beat 50+ win teams to make the finals and beats Orlando in 5 (a team that knocked out Cleveland).

He shot like 47% that year too and had great all around numbers. Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki were clearly not better in 06' or 07', yet they won over him because of team success. Why can't the same apply to what Kobe did with the Lakers in 2009??

[West-Side]

Kobe has little case for 2009 and 2010. His PER was much lower than Bron's (historically great in both years) and yes, that does matter. Bron did more with less. By 2010, Kobe was clearly past his prime and declined noticeably from 2009 even though the numbers don't point to it. He lost a half step of quickness.

I can see 2006 because, like you said, he was so historically dominant in scoring and did carry a scrub team to the playoffs but that's it.

Iverson's PER was far less than Shaq's in 2001, what's your excuse there?
Kobe's PER was 26.8 in 2009; LeBron's was 31.1.

Shaq's was 30 & Iverson's was 24.

I just find it amusing how much people like to discredit Kobe.
What did Kobe do in 2009 that Iverson never did in 2001?

- Win more games (65 wins vs 56 wins in the regular season)
- Beat out THREE 50+ win teams to reach the NBA finals
- Actually win a championship.

Yet no one really mentions how Iverson "deserves" his MVP award; yet Kobe doesn't because James had a better PER average? Even though Shaq did too the year Iverson won.

Not to mention how incredible Kobe was in the playoffs that year; just destroying teams in the 4th over and over again.

[ClipperRevival]

I don't know; I think Kobe's 2009 season overall was just more impressive.
He helped LA to 65 wins in a MUCH tougher conference (1 less than LeBron); beat 50+ win teams to make the finals and beats Orlando in 5 (a team that knocked out Cleveland).

He shot like 47% that year too and had great all around numbers. Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki were clearly not better in 06' or 07', yet they won over him because of team success. Why can't the same apply to what Kobe did with the Lakers in 2009??

I thought Kobe was absolutely fantastic in 2008-09, but Bron deserved it. Bron won about as much as Kobe with noticeably less talent and his numbers were superior across the board from ppg, apg, rgp, PER, etc.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_2009.html#mvp

[ClipperRevival]

Iverson's PER was far less than Shaq's in 2001, what's your excuse there?

Carrying a team with little talent to a lot of wins matters. It's not all about the numbers. It's a combo of things, you know that.

[West-Side]

Carrying a team with little talent to a lot of wins matters. It's not all about the numbers. It's a combo of things, you know that.

:rolleyes: Oh my god; can you and the rest of the ****ing world stop pretending that LeBron & Iverson were not in a perfect situation.

That's what infuriates me more than anything about some of you basketball fans. Iverson & LeBron had the green light to control the entire offense and rely on their teammates to hold it down defensively. Iverson had a terrific squad in 2001; even with Iverson's low effiency that year, they still won because of TEAM DEFENSE. Both Philly and Cleveland were always ranked high in team defense; which was perfect for ball dominant players like Iverson and LeBron. That's why their numbers look so great, go look at their usage ratings.

They had Motumbo, Snow, McKie; you know, great defensive players, right??

:roll: @ Kobe having a historically great team, who???

Pau Gasol who was 0-16 before joining Kobe in the playoffs?
Lamar Odom?? What did he really do in the NBA before and after he left LA??
Derek Fisher? Bynum who barely played??

He had talent around him that was enough to win a couple of titles but please stop acting like he had a Pippen/Kokuc/Grant/Rodman type talent. Odom & Gasol were talented players in this league that won titles BECAUSE of Kobe, not the other way around.

[ClipperRevival]

Iverson's PER was far less than Shaq's in 2001, what's your excuse there?
Kobe's PER was 26.8 in 2009; LeBron's was 31.1.

Shaq's was 30 & Iverson's was 24.

I just find it amusing how much people like to discredit Kobe.
What did Kobe do in 2009 that Iverson never did in 2001?

- Win more games (65 wins vs 56 wins in the regular season)
- Beat out THREE 50+ win teams to reach the NBA finals
- Actually win a championship.

Yet no one really mentions how Iverson "deserves" his MVP award; yet Kobe doesn't because James had a better PER average? Even though Shaq did too the year Iverson won.

Not to mention how incredible Kobe was in the playoffs that year; just destroying teams in the 4th over and over again.

You can't compare win totals for different seasons. That takes context out of the equation which is everything. Also, the MVP is a regular season award. The playoffs have nothing to do with it.

[ClipperRevival]

:rolleyes: Oh my god; can you and the rest of the ****ing world stop pretending that LeBron & Iverson were not in a perfect situation.

That's what infuriates me more than anything about some of you basketball fans. Iverson & LeBron had the green light to control the entire offense and rely on their teammates to hold it down defensively. Iverson had a terrific squad in 2001; even with Iverson's low effiency that year, they still won because of TEAM DEFENSE. Both Philly and Cleveland were always ranked high in team defense; which was perfect for ball dominant players like Iverson and LeBron. That's why their numbers look so great, go look at their usage ratings.

They had Motumbo, Snow, McKie; you know, great defensive players, right??

:roll: @ Kobe having a historically great team, who???

Pau Gasol who was 0-16 before joining Kobe in the playoffs?
Lamar Odom?? What did he really do in the NBA before and after he left LA??
Derek Fisher? Bynum who barely played??

