Why they give a FMVP award but not a Playoffs MVP award instead?

[nba_55]

All 4 rounds are important, why ignore the other rounds?

[Black and White]

This sounds like some excuse to award players that can't get it done. Let me guess, LeBron should have got the award in 2011??? Because the finals aren't the most important right?

[Black and White]

It should be given to someone on the team that won the championship if it were to happen.

In other words, the finals MVP

[J Shuttlesworth]

You're right. All four rounds count. THATS WHY WE HAVE FINALS MVP. It doesn't make sense to give it to someone who knocked out in the first/2nd/3rd round

[nba_55]

This sounds like some excuse to award players that can't get it done. Let me guess, LeBron should have got the award in 2011??? Because the finals aren't the most important right?

Cant we we have a discussion without bringing Lebron, Kobe, MJ or Durant?

All 4 rounds are important, if you lose one, you are out. Why does the award given ignore the other 3 rounds?

[nba_55]

You're right. All four rounds count. THATS WHY WE HAVE FINALS MVP. It doesn't make sense to give it to someone who knocked out in the first/2nd/3rd round

it should be given to a player on the team that wins the championship.
It s just like the FMVP, it s given to the player that wins the championship even if another player on the other team has better stats.

[Ramza]

In other words, the finals MVP
I lol'd :lol

[Black and White]

Cant we we have a discussion without bringing Lebron, Kobe, MJ or Durant?

All 4 rounds are important, if you lose one, you are out. Why does the award given ignore the other 3 rounds?

Because the award is designed for the team that wins the championship, and the best player on that squad (generally), do you really think there is much value in the award if you gave it to a player that lost???

[Black and White]

it should be given to a player on the team that wins the championship.
It s just like the FMVP, it s given to the player that wins the championship even if another player on the other team has better stats.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

So what you are saying is, is the heat won in 2011, LeBron would get it?

[Rocketswin2013]

Because the award is designed for the team that wins the championship, and the best player on that squad (generally), do you really think there is much value in the award if you gave it to a player that lost???
Are you too ****ing daft to see what he means you dumb piece of shit?


He's talking about a person on the title team that was great in all rounds and not just the finals.


Last year Danny Green would have won FMVP, though Parker was the best throughout. :facepalm

[T_L_P]

How different would the awards look though? Garnett may have won in '08, Duncan probably would have won '07, but other than that I can't think of any others.

[nba_55]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

So what you are saying is, is the heat won in 2011, LeBron would get it?

I dont know. I dont remember how Wade and Lebron played in the other 3 rounds. All I know is that last year, Green had a chance of winning the award and he was far from being the best player for the Spurs during the playoffs.

[Rocketswin2013]

How different would the awards look though? Garnett may have won in '08, Duncan probably would have won '07, but other than that I can't think of any others.
Parker last year. All those 80's teams.

[J Shuttlesworth]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

So what you are saying is, is the heat won in 2011, LeBron would get it?
I think what he's saying is that if Westbrook were to win FMVP, then Durant would get the PMVP

Actually, Westbrook might get both those awards if OKC were to win

[Black and White]

Are you too ****ing daft to see what he means you dumb piece of shit?


He's talking about a person on the title team that was great in all rounds and not just the finals.


Last year Danny Green would have won FMVP, though Parker was the best throughout. :facepalm

So why would you award a player that is great through 3 rounds and wasn't the best on the greatest stage?? It makes no sense.

[T_L_P]

Parker last year. All those 80's teams.

There's no way the team that loses should have the MVP.

So no, LeBron would have won it last year.

[Rocketswin2013]

Bird and Magic missed out on some IIRC

[Rocketswin2013]

There's no way the team that loses should have the MVP.

So no, LeBron would have won it last year.
TLP.........Hypothetically, IF THEY HAD WON.

[Black and White]

I dont know. I dont remember how Wade and Lebron played in the other 3 rounds. All I know is that last year, Green had a chance of winning the award and he was far from being the best player for the Spurs during the playoffs.

Its very rare that it happens, in most cases, the best player usually gets the FMVP. The Danny Green situation wasn't the norm, its just the way it happens sometimes.

