[QUOTE=Jumpman10135]I know some other certain rook who is taking his team to the second round.[/QUOTE]
it doesn't matter you idiot, ROY is an individual award based on 95% stats
Printable View
[QUOTE=Jumpman10135]I know some other certain rook who is taking his team to the second round.[/QUOTE]
it doesn't matter you idiot, ROY is an individual award based on 95% stats
[QUOTE=Big One]it doesn't matter you idiot, ROY is an individual award based on 95% stats[/QUOTE]
Was the name calling really necessary?
Dude this thread is ridiculous. Put Tyreke in Jennings' position and the Bucks are the same if not better.
Tyreke is a better player and had the better season. That's all there is to it.
[QUOTE=Jumpman10135]I know some other certain rook who is taking his team to the second round.[/QUOTE]
Dude, the award is for the rookie who had the best regular season. Jennings didn't have the best rookie season.
[QUOTE=Jumpman10135]I know some other certain rook who is taking his team to the second round.[/QUOTE]
How in the hell did that other "rook" you're referring to lead his team anywhere shooting 37%? That rook better learn to shoot over the summer before he ends up out of the league like other terrible shooters... Tyreke Evans deserved to win with Stephen Curry rightfully coming in second place. That other rook is an afterthought even if he makes it into the second round.
[QUOTE=Jumpman10135]I know some other certain rook who is taking his team to the second round.[/QUOTE]
John Salmons is not a rookie.
Being serious... It is more the result of teamwork than the merit of a single player
The ROY has a simple criteria: Player with the best numbers wins.
[QUOTE=RaceBannana]John Salmons is not a rookie.
[/QUOTE]
Why didn't I think of that... :lol
Curry and Jennings woylsve been better choices
[QUOTE=Peteballa]Dude this thread is ridiculous. Put Tyreke in Jennings' position and the Bucks are the same if not better.
Tyreke is a better player and had the better season. That's all there is to it.[/QUOTE]
And you know this, how?
Because he was the best overall rookie this year. Individual awards shouldn't be based on "how good the player's teammates were".
Regular. Season. Award.
good news :rockon:
Well deserved, if anyone thinks that Jennings or Curry deserved this over Evans then they need to reevaluate.
Evans DESERVES this award. He had a FANTASTIC season. His team unfortunately, stinks.
People look at Jennings, and say to themselves ..."well his team is damn near heading to the second round, so why isnt he the rookie of the year?"
Well, what you're seeing on that Bucks squad is what happens when a team bands together, and makes a concentrated effort together, to play great team ball. It isnt solely BECAUSE of Jennings' play. Are you crazy?
well deserved Reke. :applause:
I actually think if Kmart didn't go down at the beginning of the season we'd be congratulating Curry or Jennings.
Overrated...
[QUOTE=Kiddlovesnets]Overrated...[/QUOTE]
20/5/5 during a rookie season, is overrated to you?
Future Top 3 player in the NBA. The Sky is the limit for young Tyreke Evans.
Congrats to tyreke.. Can't argue with those numbers..
I would have liked to see Jennings get it, but he was MIA for
chunks of the season.. Good to see him playing well in the
playoffs though..
yea jennings shot at 37 percent for his debut season but as far as the playoffs im pretty sure he was shooting at about the 45 percent mark although he did make a few more attempts. that being said he came up big in the playoffs as the bucks needed due to the absense of their big man and even tht still doesnt win him the ROY tho the kid deserves more than the idioitic hate based on his [B]APG[/B] through the regular series :banghead:
I'm a little lost as to why team record is such an important factor in MVP but has little importance for ROY.
[QUOTE=Jailblazers7]I'm a little lost as to why team record is such an important factor in MVP but has little importance for ROY.[/QUOTE]
It's not just team record. It's a player's impact on his team's record.
[QUOTE=Showtime]It's not just team record. It's a player's impact on his team's record.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't you say Brandon Jennings has had a significant impact on that record? I understand Bogut is the best player on that team but Jennings has been asked to run the offense while also carrying a heavy load of the scoring with Michael Redd out all year.
[QUOTE=Jailblazers7]Wouldn't you say Brandon Jennings has had a significant impact on that record?[/quote]
The argument people have used has been:
Bucks record > Kings and Warriors record.