He had talent around him that was enough to win a couple of titles but please stop acting like he had a Pippen/Kokuc/Grant/Rodman type talent. Odom & Gasol were talented players in this league that won titles BECAUSE of Kobe, not the other way around.

Show me where I said Kobe had a historically great team. And that 2001 76ers team did not have much talent. Of course it had SOME, but not much in comparison to other top tier teams.

[West-Side]

Show me where I said Kobe had a historically great team. And that 2001 76ers team did not have much talent. Of course it had SOME, but not much in comparison to other top tier teams.

Offensively? You are absolutely right which is why Iverson carried the load.
However, defensively they were very very good.

Kobe won 45 games with a far worse supporting cast in 2006; had a more impressive season in 2006 than Iverson's 2001. Yet he never received the award over STEVE NASH.

Now go compare the years Nash had in 2006 and Shaquille had in 2001.
I accepted the fact that Kobe only has 1 MVP; but when idiots start yapping about him not deserving it over Chris Paul, it gets annoying.

Nash, Paul never even reached the NBA finals once in their careers; Dirk was not better than Kobe in 2007. That's 3 years where Kobe would have been MVP if he had a decent team around him and wasn't injured; 2005, 2006 & 2007.

But unfortunately the circumstances prevented him from getting more than 1:

- Playing with Shaq till 2004
- Injured in 2005
- Had historically one of the worst supporting casts in 2006 & 2007
- In 2008, after Pau was acquired, he won his first.
- Could have won in 2009 & 2010 if it wasn't for the emergence of LeBron.

I still think the year LA beat Orlando; Kobe was the MVP and the best player in the world. I could care less what LeBron's numbers looked like.

[West-Side]

You can't compare win totals for different seasons. That takes context out of the equation which is everything. Also, the MVP is a regular season award. The playoffs have nothing to do with it.

Sure, since I believe the west in 2009 was far tougher than the east in 2001.

In 2009:
Nuggets - 54 wins
Blazers - 54 wins
Rockets - 53 wins
Spurs - 54 wins
Mavs - 50 wins
Hornets - 49 wins
Jazz - 48 wins


In 2001:
Heat - 50 wins
Bucks - 52 wins
Knicks - 48 wins

[ClipperRevival]

Offensively? You are absolutely right which is why Iverson carried the load.
However, defensively they were very very good.

Kobe won 45 games with a far worse supporting cast in 2006; had a more impressive season in 2006 than Iverson's 2001. Yet he never received the award over STEVE NASH.

Now go compare the years Nash had in 2006 and Shaquille had in 2001.
I accepted the fact that Kobe only has 1 MVP; but when idiots start yapping about him not deserving it over Chris Paul, it gets annoying.

Nash, Paul never even reached the NBA finals once in their careers; Dirk was not better than Kobe in 2007. That's 3 years where Kobe would have been MVP if he had a decent team around him and wasn't injured; 2005, 2006 & 2007.

But unfortunately the circumstances prevented him from getting more than 1:

- Playing with Shaq till 2004
- Injured in 2005
- Had historically one of the worst supporting casts in 2006 & 2007
- In 2008, after Pau was acquired, he won his first.
- Could have won in 2009 & 2010 if it wasn't for the emergence of LeBron.

I still think the year LA beat Orlando; Kobe was the MVP and the best player in the world. I could care less what LeBron's numbers looked like.

I already conceded that I have no problem with Kobe winning in 2006. And I also agree that I thought Kobe was still the best in the world in 2009. But I think Bron deserved it in 2009 and 2010. You don't and that's fine. Everyone has opinions.

[ShawkFactory]

Iverson's PER was far less than Shaq's in 2001, what's your excuse there?
Kobe's PER was 26.8 in 2009; LeBron's was 31.1.

Shaq's was 30 & Iverson's was 24.

I just find it amusing how much people like to discredit Kobe.
What did Kobe do in 2009 that Iverson never did in 2001?

- Win more games (65 wins vs 56 wins in the regular season)
- Beat out THREE 50+ win teams to reach the NBA finals
- Actually win a championship.

Yet no one really mentions how Iverson "deserves" his MVP award; yet Kobe doesn't because James had a better PER average? Even though Shaq did too the year Iverson won.

Not to mention how incredible Kobe was in the playoffs that year; just destroying teams in the 4th over and over again.
To be fair most people thought Shaq should have been MVP in 01. Also Dirknwas neck and neck with Kobe in 06. Kobe was more individually dominant but Dirk was huge again and again. I need to find his 4th quarter stats. Just daggers all season.

[Mr Feeny]

Kobe was far and away the best player in the league in 2006 and 2007. He should have won the MVP at least one of those years.

In 2009; he led his team to 65 wins. The playoff teams in the west (besides LA) had on average 52 wins that year. LeBron won 66 games for Cleveland; the 8th seed in the east won 39 games that year. On average, playoff teams in the east had 46 wins.

LeBron couldn't even make the finals that year; yet Kobe took out Orlando in 5 games.

He could have EASILY won the MVP that year too, but of course the NBA will keep sucking off LeBron James.

In 2009; Kobe wins his 2nd straight title and again LeBron is no where to be seen. Instead, Kobe beat the team LeBron couldn't, yet again.

LA won 57 games that year, Cleveland won 61.
In the west; the 8th seed had 50 wins. In fact all playoff teams had 50+ wins in the west.