[nba_55]

So why would you award a player that is great through 3 rounds and wasn't the best on the greatest stage?? It makes no sense.

Each stage is big. If you lose one, you are out.

[NumberSix]

Only 2 teams play all 4 rounds.

[T_L_P]

TLP.........Hypothetically, IF THEY HAD WON.

Oh, I see.

Yes, Parker would have won Playoffs MVP

[nba_55]

Its very rare that it happens, in most cases, the best player usually gets the FMVP. The Danny Green situation wasn't the norm, its just the way it happens sometimes.

What about KG 08?

Allen could have gotten the award while being the 3rd best player on the team.

[Black and White]

What about KG 08?

Allen could have gotten the award while being the 3rd best player on the team.

Yea that one too, but then you look at Dirk 11, LeBron 12, LeBron 13, Kobe 09/10, see what I mean?

[nba_55]

Only 2 teams play all 4 rounds.

Rocketswin said it well, I didnt express my idea well : ''He's talking about a person on the title team that was great in all rounds and not just the finals.''

[nba_55]

Yea that one too, but then you look at Dirk 11, LeBron 12, LeBron 13, Kobe 09/10, see what I mean?

Why not change it to playoffs MVP to avoid those kind of situations?

[Black and White]

Why explain to him. Might as well ignore.

**Looks at username** :facepalm

[Lebronxrings]

This sounds like some excuse to award players that can't get it done. Let me guess, LeBron should have got the award in 2011??? Because the finals aren't the most important right?
rent free

[Black and White]

Why not change it to playoffs MVP to avoid those kind of situations?

Well as said, the FMVP works for the most part, and if the best player through 3 rounds fails in the finals, does it really make sense to award him if somebody else steps up?

[TheMarkMadsen]

01 Kobe, 08 KG, 14 WB?

[nba_55]

Well as said, the FMVP works for the most part, and if the best player through 3 rounds fails in the finals, does it really make sense to award him if somebody else steps up?

Yes, each round is as important. Take OKC for example, Westbrook is stepping up during the 2nd round, if he didnt step up, they probably lose the series and they are out for good. It s the 2nd round and it doesnt make it less important than the finals.

If player A plays the best for 3 rounds and player B plays the best for 1 round, player A should be rewarded.

[T_L_P]

01 Kobe, 08 KG, 14 WB?

C'mon bro. You can't add '01 Kobe, who was toe-to-toe the best player with Shaq up until the Finals, and forget '07 Duncan, who up until the Finals was far and away the best player on his team.

[nba_55]

C'mon bro. You can't add '01 Kobe, who was toe-to-toe the best player with Shaq up until the Finals, and forget '07 Duncan, who up until the Finals was far and away the best player on his team.

Duncan should have been rewarded that year. This is why I think FMVP is flawed.

[Black and White]

Duncan should have been rewarded that year. This is why I think FMVP is flawed.

Most awards are flawed, the MVP award is flawed, because its never given to the real "most valuable player", its given to a player with the best combination of stats and team record.

[nba_55]

Most awards are flawed, the MVP award is flawed, because its never given to the real "most valuable player", its given to a player with the best combination of stats and team record.

One problem that I have with FMVP award is that it gives the perception that finals are more important than the other rounds. That s not true. All the rounds are equally important. Yeah, finals are the last step to get to the championship, but you have other steps to accomplish before reaching to that last step.

[PsychoBe]

One problem that I have with FMVP award is that it gives the perception that finals are more important than the other rounds. That s not true. All the rounds are equally important. Yeah, finals are the last step to get to the championship, but you have other steps to accomplish before reaching to that last step.

sorry but no. literally nothing is more important than a championship. are you telling me cp3 wouldn't rather lose in the finals than in the first round? of course if you ask him he'd say "i'd rather not lose at all" but it's something to build upon rather than a first round exit.

dont know why you cant see how the finals isn't the biggest step. the playoffs ramp up a step after each round and the finals is literally the toughest venue in all of basketball.

