Career MVP shares

[tpols]

Does this give a good all time list?

MJ 8.1
KAJ 6.2
Bird 5.7
Lebron 5.4
Magic 5.2
Russell 4.8
Shaq 4.4
Karl Malone 4.3
Wilt 4.3
Duncan 4.3
Kobe 4.2
David Robinson 3.1
Moses 2.9
KG 2.7
Bob Petit 2.6
Hakeem 2.6
Big O 2.4
Barkley 2.4
Nash 2.4
West 2.0
Durant 2.0
Dirk 1.9
Baylor 1.7
Iverson 1.5
McaDoo 1.5

Aside from Karl Malone and Nash, looks like a decent list. Karl is the only player in the top 17 without any rings though.. so his regular season success doesnt match his postseason. Nash of course won two flukish ones and didnt really compete on a regular basis.

Everyone seems to be grouped right where they usually are.. also the biggest gap occurs between the top 10-11 players of all time.. theres a clear 1.0 schism there between them and the next group

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

No dumb idea this underrates the playoff monsters like Shaq, Hakeem and Dirk

[Young X]

MJ got robbed for like 3 MVP's and he's still #1 by far...

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

MJ got robbed for like 3 MVP's and he's still #1 by far...
93 shouldve been Hakeems and MJ robbed Karl Malone in 98

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

How are "MVP shares" calculated, exactly? Not familiar with this stat.

[tpols]

No dumb idea this underrates the playoff monsters like Shaq, Hakeem and Dirk
Hakeem and Dirk I agree.. because they made their names with one or two playoff runs.. but Shaq is ranked 7.. right where he normally is.

[plowking]

93 shouldve been Hakeems and MJ robbed Karl Malone in 98

Malone robbed Jordan in 97, so it works out.

[tpols]

How are "MVP shares" calculated, exactly? Not familiar with this stat.
You get 0 to 1 MVP shares per season. The more dominant your season the closer the percentage is to 1. So if you have 4 super unanimous MVPs you should have close to 4 MVP shares.. if its close race you might have 2 or 3 or something. Thats what Im getting from it.

Basically the better you finish each year the better your 'share' is.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Hakeem and Dirk I agree.. because they made their names with one or two playoff runs.. but Shaq is ranked 7.. right where he normally is.
Shaq is top 5 dead or alive lettuce be real..............

[MichaelCorleone]

KAJ fluke.

Apart from that, good list.

[SamuraiSWISH]

93 shouldve been Hakeems and MJ robbed Karl Malone in 98
Um, no.

MJ most definitely got robbed in '89, '90, '93, and '97. Shaq was the most statistically impactful player in 1998 but missed too many games, and underperformed with a really stacked roster.

Jordan led the Bulls under more difficult circumstances missing his 2nd best player for half the season. I think that's why his '98 MVP was deserved.

[tpols]

Um, no.

MJ most definitely got robbed in '89, '90, '93, and '97. Shaq was the most statistically impactful player in 1998 but missed too many games, and underperformed with a really stacked roster.

Jordan led the Bulls under more difficult circumstances missing his 2nd best player for half the season. I think that's why his '98 MVP was deserved.

MJ had .70, .62, .57, and .83 in those 4 seasons. So its not like he got no credit.


Hell, MJ got a larger MVP share in 97 when he lost than he did in 88 when he won.

[Milbuck]

KAJ fluke.

Apart from that, good list.
You've tried that 'Kareem sucks' joke countless times in different ways, it's just not landing buddy. Try something new.

[MavsSuperFan]

Overall a decent measure.

I think Career MVP shares comes closest to ranking the players all time of any single statistical measure.

Regular season monsters like Karl Malone are overrated by this measure, and guys who raise their level of play during the playoffs are underrated.

Also the problem of nash, who didnt deserve his to MVPs. Also the Nash mvps were in relatively weak years. So weak era players are also given a boost.

[Lord Bean]

MJ :bowdown: :bowdown:

[tpols]

Overall a decent measure.

I think Career MVP shares comes closest to ranking the players all time of any single statistical measure.

Regular season monsters like Karl Malone are overrated by this measure, and guys who raise their level of play during the playoffs are underrated.

Also the problem of nash, who didnt deserve his to MVPs. Also the Nash mvps were in relatively weak years. So weak era players are also given a boost.

I was thinking about what it would look like if I added a 1 for every title won as a top 5 elite player in the league. ie MJ would have 6 + 8.1, Karl would still have what he has now, so him and Nash would fall a bunch.. Hakeem would move into top 10 and so forth

[MavsSuperFan]

I was thinking about what it would look like if I added a 1 for every title won as a top 5 elite player in the league. ie MJ would have 6 + 8.1, Karl would still have what he has now, so him and Nash would fall a bunch.. Hakeem would move into top 10 and so forth
Rings are kind of a team accomplishment though.