In the east? Where LeBron plays?
The 8th seed won 41 games and only 3 other teams won 50+ games besides Cleveland.

Kobe had to go through all that just to reach the finals; LeBron couldn't even reach the finals.

Kobe certainly put up numbers those two years worthy of the MVP.
The man should have at least 2 MVP's and could have had as many as 5 if people actually evaluated the context better; instead of "Oh look LeBron's numbers look so pretty, and he won more games; lets just continue tossing him MVP awards." :rolleyes:

Than you have to remember, Kobe wasting 7/8 years playing behind Shaquille; so obviously him not leading his own team and playing next to the most dominant player in the league, he didn't have a great shot at the MVP those years either.

Why would a guy who leads his team to 42 wins win MVP. He's just not very valuable unfortunately. Steve Nash was heads and shoulders above your boy any way you spin it. Not many people agree with you unfortunately. The general consensus is that Steve Nash was the most valuable player both years.

[West-Side]

Why would a guy who leads his team to 42 wins win MVP. He's just not very valuable unfortunately. Steve Nash was heads and shoulders above your boy any way you spin it. Not many people agree with you unfortunately. The general consensus is that Steve Nash was the most valuable player both years.

That's why he could barely beat Kobe and his garbage teammates in the 1st round, right? Go watch that game six and tell me again who was better.

If it wasn't for the rebound and Thomas hitting a huge 3 at the end of the 4th; Kobe would have sent Nash and his far more talented teammates golfing.

[ClipperRevival]

Make take on the MVP is that the right guy wins 90% of the time. And the 10% who might've been gifted the MVP still played at a level that was right there with the guy who might've deserved it more. So I can't complain too much.

For instance, take this year. I thought Harden was the MVP. He did more with less and took his team to the 2nd seed in the WC. But Curry won it. And I have no problem with that. The fans who follow the game closely will know that Harden had an MVP caliber season.

[TheMarkMadsen]

03, 06, 07, 08, maybe 09

[West-Side]

Why would a guy who leads his team to 42 wins win MVP. He's just not very valuable unfortunately. Steve Nash was heads and shoulders above your boy any way you spin it. Not many people agree with you unfortunately. The general consensus is that Steve Nash was the most valuable player both years.

Well, I think if you take Nash away from Phoenix and you take Kobe away from LA that year; relatively speaking, LA would suffer far more.

Everyone knows Kobe was by far the best basketball player in 2006 & 2007.
Sometimes team records can be overlooked in determining who was the most valuable player to their team.

[mentallooser]

One

[RRR3]

03, 06, 07, 08, maybe 09
If Kobe gets 06, TMac gets 03. Be consistent.

[Rocketswin2013]

Kobe was far and away the best player in the league in 2006 and 2007. He should have won the MVP at least one of those years.

In 2009; he led his tm to 65 wins. The playoff teams in the west (besides LA) had on average 52 wins that year. LeBron won 66 games for Cleveland; the 8th seed in the east won 39 games that year. On average, playoff teams in the east had 46 wins.

LeBron couldn't even make the finals that year; yet Kobe took out Orlando in 5 games.

He could have EASILY won the MVP that year too, but of course the NBA will keep sucking off LeBron James.

In 2009; Kobe wins his 2nd straight title and again LeBron is no where to be seen. Instead, Kobe beat the team LeBron couldn't, yet again.

LA won 57 games that year, Cleveland won 61.
In the west; the 8th seed had 50 wins. In fact all playoff teams had 50+ wins in the west.

In the east? Where LeBron plays?
The 8th seed won 41 games and only 3 other teams won 50+ games besides Cleveland.

Kobe had to go through all that just to reach the finals; LeBron couldn't even reach the finals.

Kobe certainly put up numbers those two years worthy of the MVP.
The man should have at least 2 MVP's and could have had as many as 5 if people actually evaluated the context better; instead of "Oh look LeBron's numbers look so pretty, and he won more games; lets just continue tossing him MVP awards." :rolleyes:

Than you have to remember, Kobe wasting 7/8 years playing behind Shaquille; so obviously him not leading his own team and playing next to the most dominant player in the league, he didn't have a great shot at the MVP those years either.
Not even sure why you would bring up 2009. LeBron was so, so, clearly superior. Kobe had no case even in terms of fan/media, consensus. Jerry West was saying LeBron had a chance to be GOAT during that year. Even he said it wasn't close. LeBron was playing defense on the level of '00 Kobe/prime Pippen, with offensive production that is unheard of. LeBron was even better than Kobe in the playoffs.

Yes, even the playoffs. He led the playoffs in literally every advanced statistic except DWS. The guy was so dominant he swept the first two rounds with a 43.6 PER. 33-11-7 on 64 TS% with like 2 TOV. He was even better than Kobe against Orlando. He dropped 38-9-8 on .591 TS% with a moderate amount of TO's. He had a positive on/off in 4 of the 6 games against them. That means in 2 losses, the team was winning with him on the court, and they lost the lead by such a margin while he was on the bench, that they lost the games. He literally played well enough to win against Orlando. Even his clutch play was superior to Kobe's. Kobe was getting outplayed by Gasol in 4th quarters of the finals and had the benefit of an extremely hot Fisher and co.

I'm gonna stop there on '09 because of all the stat dropping I'm doing. People literally don't like facts, even with context) but I'm not making this stuff up. It's literally not even close that season.


