Nba mvp

Originally posted by zebano
Garnett. Did you see those Celtics last year?

Yes, i did. They will easily have the biggest turn around in NBA history, but I dont think Garnett will win the MVP, he has two other All-Stars on his team in Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. Besides when he was hurt I think they only lost two games, while the Celtics have been a GREAT story this year Garnett wont win MVP.

Originally posted by 425lsu
besides Garnett's points and rebounds are the lowest they have ever been since the 98-99 season

The award is mVp, not most ppg or any other stat. He might just realize that by backing off a little on the personal stats his whole team gets better.

Originally posted by zebano
The award is mVp, not most ppg or any other stat. He might just realize that by backing off a little on the personal stats his whole team gets better.

But when the team can play as well as they have when he is hurt, he is obviously not the MOST valuable player of the league. What are your thoughts on Chris Paul?

Originally posted by 425lsu
But when the team can play as well as they have when he is hurt, he is obviously not the MOST valuable player of the league. What are your thoughts on Chris Paul?

Garnett should win in a landslide. He's brought more than points, rebounds, etc. to the team; he's brought a winning and ferociously competitive attitude. And that's made better players of everybody on the team particularly the young rising stars like Rondo (did anybody see him break Nash's ankles on that drive last night?), Kendrick Perkins, "Big Baby" Davis and Leon Powe. Chris Paul has done a great job, but without KG the Celts would be a sub-.500 team rather than having easily the best record in the NBA.

Originally posted by shortcircuit
Tracy McGrady. Where would the Rockets have been without him??

With him, they were at the wrong end of a 20 point blowout by the Celts in Houston last week.

Originally posted by no1marauder
With him, they were at the wrong end of a 20 point blowout by the Celts in Houston last week.

True, but he is a one man all star team since Yao went down, whereas KG, Paul Pierce & Ray Allen are a trio of all stars. The supporting casts are similar. So you may be surprised when KG doesn't win it.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Garnett should win in a landslide. He's brought more than points, rebounds, etc. to the team; he's brought a winning and ferociously competitive attitude. And that's made better players of everybody on the team particularly the young rising stars like Rondo (did anybody see him break Nash's ankles on that drive last night?), Kendrick Perkins, "Big Baby" ...[text shortened]... G the Celts would be a sub-.500 team rather than having easily the best record in the NBA.

KG had ample opportunities to display his wares in Minnesota, yet he didn't win squat. You surround him with stars and he performs all of the sudden. Doesn't sound like he has the capacity of Kobe or LeBron or even T-Mac to me.

Originally posted by shortcircuit
KG had ample opportunities to display his wares in Minnesota, yet he didn't win squat. You surround him with stars and he performs all of the sudden. Doesn't sound like he has the capacity of Kobe or LeBron or even T-Mac to me.

Gee, how many playoff series has a team with T-Mac won again? Your method of evaluation certainly isn't very consistent.

Let's make it simple: the Celts are the best team. KG is their best player and has been one of the best players in the league for many years. If KG doesn't win the MVP after leading the greatest single year turnaround in NBA history, it's a joke.

Originally posted by 425lsu
Chris Paul has elevated the play of everyone around him, him, Tyson Chandler, and David West are all having there best seasons ever. Chris makes everyone around him better, and when he needs too he takes over the game, he can do it in all aspects of the game.

MVP is given for different reasons all the time. Sometimes for scoring, sometimes for turning things around, sometimes for making everyone around you better, or for just obviously being the best in the league. Its true meaning is for who was most valuable to their team. I think Garnett has done all those things this year. It should be KG.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Gee, how many playoff series has a team with T-Mac won again? Your method of evaluation certainly isn't very consistent.

Let's make it simple: the Celts are the best team. KG is their best player and has been one of the best players in the league for many years. If KG doesn't win the MVP after leading the greatest single year turnaround in NBA history, it's a joke.

Come on, you aren't a rube. You have knowledge about sports. How can you make a dumb statement like that? Let me help you ease your foot out of your mouth once again.

First of all, Past years performance have no bearing on this year's MVP selection.

Second, the MVP does not have to come from the best team, although it can. Have you ever seen an MVP selected from a last place team in any sport? Of course you have...many times. The reason the call it MVP is because they establish whether the team's performance would have been drastically different were it not for that player's performance. Unless you were full of crap when you were extolling the greatness of the Celtic team and the solid bench with the great performing kids, then they should have been able to play pretty well without KG. I mean Pierce, Allen, Rondo, Baby, they might have had something to do with the success. In my arguement for McGrady, if you take him out, they don't have any prolific scorers....Alston on a hot night? Scola? Battier? Mutumbo? None that I can see. When Yao was playing, it was either Yao or T-Mac leading the scoring night in and night out.

YOur arguement about the greatest team's greatest player must be the MVP usually does not hold water. In baseball, Dale Murphy won for a bottom feeder twice, Andre Dawson for a last place team. In football, Earl Campbell won for a lousy Olier team that later became pretty good. Walter Payton won for the bears. In basketball, Michael Jordan was probably the greatest player to ever lace up sneakers, but he did not win the MVP every year. Why? Because the Bulls had all of the pieces and were expected to win. Granted, the Celtics weren't expected to do much before Ainge backed up the truck and played Let's Make a Deal, but afterwards, it was generally expected that they would be in the playoff hunt. So where is all the mystery you allude to?

Geez, there are time when you appear to know something about what you are talking about, and then you make assinined statements like these you have directed at me. I have repeatedly shoved your words back down your throat anytime we have gotten into it, but you keep coming back for more. (I know your memory is short so here is your refresher...Bosie State Football were true champions.....Hawaii Football deserving of National Championship game.....Colt Brennen's greatness....Colt Brennen as the highest rated QB in the draft......)

Now, back off and take a look at what I have said from an unbiased stance, and perhaps you won't be disappointed later. I have never said KG was not a great player (he is) and that he has not played very well (he has), but I am saying it would be a greater joke if they gave him the MVP with that supporting cast than it would be for a player like McGrady of LeBron who pretty much carry their team's respective loads.