[nba_55]

sorry but no. literally nothing is more important than a championship. are you telling me cp3 wouldn't rather lose in the finals than in the first round? of course if you ask him he'd say "i'd rather not lose at all" but it's something to build upon rather than a first round exit.

dont know why you cant see how the finals isn't the biggest step. the playoffs ramp up a step after each round and the finals is literally the toughest venue in all of basketball.

Obviously CP3 would rather lose in the finals, to get to the finals, you have to win the other 3 rounds. I dont get your point.

I dont agree with the finals being the toughest venue in all of basketball. Take the 2000s Lakers during their 3peat for example. Their WCF opponents were much tougher than their finals opponents. Once they won the West, they were almost guaranteed to win the championship. The biggest step was the WCF, not the finals.

[PsychoBe]

Obviously CP3 would rather lose in the finals, to get to the finals, you have to win the other 3 rounds. I dont get your point.

I dont agree with the finals being the toughest venue in all of basketball. Take the 2000s Lakers during their 3peat for example. Their WCF opponents were much tougher than their finals opponents. Once they won the West, they were almost guaranteed to win the championship. The biggest step was the WCF, not the finals.

the finals is the biggest stage, that's the point. it gets harder as you go, not easier.

they swept their wcf most years. the only wcf teams that challenged them were the 2002 kings and 2000 blazers but that had more to do with matchup issues than anything else. but kobe and shaq still put in a lot of work on both fronts even during the finals too. it's not like every game was a blowout they just knew how to close-out better vs their matchups in the east (more offensive firepower).

players and teams play hardest in the finals, that's just a fact.

[gts]

In other words, the finals MVP

This.. you'd think the answer would be obvious but evidently not

[nba_55]

the finals is the biggest stage, that's the point. it gets harder as you go, not easier.

they swept their wcf most years. the only wcf teams that challenged them were the 2002 kings and 2000 blazers but that had more to do with matchup issues than anything else. but kobe and shaq still put in a lot of work on both fronts even during the finals too. it's not like every game was a blowout they just knew how to close-out better vs their matchups in the east (more offensive firepower).

players and teams play hardest in the finals, that's just a fact.

Ok, let s take another example.
Which series was tougher for the Spurs in 2007, 2nd round vs Phoenix that went to 6 games and had very close games or finals vs Cavaliers which was a sweep?

[PsychoBe]

Ok, let s take another example.
Which series was tougher for the Spurs in 2007, 2nd round vs Phoenix that went to 6 games and had very close games or finals vs Cavaliers which was a sweep?

obviously the phoenix series. however, by the time the spurs made it to the finals, they swept the cavs because they were able to shut down lebron (who also had one of the biggest playoff chokes from a superstar ever).

dont forget that the playoffs is about matchups too. just because team a beat team b and team b beat team c doesn't mean team a can't lose to team c. if phoenix won however and went on to the finals i'd say the phoenix suns would had been champions regardless. they were both championship contenders who had to meet in the second round which is tough but it happens.

either way, the finals is still the biggest stage and all your example proves is how much flack bran got for that performance vs losing to orlando or the celtics. that's where all the choke jokes came from and it steamrolled as he kept losing but him choking in the finals started the entire thing.

[nba_55]

obviously the phoenix series. however, by the time the spurs made it to the finals, they swept the cavs because they were able to shut down lebron (who also had one of the biggest playoff chokes from a superstar ever).

dont forget that the playoffs is about matchups too. just because team a beat team b and team b beat team c doesn't mean team a can't lose to team c. if phoenix won however and went on to the finals i'd say the phoenix suns would had been champions regardless. they were both championship contenders who had to meet in the second round which is tough but it happens.

either way, the finals is still the biggest stage and all your example proves is how much flack bran got for that performance vs losing to orlando or the celtics. that's where all the choke jokes came from and it steamrolled as he kept losing but him choking in the finals started the entire thing.

but you said that it got tougher as the team advanced, you are contradicting yourself now.

[PsychoBe]

but you said that it got tougher as the team advanced, you are contradicting yourself now.

read the rest of my post. you were just trying to bait me by bringing up exceptions. a very flawed debate tactic considering that i went much more in depth with my response.

[Smoke117]

What do you want next, a preseason MVP? Shut up.

