Is elite defense a requisite for MVP?

[basketballcat]

Why does not being elite defensively disqualify a player for the MVP, in the minds of some people? Can offensive prowess compensate for a lack of defense? I'll disregard the shaky narrative on some players first and focus just on logic. Let's say a player averages 0.5 spg and 0.5 bpg BUT averages 50ppg, 20apg, and 10rpg. Are those not MVP numbers?

Who would you rather have in your team?
Mr. Complete Package: 25ppg, 8rpg, 7apg, 2.5 bpg, 2.0 spg
Mr. Extremely Ridiculous Offense: 50ppg, 5rpg, 20apg, 0.5 bpg, 0.5spg
Same FG%, 3pt%, turnovers, fouls, etc.

Surely, there is a tipping point when offense compensates for defense. If a player scores 200 ppg on 70% shooting and does literally nothing else, is that not valued? Or are we turning off our brains for narratives?

[SATAN]

As I said, they are the new Kobe stans...

[Carbine]

This is a pretty uninformed post.

Jokic, not know for defense, has won 3 of the last 4 MVPs.

Harden, Westbrook have won recent MVPs

Steve Nash, was one of the only back to back MVPs in NBA history.

If you did just a little research you would have the answer - no, elite defense is not a requirement.

[SouBeachTalents]

Steve Nash is a 2x MVP and OP is asking if defense is a requisite to win one.

[basketballcat]

This is a pretty uninformed post.

Jokic, not know for defense, has won 3 of the last 4 MVPs.

Harden, Westbrook have won recent MVPs

Steve Nash, was one of the only back to back MVPs in NBA history.

If you did just a little research you would have the answer - no, elite defense is not a requirement.

Pump your brakes. Where did I say offense-heavy players have never won the MVP? Easy on the strawman argument.

I'm taking about "hot takes" about certain winners not deserving it. Or even certain offense-heavy players that don't deserve to be in the conversation at all, according to their haters.

Read slowly, next time.

[basketballcat]

Literally my first sentence: "Why does not being elite defensively disqualify a player for the MVP, IN THE MINDS OF SOME PEOPLE?"

How some people, seemingly with ADHD and some form of autism read it: "Hey yo, no MVP winner ever has been weak on defense. That's cray cray, coz." :biggums:

[Duffy Pratt]

Why does not being elite defensively disqualify a player for the MVP, in the minds of some people? Can offensive prowess compensate for a lack of defense? I'll disregard the shaky narrative on some players first and focus just on logic. Let's say a player averages 0.5 spg and 0.5 bpg BUT averages 50ppg, 20apg, and 10rpg. Are those not MVP numbers?

Who would you rather have in your team?
Mr. Complete Package: 25ppg, 8rpg, 7apg, 2.5 bpg, 2.0 spg
Mr. Extremely Ridiculous Offense: 50ppg, 5rpg, 20apg, 0.5 bpg, 0.5spg
Same FG%, 3pt%, turnovers, fouls, etc.

Surely, there is a tipping point when offense compensates for defense. If a player scores 200 ppg on 70% shooting and does literally nothing else, is that not valued? Or are we turning off our brains for narratives?

There’s a lot more to defense than blocks and steals.

Everyone makes up their own criteria for MVP, and that seems to change from year to year.

Most people overvalue offense. That’s why almost everyone was praising the Lillard trade to the Bucks.

For me, the question should be: Who makes the most irreplaceable contribution to winning? There is no stat or advanced stat that shows that, so there’s always gonna be room for disagreement. It’s one of the reasons why the same stupid GOAT debates are never-ending.

[SATAN]

For me, the question should be: Who makes the most irreplaceable contribution to winning?

Vast majority of people agree that it's currently Jokic and the MVP votes reflect that.

Luka sucks. People need to get over it...

[BarberSchool]

No.

But there is a certain floor. A floor of acceptability for how poorly someone can play on defense, and how frequently they play that poorly.

[basketballcat]

No.

But there is a certain floor. A floor of acceptability for how poorly someone can play on defense, and how frequently they play that poorly.

Even if they score 200ppg on 70% shooting?

Some people act like the floor is being elite. Personally, if there was to be a floor, I would put it at average. If they are so ridiculous on offense, as our theoretical 200ppg player, I would disregard defense entirely. Let the other 4 players pick up the slack.

Ben Wallace was a defense-only guy. He won multiple DPOYs and got his team a ring. Even placed #7 in the 2004 MVP voting, over LeBron, Kidd, and Nowitzki. Why can't an offense-heavy guy get the same respect, in the minds of certain people?