'06? For some reason, people like to pretend Kobe was just by far better than everyone that season. LeBron was 2nd behind Nash in MVP voting. Clearly, he wasn't thought of as that. There's a legit chance Bryant never deserved an MVP.

In '07 Dirk deserved the MVP over Bryant.

I will say, '08 is one that didn't deserve, but he was so brilliant thoughout the WC playoffs, and he absolutely destroyed everything in sight. I actually don't mind it that much. Of course, he was suffocated by Boston but that was an extremely good defense that got away with a lot of physicality, and his teammates left their talent...somewhere else. Hard to blame him under those circumstances.

[West-Side]

Make take on the MVP is that the right guy wins 90% of the time. And the 10% who might've been gifted the MVP still played at a level that was right there with the guy who might've deserved it more. So I can't complain too much.

For instance, take this year. I thought Harden was the MVP. He did more with less and took his team to the 2nd seed in the WC. But Curry won it. And I have no problem with that. The fans who follow the game closely will know that Harden had an MVP caliber season.

Curry rightfully won it this year. His championship simply solidifies it.
His team also won an impressive 67 wins and he was extremely clutch throughout the season. Also I believe broke the single season record for most 3's made.

Harden is not Kobe Bryant or Shaquille O'Neal; those guys absolutely dominated the league in 2001, 2006 & 2007.

23.8 PPG, 7.7 APG, 2.0 SPG, 4.3 RPG, 49 FG%, 44% 3PT & 91 FT%
27.4 PPG, 7.0 APG, 1.9 SPG, 5.7 RPG, 44 FG%, 38% 3PT & 87 FT%

Or

35.4 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 4.5 APG, 45 FG%, 35 3PT%, 85 FT%, 1.8 SPG
18.8 PPG, 4.2 RPG, 10.8 APG, 51 FG%, 44 3PT%, 92 FT%, 0.8 SPG

Nash won 54 games (7 more than Kobe's team)
Curry won 67 games (11 more than Harden's team)

Uhm; Kobe nearly doubled the amount of points he scored that year.
Not to mention Harden had far better teammates than Kobe in those respective years.

Sorry, Kobe's case is far stronger. He was every-thing for that Laker team in 2006. Without him, they don't win 20 games. **** might not even win 10 games.

Mihm, Odom, Walton, Farmar & S.Parker with K.Brown off the bench. :facepalm

[Heavincent]

Uh...zero. He only got one in 08 because of pity and career stats. He legit never actually earned one. He literally stole the MVP from Chris Paul...which maybe is really why all these kobe stan twats hate on him so much...because anyone who knows basketball knows CP3 should have been MVP in 2008...so they have to bring down the down the man now in some attempt to raise up Kobe...yes it's pathetic. When were Kobe stans ever not pathetic though? Exactly.

:roll:

****ing idiot.

[ShawkFactory]

If Kobe gets 06, TMac gets 03. Be consistent.
Forreal. TMac in 03 was stupid.

[Real14]

More than Lebron. Can't get realer than what I just said.

[Real14]

Kobe has never been the league's most valuable player.

REPORTED FOR MENTAL RETARDATION.

[ClipperRevival]

Curry rightfully won it this year. His championship simply solidifies it.
His team also won an impressive 67 wins and he was extremely clutch throughout the season. Also I believe broke the single season record for most 3's made.

Harden is not Kobe Bryant or Shaquille O'Neal; those guys absolutely dominated the league in 2001, 2006 & 2007.

23.8 PPG, 7.7 APG, 2.0 SPG, 4.3 RPG, 49 FG%, 44% 3PT & 91 FT%
27.4 PPG, 7.0 APG, 1.9 SPG, 5.7 RPG, 44 FG%, 38% 3PT & 87 FT%

Or

35.4 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 4.5 APG, 45 FG%, 35 3PT%, 85 FT%, 1.8 SPG
18.8 PPG, 4.2 RPG, 10.8 APG, 51 FG%, 44 3PT%, 92 FT%, 0.8 SPG

Nash won 54 games (7 more than Kobe's team)
Curry won 67 games (11 more than Harden's team)

Uhm; Kobe nearly doubled the amount of points he scored that year.
Not to mention Harden had far better teammates than Kobe in those respective years.

Sorry, Kobe's case is far stronger. He was every-thing for that Laker team in 2006. Without him, they don't win 20 games. **** might not even win 10 games.

Mihm, Odom, Walton, Farmar & S.Parker with K.Brown off the bench. :facepalm

I had no idea you were such a dedicated Kobe fan. Like I said, I have no problem with him winning in 2006 so why do you keep making a case for 2006?

And Harden had key players miss a lot of time and he still took that depleted team to the 2nd seed. He had many dominant games where he literally carried that team. My vote would've went with him but again, I have no problem with Curry winning. Sometimes there isn't a clear cut winner in a given season and you have to live with the decision.

[Real14]

One
Still mad about 2000:oldlol:

[TheMarkMadsen]

If Kobe gets 06, TMac gets 03. Be consistent.