Maybe a full point is too much.

[tpols]

Rings are kind of a team accomplishment though.

Maybe a full point is too much.

Yea it would definitely have to be weighted in the same way MVP shares are.. ie Dirk might get a .95 for his 2011, Kobe might get a .7 for 2001, Bran might get a .85 or so for 2012 etc

[TheCorporation]

No dumb idea this underrates the playoff monsters like Shaq, Hakeem and Dirk

As in 9 first round exit playoff monster Hakeem?

:biggums:

[TheCorporation]

I was thinking about what it would look like if I added a 1 for every title won as a top 5 elite player in the league. ie MJ would have 6 + 8.1, Karl would still have what he has now, so him and Nash would fall a bunch.. Hakeem would move into top 10 and so forth

That's actually not a bad idea, just don't let Hollinger get ahold of this! He will create a formula of some sort and call it MPCRS (MVP Plus Championships Ranking System)

Shit too late...Here we have it folks, MPCRS :bowdown:

[tpols]

That's actually not a bad idea, just don't let Hollinger get ahold of this! He will create a formula of some sort and call it MPCRS (MVP Plus Championships Ranking System)

Shit too late...Here we have it folks, MPCRS :bowdown:

:oldlol:

[secund2nun]

All of these stats completely underrate defense. Look at how low Hakeem is that's a joke. PER also basically ignores defense as well.

[tpols]

All of these stats completely underrate defense. Look at how low Hakeem is that's a joke. PER also basically ignores defense as well.

Not at all.. Look at Bill Russell.. thats mostly for his defensive impact. He was voted more valuable over Oscar and Wilt many years because of his defensive and overall leadership.. and they of course were the ones with the gaudy offensive numbers.


Hakeem just wasnt getting as many MVP votes as other players at the time he was playing in his career. And if we were making cases just on regular seasons I dont think people would be shocked at Hakeem being 15th or so. His two playoff rings massively boosted his legacy and this is using a regular season metric so it has him depicted quite accurately for what it is measuring.

[TheCorporation]

:oldlol:

Although I might say something like 1 point for Finals MVP and .5 for a ring, but you get my drift.

Man, we need to build MPCRS!

[MichaelCorleone]

That's actually not a bad idea, just don't let Hollinger get ahold of this! He will create a formula of some sort and call it MPCRS (MVP Plus Championships Ranking System)

Shit too late...Here we have it folks, MPCRS :bowdown:
Nice stats. Lebron and MJ would dominate the ranking.

[Psileas]

MJ 8.1
KAJ 6.2
Bird 5.7
Lebron 5.4
Magic 5.2
Russell 4.8
Shaq 4.4
Karl Malone 4.3
Wilt 4.3
Duncan 4.3
Kobe 4.2
David Robinson 3.1
Moses 2.9
KG 2.7
Bob Petit 2.6
Hakeem 2.6
Big O 2.4
Barkley 2.4
Nash 2.4
West 2.0
Durant 2.0
Dirk 1.9
Baylor 1.7
Iverson 1.5
McaDoo 1.5

Bolded players are either too high or too low. Not an accurate list at all. Completely different rules of voting among eras make it so:

-Once, only players voted. Nowadays, no player votes. Different things were valued.
-Old voters were at times heavily biased in favor of certain players they liked and against others. So, it was almost impossible for someone to get an MVP share anywhere near as high as now, regardless of how dominant a season he had. Now, it's almost a no-brainer that a strong MVP candidate a la LeBron will get a top-5 vote by everyone. Not so back then. Someone like 2012 LeBron might only have had a .700 MVP share and you might see names like Westbrook get votes for #1.
-Some seasons, each voter could only cast 1 vote, not 5. Hence, much lower MVP shares for virtually every real MVP candidate.

[Psileas]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_1962.html#mvp

Wilt's and Oscar's mythical statistical seasons in '62 failed to even crack 0.400 shares.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_1977.html#mvp]

Prime, if not peak, Kareem with only a .644 share. Champion Walton (top-2 player) at 0.117...

Compare to this:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_2012.html#mvp

Durant gets only 20% of MVP votes and still has a 0.735 share. In 1977, this would have given him only 0.198 shares.

[ArbitraryWater]

Does this give a good all time list?

MJ 8.1
KAJ 6.2
Bird 5.7
Lebron 5.4
Magic 5.2
Russell 4.8
Shaq 4.4
Karl Malone 4.3
Wilt 4.3
Duncan 4.3
Kobe 4.2
David Robinson 3.1
Moses 2.9
KG 2.7
Bob Petit 2.6
Hakeem 2.6
Big O 2.4
Barkley 2.4
Nash 2.4
West 2.0
Durant 2.0
Dirk 1.9
Baylor 1.7
Iverson 1.5
McaDoo 1.5

Aside from Karl Malone and Nash, looks like a decent list. Karl is the only player in the top 17 without any rings though.. so his regular season success doesnt match his postseason. Nash of course won two flukish ones and didnt really compete on a regular basis.