[Ne 1]

Finals MVP is a pretty useless award. It didn't even exist until 1969, had it did Bill Russell would have more than anyone.

Kareem was flat out robbed of the 1980 FMVP in favor of a popular, charismatic teammate and we are to act as if the award is legit? Paul Pierce, Tony Parker, Cedric Maxell, Joe Dumars, and Chauncey Billups all have FMVP's. Even John freaking Starks came within one shot of winning a FMVP.
That's why they should have a playoff MVP like in hockey, one rule is the winner has to make the Finals. You can't have a player knocked out in the Conference Finals or Semi Finals as the playoff MVP winner. But Finals MVP is just based on 4-7 games.

[K Xerxes]

It makes a lot more sense to give a playoffs MVP, even if the condition is that it's only given to a player on the winning team. Sure, the finals is the most important, but the rounds leading up to that are not meaningless and can even be tougher (depending on conference). In 2007, Duncan was the leader of that team and would have won the playoffs MVP; Parker just abused a horrible mismatch against an undermatched team.

Lol at anyone who says Kobe should have won 01 though. The playoffs MVP would INCLUDE the finals too. :lol

[pauk]

FMVP = Playoffs MVP essentially....

It wouldnt make sense to give ANY type of MVP to somebody who didnt win a championship anyways, the MVP should be given to the guy whos game/performance translated to the best success....

[navy]

It makes a lot more sense to give a playoffs MVP, even if the condition is that it's only given to a player on the winning team. Sure, the finals is the most important, but the rounds leading up to that are not meaningless and can even be tougher (depending on conference). In 2007, Duncan was the leader of that team and would have won the playoffs MVP; Parker just abused a horrible mismatch against an undermatched team.

Lol at anyone who says Kobe should have won 01 though. The playoffs MVP would INCLUDE the finals too. :lol
The only reason people are arguing against it is because it would challenge the norm. If they had always done a playoff mvp, nobody would be in favor of shortening the award just to include the finals.

And it should always go to the winner.Sorry Jerry West.

[Droid101]

I agree with this. It should be playoff MVP. Anyone can catch fire for a round.

[Magic 32]

Lol at anyone who says Kobe should have won 01 though. The playoffs MVP would INCLUDE the finals too. :lol

It was still close overall. The play on the road should be a factor too.

[Ne 1]

It makes a lot more sense to give a playoffs MVP, even if the condition is that it's only given to a player on the winning team. Sure, the finals is the most important, but the rounds leading up to that are not meaningless and can even be tougher (depending on conference). In 2007, Duncan was the leader of that team and would have won the playoffs MVP; Parker just abused a horrible mismatch against an undermatched team.

Lol at anyone who says Kobe should have won 01 though. The playoffs MVP would INCLUDE the finals too. :lol
Shaq was easily the MVP of the Finals in 2001, but Kobe was no slouch either. 25/8/6. Bryant struggled in the Game 1 loss, but he had a solid all around series, particularly after game 1, and the Lakers won in 5 games, back door sweep. Definitely not a bad series, particularly against a defensive powerhouse like Larry Brown's Sixers (#1 ranked defense after the Mutumbo trade I believe) He contributed on both ends of the court, and had a few triple double type games, iirc. 31/8/6/2/2 48 FG% in Game 2 and also, his Game 3 although not very efficient overall, he had a memorable streak, I think in the 3rd quarter, when he got hot and sank like 6 or 7 baskets without a miss, most from about 18 feet, making the traditionally tough Philly fans go "ooh". Great series overall after that Game 1 loss and the Sixers had strong, stifling perimeter defenders like Aaron McKie, Eric Snow and Raja Bell to guard him and Defensive Player of the Year Mutombo manning the paint. If you included the first 3 rounds, he certainly has a case for playoff MVP or at the very least Co-MVPs.

[nba_55]

FMVP = Playoffs MVP essentially....

It wouldnt make sense to give ANY type of MVP to somebody who didnt win a championship anyways, the MVP should be given to the guy whos game/performance translated to the best success....

No, this award has become a become, role players getting hot for a few games are winning it now just because they are on the winning team. :facepalm