Kobe gets 06 because he had a historical year, and did things that nobody in the NBA's history had ever done..

and became the only player in NBA history (besides Wilt) to have record his 2nd month of averaging 40ppg, not to mention the historic 81 points, beating the WC champions by himself through 3 quarters

[RRR3]

Kobe gets 06 because he had a historical year, and did things that nobody in the NBA's history had ever done..

and became the only player in NBA history (besides Wilt) to have record his 2nd month of averaging 40ppg, not to mention the historic 81 points, beating the WC champions by himself through 3 quarters
Russell Westbrook had a historic season this year. He didn't win MVP either.
Kobe put up insane numbers in 06 but so did TMac in 03. And TMac played with even worse teammates. Yet Kobe gets 03 too. Ok.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Russell Westbrook had a historic season this year. He didn't win MVP either.
Kobe put up insane numbers in 06 but so did TMac in 03. And TMac played with even worse teammates. Yet Kobe gets 03 too. Ok.

:biggums: :facepalm

[Fallen Angel]

:biggums: :facepalm
http://www.okcthundernation.com/russell-westbrook-records-broken-so-far-2015/

[TheMarkMadsen]

and you might have a case for T Mac and T Mac might have had more of a case at the time if you know he played this thing called defense

wasn't even all defensive 2nd team that year

[RRR3]

:biggums: :facepalm
First of all he had a few insane months IIRC (same thing you used to argue for Kobe). He had 11 ****ing triple doubles! And he averaged 28/7/9+ which I think has only been done by Michael Jordan Oscar Robertson and LeBron James.

Don't get me wrong, Kobe>WB, but WB was nuts last year.

[RRR3]

and you might have a case for T Mac and T Mac might have had more of a case at the time if you know he played this thing called defense

wasn't even all defensive 2nd team that year
TMac didn't get gifted all defense teams sadly.

Everyone I've heard talk about 06 Kobe acknowledges defense was not his strongsuit that season.

[TheMarkMadsen]

TMac didn't get gifted all defense teams sadly.

Everyone I've heard talk about 06 Kobe acknowledges defense was not his strongsuit that season.

are you even trying anymore??

T Mac was never a consistent defender you morons sit here and say Kobe got all these defensive selections off "media hype" yet have no answer for why the most hyped media player of this generation in Lebron only made the all defensive team from 09-14.. or why similar hyped players like T Mac never made an all defensive team in his career..

Kobe was beast on defense in 03 had finished 3rd in DPOY voting in 02, the defenis is why his case is stronger than T Macs for that year

[RRR3]

No I am not trying particularly :lol
Especially since I didn't watch basketball much until the 2011 playoffs. I caught games when I could and followed TMac but I was into mlb and didn't have cable.

So I can't comment on how good Kobes defense was back then but Phil Jackson wrote in his book in 2004 that Kobe had ceased being a great defender in "recent years". Also T-Mac iirc wasn't a bad defender he was always known to be capable of good defense. Consider how much he had to shoulder offensively in 03, like Kobe in 06.

[TheMarkMadsen]

and of course WB deserved MVP mention this year i don't even know why you're bringing this up..

WB played 67 games and missed the playoffs yet finished higher in the MVP voting than 06 Kobe who played 80 games and made the playoffs.. :oldlol: :oldlol:

[RRR3]

Also now defense matters eh. But Kobe>Duncan in 03. I won't comment but I thought most agreed 03 was peak Duncan?

[TheMarkMadsen]

No I am not trying particularly :lol
Especially since I didn't watch basketball much until the 2011 playoffs. I caught games when I could and followed TMac but I was into mlb and didn't have cable.

So I can't comment on how good Kobes defense was back then but Phil Jackson wrote in his book in 2004 that Kobe had ceased being a great defender in "recent years". Also T-Mac iirc wasn't a bad defender he was always known to be capable of good defense. Consider how much he had to shoulder offensively in 03, like Kobe in 06.

the same book that PJ wrote about how difficult Kobe is to coach, and trashed him in..

or was it the book published 2 years later that discussed how he only came back to the NBA so he could coach Kobe again..

remind me because his "gotta sell some books" agenda switches up sometimes

[TheMarkMadsen]

Also now defense matters eh. But Kobe>Duncan in 03. I won't comment but I thought most agreed 03 was peak Duncan?

MVP is regular season award..

KG imo was better than Duncan in that regular season

Duncan's 03 is held so highly these days because of the playoffs but that was was incredibly overrated because they faced the Lakers after Kobe had just torn his labrum (same injury that ended his season this year) and Dirk got hurt mid way through the Spurs series and Dirk was fuccing killing the Spurs at the time

but yeah, nobody ever brings that up but we better put that * next to Curry since Conley was hurt aint that correct ISH

[RRR3]

the same book that PJ wrote about how difficult Kobe is to coach, and trashed him in..

or was it the book published 2 years later that discussed how he only came back to the NBA so he could coach Kobe again..

remind me because his "gotta sell some books" agenda switches up sometimes
Kobe is likely difficult to coach, based on what we know. However, he is also a transcendent talent who has proven he can almost single-handedly win games, which probably makes his difficulty more stomachable.

Like I said, I wish I had been able to watch the NBA during those years in retrospect, but I didn't. My point was that I didn't think it was logically consistent to have Kobe in 03 and also 06-09.

[RRR3]

MVP is regular season award..

KG imo was better than Duncan in that regular season

Duncan's 03 is held so highly these days because of the playoffs but that was was incredibly overrated because they faced the Lakers after Kobe had just torn his labrum (same injury that ended his season this year) and Dirk got hurt mid way through the Spurs series and Dirk was fuccing killing the Spurs at the time

but yeah, nobody ever brings that up but we better put that * next to Curry since Conley was hurt aint that correct ISH
Currys ring is legit. We just like trolling warriorfan :lol

[West-Side]

TMac didn't get gifted all defense teams sadly.

