Wednesday, April 2, 2008
LBJ 4 MVP?
Allow me to start with a disclaimer: the NBA MVP award is a joke. I've never wasted my time writing entirely about the MVP award in this space before because it has become the BPBT award (best player on the best team), and I hate it. Recently, it hasn't been about who is most valuable to their team or about who is the best player, it is simply BPBT.
Steve Nash winning the award the first time made me mad. His winning the second time turned me off forever. He's a gimmick player on a gimmick team who plays great on one side of the floor and holds his team hostage on the other. Yet he is a two-time MVP because the Suns win a lot of regular season games. (Note: It is important to stress "regular season" in the previous sentence).
Since the '05 season, the MVP award had been dead to me.
Until about two weeks ago.
That is when the national media start breaking down the '08 season and the naming the top candidates for this year's MVP award. Of course, Kevin Garnett is getting some hype as the BPBT party candidate, but there seems to be three front-runners this season: Kobe Bryant, Chris Paul, and LeBron James.
You read that correctly, LeBron James. Apparently the criteria for the MVP award has changed.
Don't get me wrong, LeBron is awesome. With a capital "A." And probably an exclamation point or two thrown in there for good measure. He is more unstoppable going to the basket than any player the league has ever seen, including Michael.
But he's not the MVP. Not in 2008. Not based on what wins players the award in this decade.
As of Monday, the Cavs are on pace to finish the season with 45 wins. LeBron has his Cavaliers pretty much locked into the fourth seed in the Eastern Conference. He is putting up huge numbers, has little to no help, and is keeping his team afloat in the East.
Allow me to present exhibit "A" of why the MVP award is a joke: in the 2005-06 season, Kobe averaged 35.5 points, 5.3 rebounds, and 4.5 assists per game. He led the league in scoring. The Lakers won 45 games.
He finished fourth in MVP voting that year.
How is that any different than the season that LeBron is having right now? He is putting up huge numbers, leading the league in scoring, and on his way to 45 wins in a bad conference.
Yet somehow LeBron will get more serious consideration as the MVP this year than Kobe did in 2006. Can someone explain how keeping your team afloat by putting up huge numbers in 2008 makes you more worthy of being an MVP than it did in 2006?
There needs to be consistency in how the voters vote. If team success is the number one factor in MVP voting, so be it. It may be a flawed system, but at least it's a system.
Not even being the best player in the world and first team all-defense could get Kobe even on the podium in '06, and LeBron doesn't have either of those things going for him right now. If they are both playing at their best, Kobe is the better player.
That doesn't necessarily mean that Bryant is the clear-cut MVP right now, either. What Chris Paul has done in New Orleans has been amazing. With the ball, he's like Steve Nash in his MVP seasons, only if Nash played defense and had killer instincts and a swagger.
Having an impressive first half and putting up big numbers is one thing, but sustaining it throughout the entire season and leading your team to the best record your conference is quite another. Chris Paul has certainly made his case for MVP this season.
If either Bryant or Paul wins the MVP award this year, they will have earned it the right way. If LeBron takes home the trophy, it's just another example of how much of a joke the award has become.
Kobe doesn't deserve the MVP because he's never won one; he deserves it because he's earned it.
Chris Paul doesn't deserve to win the MVP because he's the best player on the team with the best record in his conference; he deserves it because he's earned it.
If either Paul or Bryant wins the MVP, it'll restore my faith in the voting process.
If LeBron wins, I give up.