Now, my position is that if you want to argue impact, then I have two responses:
First of which is that Evans has impacted his team. Dealing with a first year head coach, dealing with injuries, trades, and an inconsistent lineup (and one of the youngest and most inexperienced rotations in the league), he not only managed to help his team win more games than last season, but anybody paying attention saw his clutch play and how he helped his team stay competitive when they really shouldn't have been (taking LA and Cleveland down to the wire, 35 point comeback in Chicago, etc etc).
So with that being said, when looking at impact, I don't see how Evans couldn't have the same positive impact on the bucks to help them get to the playoffs.
Both players helped their team. Just because one had a better team doesn't mean said individual had more of an impact than the other.
[quote]I understand Bogut is the best player on that team but Jennings has been asked to run the offense while also carrying a heavy load of the scoring with Michael Redd out all year.[/QUOTE]
And Evans shouldered the load when Martin went down 6 games into the season. The kings didn't have a legit option like Bogut to go to. All they had was Evans and a bunch of role players.
It's comments like these that really make me wonder how many games people actually watched Evans play this season.
[QUOTE=Showtime]The argument people have used has been:
Bucks record > Kings and Warriors record.
Now, my position is that if you want to argue impact, then I have two responses:
First of which is that Evans has impacted his team. Dealing with a first year head coach, dealing with injuries, trades, and an inconsistent lineup (and one of the youngest and most inexperienced rotations in the league), he not only managed to help his team win more games than last season, but anybody paying attention saw his clutch play and how he helped his team stay competitive when they really shouldn't have been (taking LA and Cleveland down to the wire, 35 point comeback in Chicago, etc etc).
So with that being said, when looking at impact, I don't see how Evans couldn't have the same positive impact on the bucks to help them get to the playoffs.
Both players helped their team. Just because one had a better team doesn't mean said individual had more of an impact than the other.
And Evans shouldered the load when Martin went down 6 games into the season. The kings didn't have a legit option like Bogut to go to. All they had was Evans and a bunch of role players.
It's comments like these that really make me wonder how many games people actually watched Evans play this season.[/QUOTE]
I've watched probably 7-8 games of Tyreke this season. Obviously I won't have as many opportunities to watch his games as you do because you live on the west coast and I live on the east coast. I know Evans had a huge impact on his team and did perform great in the clutch. I'm just trying to play devil's advocate here as to why Jennings should be voted ROY. I don't even think Jennings should have won it.
[QUOTE=Jailblazers7]I've watched probably 7-8 games of Tyreke this season. Obviously I won't have as many opportunities to watch his games as you do because you live on the west coast and I live on the east coast. I know Evans had a huge impact on his team and did perform great in the clutch. I'm just trying to play devil's advocate here as to why Jennings should be voted ROY. I don't even think Jennings should have won it.[/QUOTE]
I understand. Because of BJ's stats, the best argument that could be made is his impact on the bucks making the playoffs. But the counter to that is that other PG's, in a similar situation, could have also made a positive impact on the bucks, so there's really nothing that sets BJ head and shoulders above the rest of his rookie peers to get the award.
One advantage Jennings seems to have over the others (besides team success) is defense.
[url]http://www.brewhoop.com/2010/4/29/1451337/bucks-slow-hawks-transition-game[/url]
Hollinger's take....
[QUOTE]Unlike Evans or Curry, however, he doesn't have to post big offensive numbers in order to be an effective player. For starters, Jennings has run the point with savvy belying his years, committing just seven turnovers in five games in the postseason. He's still not a classic drive-and-kick guy, but in his year spent taking his lumps in Italy and his season under Skiles, he's learned how to play nearly mistake-free basketball.
And then there's the defense. Jennings is miles beyond Evans and Curry in this respect, and that explains why his on-court versus off-court defensive stats are the best of the three -- even though Jennings' faces much more difficult comparisons via this stat because his teammates actually guard people. The Kings were 21st in Defensive Efficiency and the Warriors 29th, while Jennings' Milwaukee team, by contrast, was third.
Jennings is undersized and took his lumps at times at the defensive end of the floor early in the season. But he has steadily improved by necessity, and because he's been held accountable all season, his defense this series has been consistently good and at times phenomenal. I watched Game 3 and thought it was the best I'd ever seen him defend, but he was just as good in far more trying circumstances in Game 5.[/QUOTE]
Again while Evans clearly had the best regular season and was the ROY, Jennings was probably closer than most (Evans fans and Curry fans) care to admit.
Also, I do find it preposterous when people say that Curry or Evans could have done just as good and probably better in Milwaukee considering that is clearly hypothetical. Some pieces fit well together, some do not. Jennings clearly fit in Milwaukee, we do not know hot the others would have.