Everyone I've heard talk about 06 Kobe acknowledges defense was not his strongsuit that season.

I didn't think you guys can get more desperate.
He was gifted all 9 of them, right?

[RRR3]

I didn't think you guys can get more desperate.
He was gifted all 9 of them, right?
IDK I didn't follow closely enough for most of his career. He didn't deserve it in 2012 that's for sure.

[Wade's Rings]

I find it funny how people will quickly point out that Chris Paul "deserved" it over Kobe in 08'; yet Kobe was clearly the better player and actual won a title, when Paul can't even sniff a finals berth.

But pretend like Steve Nash deserved it over Kobe in 06' and 07'.
Why? Because his team was better?

Kobe carried a bunch of losers on his back those years...literally once they left Kobe their careers ended.

Think about it; Smush Parker, Luke Walton, Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm.
Where the **** are these guys? Did anyone even hear their names since 09'??

Vlad Radmanovic? **** I can't even remember the other players on those teams besides Lamar who was inconsistent as hell.

The Playoffs don't Decide the MVP.

[Heavincent]

Anybody who thinks Chris ****ing Paul deserved MVP over Kobe in 08 is a moron. Ban worthy tbh.

[RRR3]

Anybody who thinks Chris ****ing Paul deserved MVP over Kobe in 08 is a moron. Ban worthy tbh.
Chris Paul is the greatest player of all time.

[Wade's Rings]

I'm just saying Kobe won 65 & 57 games for his team; won titles; had great all around numbers and made it out of the west (beating 10 50+ win teams in the process), to make it to the NBA finals and win both times.

Both years; LeBron received the award over Kobe.
Kobe was most definitely a strong MVP candidate and if you carefully consider the context of those two years; you can easily give him the MVP.

In 06' on sheer dominance alone and the fact that he made the playoffs with a historically terrible squad should have been enough for him to dethrone Nash; especially after nearly eliminating his squad in the playoffs. The man scored 50 points and his shitty ass teammates still couldn't finish off game 6 by simply grabbing a defensive rebound. :facepalm

2006, 2008, 2009, 2010; he could have easily won the MVP award. He was easily better than Dirk in 2007; but because Dallas won like 25 more games that year, I can understand Dirk winning it. That's the same year Kobe outscored Dallas through 3 quarters (62-61).

From 2001 to 2004; if he never played with Shaquille, he had the skill set to maybe win one MVP award if he had the right team around him.

Fact is; both Kobe & Shaq should have won more MVPs in their careers.

That same logic could be applied to Wade and why he should've won it in 2009. His Squad was absolute garbage outside of him.

[RRR3]

That same logic could be applied to Wade and why he should've won it in 2009. His Squad was absolute garbage outside of him.
He had Chalmers.

[Wade's Rings]

He had Chalmers.

And Yakhouba Diawara :applause:

[Wade's Rings]

IDK I didn't follow closely enough for most of his career. He didn't deserve it in 2012 that's for sure.

He didn't Deserve 2009, 2010, or 2011 Over Wade either.

IDC about what Coaches, Former Players, Current Players say, but Phil Jackson did say Kobe stopped Playing Defense those years when he was lighting up the League.

[T_L_P]

MVP is regular season award..

KG imo was better than Duncan in that regular season

Duncan's 03 is held so highly these days because of the playoffs but that was was incredibly overrated because they faced the Lakers after Kobe had just torn his labrum (same injury that ended his season this year) and Dirk got hurt mid way through the Spurs series and Dirk was fuccing killing the Spurs at the time

None of this addresses Kobe's case for MVP in the 03 Regular Season (somehow you mentioned Garnett's Regular Season and Duncan's postseason).

Duncan averaged 23/13/4/3 on .564 TS% with elite defense.

Kobe averaged 30/7/6/2 on .550 TS% with good defense at best (see Jackson's comments the next season about Kobe's defense after the first ring).

PER, WS, WS/48, Box +/-, ORtg, RAPM all go to Duncan.

Duncan won 10 more games. Kobe was 5-10 before Shaq came back and then the Big Diesel averaged 28/11/3 (MVP-caliber numbers and then some).

Duncan was better individually, won more games, and he did it without another All-Star, let alone another MVP-caliber player who was arguably better than him (Shaq was in the Playoffs).

[ArbitraryWater]

Sure, since I believe the west in 2009 was far tougher than the east in 2001.

In 2009:
Nuggets - 54 wins
Blazers - 54 wins
Rockets - 53 wins
Spurs - 54 wins
Mavs - 50 wins
Hornets - 49 wins
Jazz - 48 wins


In 2001:
Heat - 50 wins
Bucks - 52 wins
Knicks - 48 wins

2009 West was mediocre...records skewed because of how weak the bottom half teams in the NBA were during that time. 2 elite teams with LAL/Nuggets.

[raprap]

Crazy that he's only got 1 and bron only has 4. :eek:

[TheMarkMadsen]

None of this addresses Kobe's case for MVP in the 03 Regular Season (somehow you mentioned Garnett's Regular Season and Duncan's postseason).

Duncan averaged 23/13/4/3 on .564 TS% with elite defense.

Kobe averaged 30/7/6/2 on .550 TS% with good defense at best (see Jackson's comments the next season about Kobe's defense after the first ring).