Everyone seems to be grouped right where they usually are.. also the biggest gap occurs between the top 10-11 players of all time.. theres a clear 1.0 schism there between them and the next group


See, Kobetards. On the regular MVP VOTES MAKE SENSE. Evidenced here.. Decent list, some tweaks here or there but overall we can see its accurate. no total flukes, bums or no names in there, outside of mcadoo all top 50 greats.

[ArbitraryWater]

Yea it would definitely have to be weighted in the same way MVP shares are.. ie Dirk might get a .95 for his 2011, Kobe might get a .7 for 2001, Bran might get a .85 or so for 2012 etc

.85? Both ESPN Articles listed it as 2nd Greatest Run Ever (Jordan 91 1st)

Give it a .95 too

[DMAVS41]

Does this give a good all time list?

MJ 8.1
KAJ 6.2
Bird 5.7
Lebron 5.4
Magic 5.2
Russell 4.8
Shaq 4.4
Karl Malone 4.3
Wilt 4.3
Duncan 4.3
Kobe 4.2
David Robinson 3.1
Moses 2.9
KG 2.7
Bob Petit 2.6
Hakeem 2.6
Big O 2.4
Barkley 2.4
Nash 2.4
West 2.0
Durant 2.0
Dirk 1.9
Baylor 1.7
Iverson 1.5
McaDoo 1.5

Aside from Karl Malone and Nash, looks like a decent list. Karl is the only player in the top 17 without any rings though.. so his regular season success doesnt match his postseason. Nash of course won two flukish ones and didnt really compete on a regular basis.

Everyone seems to be grouped right where they usually are.. also the biggest gap occurs between the top 10-11 players of all time.. theres a clear 1.0 schism there between them and the next group

You forgot David Robinson...he's way too high. He's not a top 20 player of all time.

But yea, MVP award shares is pretty good for determining regular season stuff...or at least it should be factored in.

[MavsSuperFan]

All of these stats completely underrate defense. Look at how low Hakeem is that's a joke. PER also basically ignores defense as well.
MVP voters usually factor in defense

another problem is that 50% of the league in 1960 couldn't make the nba today. So winning MVPs in that era was easier, as it is easier to look good against lesser competition.

[riseagainst]

someone should do a MVP share type of things for playoffs.

OP's list is pretty good, but only goes for regular season. Something tells me if you included playoff mvp shares (if there is one), MJ would be way ahead of everyone else, probably double that of the 2nd place.

[WillC]

George Mikan would be top 10 easily if the MVP award existed back then.

[SamuraiSWISH]

George Mikan would be top 10 easily if the MVP award existed back then.
If Russell, and Wilt are in the conversation for top ten ... there is no excuse under the same criteria that the original basketball superstar, George Mikan isn't in it. His resume stands up with any of those old timers. Is it because he's white? Dat basketball reverse racism.

[WillC]

If Russell, and Wilt are in the conversation for top ten ... there is no excuse under the same criteria that the original basketball superstar, George Mikan isn't in it. His resume stands up with any of those old timers. Is it because he's white? Dat basketball reverse racism.

To some extent I agree with you that Mikan should be given the same (or similar) credit as Russell and Chamberlain.

However, there are at least two major problems when it comes to making claims that Mikan is in the top 10 greatest players ever:

- He played in an all-white league.

- He played pre-shot clock.

Then again, you can only beat the players put in front of you, and Mikan certainly did just that.

In many ways he combined the best of both Russell (i.e. winning) with the best of Chamberlain (i.e. statistical dominance over his peers). What more could we ask from him?

For me, it's ridiculous when I see him ranked around 25th to 30th in all-time lists. Either have him in the top 15 or so.... or don't bother ranking him at all.

[aj1987]

You forgot David Robinson...he's way too high. He's not a top 20 player of all time.

But yea, MVP award shares is pretty good for determining regular season stuff...or at least it should be factored in.
How is he not a top 20 player? Dude was a monster scorer and one of the GOAT defenders.


The list is definitely horrible though. AI, Nash, Bob McAdoo, and Baylor over Wade? Malone over Kobe?

[LeGOAT]

By the looks of it Lebron will be GOAT in a matter of time
http://i.imgur.com/bnbOjaN.jpg

[Duncan21formvp]

93 shouldve been Hakeems and MJ robbed Karl Malone in 98
Nope MJ still had the best record and led in scoring with his 2nd option out half the season. Hakeem was good in 1993 but lost to Seattle.