"Jennings is miles beyond Evans and Curry in this respect"
That statement is LAUGHABLE. Evans often took on the best perimeter player on the opposing team. Arenas, Kobe, Joe Johnson, Westbrook, Wade, etc etc. He was often used to guard either guard position depending on matchups, and he had to face much more difficult players to handle. Again, hollinger shows how much he doesn't know about the game.
for those that believe Evans doesn't deserve ROY, let me ask you this: did Lebron deserve it over Carmelo?
nonetheless, Evans was ROY because he was the best player. it's that simple.
[QUOTE=Jailblazers7]I'm a little lost as to why team record is such an important factor in MVP but has little importance for ROY.[/QUOTE]
a rookie being the best player on a team is very rare, which means they usually aren't the main contributor to the team record. plus it's fundamentally flawed to award the rookie that has better teammate than others, therefore it's reasonable to award the player simply based on stats. MVP on the other hand, holds more responsibility for the team, which relates to the team success.
but then again, it would've been interesting if Jennings shot 45% from the field.
[QUOTE=Derek Zoolander]Bogut took HIS team to the playoffs.[/QUOTE]
and they've been winning w/o him. hmmmm.
Evans was the best player on his team as a Rookie, and lead all rookies in the most important stats. You can't be more deserving to win ROY.
[QUOTE]I'm a little lost as to why team record is such an important factor in MVP but has little importance for ROY.[/QUOTE]
It shouldn't for either one.
The MVP voting makes no sense most of the time.
I've got to say Jennings was equally deserving. Maybe statistically he was worse, but hes a better point guard, and he plays better on an actual team. Hes a real PG, where Tyreke is a SG with nice vision.
[QUOTE=magnax1]I've got to say Jennings was equally deserving. Maybe statistically he was worse, but hes a better point guard, and he plays better on an actual team. Hes a real PG, where Tyreke is a SG with nice vision.[/QUOTE]
So, since when did the rookie of the year award become the "point guard of the year" award? Ok, BJ is more of a PG than Evans, while Evans splits minutes at both guard positions. So?
[QUOTE=Showtime]So, since when did the rookie of the year award become the "point guard of the year" award? Ok, BJ is more of a PG than Evans, while Evans splits minutes at both guard positions. So?[/QUOTE]
Tyreke played PG, for at least half the game. And what I'm also trying to say is that Tyreke might look better, but might not be capable of playing in a winning environment. He is a ballhog, and IF he was in a winning situations his stats definitely wouldn't look like what they were.
[QUOTE=magnax1]Tyreke played PG, for at least half the game. And what I'm also trying to say is that Tyreke might look better, but might not be capable of playing in a winning environment. He is a ballhog, and IF he was in a winning situations his stats definitely wouldn't look like what they were.[/QUOTE]
Wade is a combo guard who dominates the ball. Go tell him he can't win.
Not a surprise, think it should have been a really tight 3 player race though. Great rookie class in the end (when you think also Flynn, Blair, Budinger, Collison, Thornton, Jerebko, Lawson, etc.).
Stephen Curry deserved it. He's a ridiculous shooter and tyreke evans is not that good. It's all the media. None of the awards in the NBA mean shit. That's why steve nash got mvp 2x. it's cuz all the voters, most of who never even set foot on a basketball court, hear how hes such a great passer and just have their mind made up at the start of the season. That's really what happened with evans. 20 games into the season, they had already made their minds up. 20 5 5 who gives a shit. It's not like any of his assists or rebounds are truly impressive dam. passes to 3 point shooter and they make it. its all on them. and thats all the kings can do is shoot 3s and thats why they got just barely above 20 wins.
[QUOTE=rfoster24][B]Stephen Curry deserved it. He's a ridiculous shooter and tyreke evans is not that good.[/B] It's all the media. None of the awards in the NBA mean shit. That's why steve nash got mvp 2x. it's cuz all the voters, most of who never even set foot on a basketball court, hear how hes such a great passer and just have their mind made up at the start of the season. That's really what happened with evans. 20 games into the season, they had already made their minds up. [B] 20 5 5 who gives a shit.[/B] It's not like any of his assists or rebounds are truly impressive dam. passes to 3 point shooter and they make it. its all on them. and thats all the kings can do is shoot 3s and thats why they got just barely above 20 wins.[/QUOTE]
?????