PER, WS, WS/48, Box +/-, ORtg, RAPM all go to Duncan.

Duncan won 10 more games. Kobe was 5-10 before Shaq came back and then the Big Diesel averaged 28/11/3 (MVP-caliber numbers and then some).

Duncan was better individually, won more games, and he did it without another All-Star, let alone another MVP-caliber player who was arguably better than him (Shaq was in the Playoffs).

I'll take the 7 extra points and 2 extra assist over the extra 6 rebounds & 2 blocks. The fact that Kobe matched Duncans efficiency as a guard is amazing honestly..

The Lakers outside of Kobe & Shaq in 03 were absolute trash, that was the most top heavy team in the league and the rest of the surrounding role players were garbage..

Samaki Walker and Madsen started for a combined 62 games..

I don't care about advanced stats, advanced stats through the first 3 rounds of last years playoffs had Lebron as like the 4th most impactful player on his team lol they are garbage


and really are you really bringing up Phil Jackson as some type of authority on this? I guess what he says is final..?

So you agree with him that the 99 Spurs deserve an asterik.. or do you just pick and choose what you want from him..

Kobe was 3rd in DPOY voting in 02.. Phil Jackson just says shit to sell books, dude trashed Kobe in the original book then wrote another book like 2 years later where he was all on his sack talking about he wouldn't come back to the NBA to coach any player but Kobe..

[TheMarkMadsen]

And speaking of Duncan's MVP, Jason Kidd was straight up robbed in 2002..

and if you watched during that season most people would agree, but i'm sure you're about to go to basketball reference and think I'm insane after you look at his stats..

Kidd barely missed being MVP and honestly would have been MVP if not for the fact that he beat his wife earlier in the year and the NBA couldn't have an MVP that just got off beating his wife

real talk

[ArbitraryWater]

Kobe's best case after 2008 is 2003.

ShaqAttack said it himself, according to the traditional criteria, Dirk is easily the most logistical choice in 2006, with 27/9/3 on a 60-win team and league leading in advanced stats as WS's.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Kobe's best case after 2008 is 2003.

ShaqAttack said it himself, according to the traditional criteria, Dirk is easily the most logistical choice in 2006, with 27/9/3 on a 60-win team and league leading in advanced stats as WS's.

WS's is another joke stat

2015 cavs PO WS/48

Bran = .173

TT = 167

Irving = .209

lmao if anybody really thinks TT was close to being as impactful as Lebron or that Kyrie was the most impactful player on the team when he played

[ArbitraryWater]

WS's is another joke stat

2015 cavs PO WS/48

Bran = .173

TT = 167

Irving = .209

lmao if anybody really thinks TT was close to being as impactful as Lebron or that Kyrie was the most impactful player on the team when he played

okay, might be, dont need it.

[ArbitraryWater]

Madsen is my bro.. we friends again.. dividing ISH, can talk Bron/Kobe without getting mad at each other.

[Cold soul]

The other years you can argue Kobe was MVP are 03, 06, 07 and maybe 09 but Wade was better that season considering it was his peak. Kobe should had another MVP reward maybe two at most so career wise 2-3 total sounds about right.

[Cold soul]

03, 06, 07, 08, maybe 09

Pretty much same years I listed. 09 is tough with what Lebron and Wade did that season they were flat out dominate their play was amazing.

[Cold soul]

Crazy that he's only got 1 and bron only has 4. :eek:

And both Shaq and Hakeem only have 1 each what does that say about MVP reward. :oldlol:

[Young X]

You can't just look at how good Kobe was individually without factoring in the other competitors and the way the award has traditionally been given out in the past.

I love 2003 Kobe but the Lakers only won 50 games and were the 5th seed. You had Duncan averaging 23/13 on a 61 win, 1st seeded team. How did Kobe deserve it over him? Kobe arguably wasn't even the best player on his own team.

In '06 he had a ridiculous individual season but he was on a 7th seeded team. Same thing happened in '07. Tell me another time where the MVP was on a team seeded that low?

In '09 he was great, but Lebron clearly had a more dominant regular season and he also led his team to the 1st seed (only 1 less win than the Lakers). Looking at it objectively, Lebron definitely deserved it more, he had one of the best regular seasons in league history and his team was just as sucessfull.

2008 is the only year he deserved it. Nobody separated themselves from him individually and he led his team to the 1st seed.

[Wade's Rings]

You can't just look at how good Kobe was individually without factoring in the other competitors and the way the award has traditionally been given out in the past.

I love 2003 Kobe but the Lakers only won 50 games and were the 5th seed. You had Duncan averaging 23/13 on a 61 win, 1st seeded team. How did Kobe deserve it over him? Kobe arguably wasn't even the best player on his own team.

In '06 he had a ridiculous individual season but he was on a 7th seeded team. Same thing happened in '07. Tell me another time where the MVP was on a team seeded that low?

In '09 he was great, but Lebron clearly had a more dominant regular season and he also led his team to the 1st seed (only 1 less win than the Lakers). Looking at it objectively, Lebron definitely deserved it more, he had one of the best regular seasons in league history and his team was just as sucessfull.

2008 is the only year he deserved it. Nobody separated themselves from him individually and he led his team to the 1st seed.

Lakers won 65 Games that Year and the Cavs won 66.

[ArbitraryWater]

You can't just look at how good Kobe was individually without factoring in the other competitors and the way the award has traditionally been given out in the past.