[Naero]

This seems like a strawman. If anything, the vast majority overvalue offense more than defense in their criteria.

The award’s historically narrative-driven (at least since the media started voting for it), and gaudy stats—which are much easier to get as a pure offensive force than as a one-dimensional defender—add to that appeal. Prime James Harden would get more traction than, say, Dennis Rodman (assuming he’d even be accepted as any team’s best player) every day of the week and twice on Sundays provided they have comparable team success.

Might some be more inclined to vote for “Mr. Complete Package” instead? Sure, but I’d imagine they’re too few and far in between to fuss about.

[ArbitraryWater]

OP are you retarded

[basketballcat]

OP are you retarded

Aww, somebody forgot to take their pills? Don't worry your little head about this, sweetie.

[GimmeThat]

if all we do is trade buckets, would the fact that I'm a much better shooter given the same amount of effort and be rewarded with a 3 instead of a 2 make me the MVP? sure, only a basketball weighs 22oz, and when you have to play 36 min running up and down 94 feet. you leave a lot of room for others to surpass you in the MVP race just by sheer effort, which is defense.

essentially, everyone else just need to have their whole body filled with THC and you're good.

[Spurs m8]

He just played LeBitches game but did it better.
And then also made LeBitch his b1tch in the process....

8-1 head to head finals record with LeB1tch during this era hahahahhaja

The league is on it way to healing from these pathetic losers

[Overdrive]

Why does not being elite defensively disqualify a player for the MVP, in the minds of some people? Can offensive prowess compensate for a lack of defense? I'll disregard the shaky narrative on some players first and focus just on logic. Let's say a player averages 0.5 spg and 0.5 bpg BUT averages 50ppg, 20apg, and 10rpg. Are those not MVP numbers?

Who would you rather have in your team?
Mr. Complete Package: 25ppg, 8rpg, 7apg, 2.5 bpg, 2.0 spg
Mr. Extremely Ridiculous Offense: 50ppg, 5rpg, 20apg, 0.5 bpg, 0.5spg
Same FG%, 3pt%, turnovers, fouls, etc.

Surely, there is a tipping point when offense compensates for defense. If a player scores 200 ppg on 70% shooting and does literally nothing else, is that not valued? Or are we turning off our brains for narratives?

It's pretty simple. Defense can be supplied by role players up to a point where your offensive star's liability doesn't matter that much. So, yes, you can be a mvp without good defense. As long as the MVP's team wins and he's the deciding factor he will get it.

In contrast to that roleplayers rarely supply enough offense for teams to constantly win unless it's a team like the oldman Duncan Spurs. And on such team rarely any player will get MVP consideration.

[GimmeThat]

It's pretty simple. Defense can be supplied by role players up to a point where your offensive star's liability doesn't matter that much. So, yes, you can be a mvp without good defense. As long as the MVP's team wins and he's the deciding factor he will get it.

In contrast to that roleplayers rarely supply enough offense for teams to constantly win unless it's a team like the oldman Duncan Spurs. And on such team rarely any player will get MVP consideration.

wrong, this is exactly how Purdue lost to UConn. if Defense just didn't matter, star bigs should be able to get as many assist as possible, just for the simple fact they can see the floor better.

great team defense means a simple message, beating us 1 v 1 won't get you anywhere. or you can just be a fatherless roleplayer. :sleeping

[Akeem34TheDream]

Just go back to giving it to the best player on the best team.

[iamgine]

Why does not being elite defensively disqualify a player for the MVP, in the minds of some people? Can offensive prowess compensate for a lack of defense? I'll disregard the shaky narrative on some players first and focus just on logic. Let's say a player averages 0.5 spg and 0.5 bpg BUT averages 50ppg, 20apg, and 10rpg. Are those not MVP numbers?

Who would you rather have in your team?
Mr. Complete Package: 25ppg, 8rpg, 7apg, 2.5 bpg, 2.0 spg
Mr. Extremely Ridiculous Offense: 50ppg, 5rpg, 20apg, 0.5 bpg, 0.5spg
Same FG%, 3pt%, turnovers, fouls, etc.

Surely, there is a tipping point when offense compensates for defense. If a player scores 200 ppg on 70% shooting and does literally nothing else, is that not valued? Or are we turning off our brains for narratives?
I think that's taking it too literal. Obviously what they mean is defense is a big factor for them in evaluating how good a player is. Obviously overwhelming offensive prowess would compensate for it.

[GimmeThat]

Obviously overwhelming offensive prowess would compensate for it.

military industry complex much?

[SATAN]

Just go back to giving it to the best player on the best team.

They gave it to the best player and Denver were favorites for much of the season.