I love 2003 Kobe but the Lakers only won 50 games and were the 5th seed. You had Duncan averaging 23/13 on a 61 win, 1st seeded team. How did Kobe deserve it over him? Kobe arguably wasn't even the best player on his own team.

In '06 he had a ridiculous individual season but he was on a 7th seeded team. Same thing happened in '07. Tell me another time where the MVP was on a team seeded that low?

In '09 he was great, but Lebron clearly had a more dominant regular season and he also led his team to the 1st seed (only 1 less win than the Lakers). Looking at it objectively, Lebron definitely deserved it more, he had one of the best regular seasons in league history and his team was just as sucessfull.

2008 is the only year he deserved it. Nobody separated themselves from him individually and he led his team to the 1st seed.

actually 1 MORE win than the Lakers.

Yeah, Dirk is a pretty obvious choice in 2006, 2007, while Bron in 2009.

Like I said, Kobe's next (and IMO only real shot) best shot would be 2003.

[tpols]

And speaking of Duncan's MVP, Jason Kidd was straight up robbed in 2002..

and if you watched during that season most people would agree, but i'm sure you're about to go to basketball reference and think I'm insane after you look at his stats..

Kidd barely missed being MVP and honestly would have been MVP if not for the fact that he beat his wife earlier in the year and the NBA couldn't have an MVP that just got off beating his wife

real talk

Yup.. Kidd dragged a team that was 23rd ranked defensive team before he got there to 1st!

It's honestly mind blowing the defensive and rebounding leadership by example he provided plus the vision to hit guys for oops/shots and get them pumped up to stay contstantly motivated (Kmart :bowdown: )

[TripleA]

Probably two or three if not for the rape case he probably would of had two or more. Stern instead of pushing Kobe as the face of the Nba instead pushed guys like Wade and Lebron who had no personal issues like Kidd or Kobe.

[Mr Feeny]

And both Shaq and Hakeem only have 1 each what does that say about MVP reward. :oldlol:

It says that James is truly a great, great, great star. Glad you've been educated:rockon:

[GoSpursGo1984]

Great post. It's really staggering how even respected posters like ShaqAttack can sometimes drink the "Offense is Everything" Kool Aid without even realizing it. And lets be real here, every top tier perimeter player's numbers spiked big time from 06-08, thanks to the league trying to generate fan interest, thanks the low scoring, low IQ style of play that was dooming the League.

Kobe lead the Lakers to a better record and besides Pau had a bunch of role players on his team. I mean Pau was 10th that year in mintues played for the Lakers he deserved that MVP.

[Mr Feeny]

Kobe lead the Lakers to a better record and besides Pau had a bunch of role players on his team. I mean Pau was 10th that year in mintues played for the Lakers he deserved that MVP.

He also had a better team, though. Overall, I think most people think Chris Paul deserved that mvp.

[ArbitraryWater]

And both Shaq and Hakeem only have 1 each what does that say about MVP reward. :oldlol:


'context' must be a msytery to you... guess why Hakeem only has one? He played amongside Jordan and Robinson took one from him, a guy who's perhaps one of the 5 best regular season performers ever.

Like Shaq, they both had ONE season however in which many fans agree they had a perhaps even better argument than the guy who won it, 1993 and 2001. You happy with that?

As for Barkley, he too could/should have won in 1990. Just a loaded era with many good representatives. Shaq was flat out robbed in '01.

[Lebron23]

Shaq could have been a 4x NBA MVP (1995, 2000,2001 and 2005)

[Wade's Rings]

He also had a better team, though. Overall, I think most people think Chris Paul deserved that mvp.

Using that logic why didn't Wade deserve the 2009 MVP? His Team was far worse than Lebron's. :coleman:

[TheMarkMadsen]

'context' must be a msytery to you... guess why Hakeem only has one? He played amongside Jordan and Robinson took one from him, a guy who's perhaps one of the 5 best regular season performers ever.

Like Shaq, they both had ONE season however in which many fans agree they had a perhaps even better argument than the guy who won it, 1993 and 2001. You happy with that?

As for Barkley, he too could/should have won in 1990. Just a loaded era with many good representatives. Shaq was flat out robbed in '01.

no he really wasn't..

you don't get the MVP when there is somebody else on your team averaging the same amount of points..

and that was actually a huge reason he didn't win at the time.

Shaq: 28.7ppg

Kobe: 28.5ppg

there was absolutly no way he was getting the award over Iverson or Duncan when he had Kobe beside him putting up the same amount of points

[Mr Feeny]

Using that logic why didn't Wade deserve the 2009 MVP? His Team was far worse than Lebron's. :coleman:Not saying Wade didn't deserve the 2009. I thought he had a good chance of winning it, too. The Cavs' record swung it Lebron's way, I think.

[GoSpursGo1984]

He also had a better team, though. Overall, I think most people think Chris Paul deserved that mvp.

Last time I checked it was Most Valuable not who has the worst team.

[L.A. Jazz]

2 is my answer.
08 and 09.

06/07 the teamrecord was too bad.

[And1AllDay]

When he had killer seasons his team wasn't winning games, and if you guys don't already know by know:

In recent history, you don't win MVP unless you are the #1 or #2 seed if the #1 seed is stacked. So you can only be so "valuable" when your team is missing the playoffs or nabbing the 8th seed.