2010/2011 NBA Thread

[Guest JukeboxHero]

Hell yeah, Cavs. Hell yeah. (Y)

[maninblack]

The Knicks however are likely to win no more than 2 against the bad teams and may need to split or sweep the last 2 games just to lock up a playoff spot

If the Knicks go 0-8, Charlotte would still have to win 6 of 9 to overtake them. I know the sky is falling and everything, but the Knicks are in.

If the Knicks actually drop out of the playoffs, we can credit it to the impending Mayan apocalypse. Never mind if no actual Mayans are living anywhere in the Tri-state area.

[ROZAY]

I know that they have the best record since the All Star break, but I think last night more than proved that the Lakers are ready for the playoffs.

[Meacon Keaton]

Or that the Spurs are getting old and would only be dominant in a 50-game season.

[maninblack]

Or, they're lulling the Lakers into a false sense of security.

[Blaze09]

The Spurs need to win this next match-up. I would rather prefer Dallas, and not have to see OKC til the conference finals.

[naiwf]

Just thought I'd throw this out there, but can anyone give a legitimate argument as to why Rose should NOT win the MVP this year? I keep hearing people try to say that Howard or LeBron are threats, but I just don't see it. Even if Miami wins out they'll have 3 fewer wins than Cleveland did last year with more talent. Similarly, if Orlando wins out they'll have 6 fewer wins than they did each of the last two seasons. Meanwhile if Chicago loses out they'll be +16 with Boozer missing about 20-25 games and Noah missing 35-40. Rose is averaging 25-4-8 and is clearly the reason Chicago will likely win the Eastern Conference regular season crown. LeBron may be the most talented player in the league, Howard may have the most impact on both ends of the court since he should win DPOY again, but Rose is easily the most valuable this year and it should be close to unanimous.

[Powerhart]

Just thought I'd throw this out there, but can anyone give a legitimate argument as to why Rose should NOT win the MVP this year? I keep hearing people try to say that Howard or LeBron are threats, but I just don't see it. Even if Miami wins out they'll have 3 fewer wins than Cleveland did last year with more talent. Similarly, if Orlando wins out they'll have 6 fewer wins than they did each of the last two seasons. Meanwhile if Chicago loses out they'll be +16 with Boozer missing about 20-25 games and Noah missing 35-40. Rose is averaging 25-4-8 and is clearly the reason Chicago will likely win the Eastern Conference regular season crown. LeBron may be the most talented player in the league, Howard may have the most impact on both ends of the court since he should win DPOY again, but Rose is easily the most valuable this year and it should be close to unanimous.

Couldn't have said it any better myself.

[DMN in the House]

Because Kobe deserves like...two make-up MVPs?

Rose can have it, though, because Chicago is out in the second round. Write it down.

[naiwf]

Because Kobe deserves like...two make-up MVPs?

Rose can have it, though, because Chicago is out in the second round. Write it down.

I agree with both statements, particularly if Orlando beats Atlanta. Those Nash MVPs look even worse in hindsight than they did at the time. At least Nash can wear the crown of worst multiple MVP winner in the history of major North American pro sports since he'll never make it to the Finals

[Trey]

Can you really fault Nash for never making a Finals? Look at the teams he had to contend with these last ten years. If you could've transplanted the Suns into the East, I would bet Nash would've been to at least 2 finals in the last 10 years or so even with such a horrible owner.

[naiwf]

Can you really fault Nash for never making a Finals? Look at the teams he had to contend with these last ten years. If you could've transplanted the Suns into the East, I would bet Nash would've been to at least 2 finals in the last 10 years or so even with such a horrible owner.

Yes we can

Every other MVP in the history of basketball has made it to the Finals. Other than Nash, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Dirk Nowitzki, Allen Iverson and Lebron James ,are the only guys that have never won a title, but the first two were around during the middle of the Jordan dynasty, Dirk was beat by an out of this world performance, and the latter two were on teams that were not nearly as talented as the teams they lost to in the Finals. If Nash had only won that first MVP, I think he could get a pass. However when the entire club of MVPs not to do something consists of one dude in 55 years, that's a problem.

Basketball is the one sport of the 4 that a single guy can drive the bus on. Dwyane Wade singlehandedly took the 2006 Heat to the title for instance, robbing Dirk of his ring. It's pretty much impossible for any baseball or football player to do that, and even a hot goalie can only prevent the other team from scoring. The fact that LeBron has 0 wins in the Finals is the main reason it's an utter joke for people to even entertain that he's a superior player to Kobe, let alone MJ.

Statistical piling on is spoiler tagged for brevity.

Other multi time MVP's in the NBA

Bob Pettit, 1x champ, ROY, 20,000+ points, 10,000+ rebounds, 10x 1st team All NBA

Bill Russell, 11x champ, 20,000+ rebounds (#2 all time), 3x 1st team All NBA, 8x 2nd team during Wilt's era

Wilt Chamberlain, 2x champ, ROY, 30,000+ points (#2 all time/#2 PPG), 20,000+ rebounds (#1 all time and forever more), 7x 1st team All NBA,

Kareem Abdul Jabbar, 6x champ, ROY, all time leading scorer in NBA history, 17,000+ rebounds, # 3 all time in blocks AND rebounds, 10x 1st team all NBA

Moses Malone, 1x champ, 27,000+ points (#7 all time), 16,000+ rebounds (#5 all time), 4x 1st team All NBA

Larry Bird, 3x champ, ROY, 20,000+ points, ~9,000 rebounds, 9x 1st team All NBA

Magic Johnson, 5x champ, ROY, 17,000+ points, 11,000+ assists (#4 all time/#1 APG), 9x 1st team All NBA

Michael Jordan, 6x champ, ROY, 32,000+ points (#3 all time/#1 PPG), 10x 1st team All NBA

Karl Malone, 36,000+ points (#2 all time), 14,000+ rebounds (#6 all time) 11x 1st team All NBA

Tim Duncan, 4x champ, 21,000+ points, 12,000+ rebounds, 9x 1st team All NBA

LeBron James, 17,000+ points, 4,000+ rebounds & assists, 4x 1st team All NBA in 7 years (will be 5 in 8 when they announce this season)

Steve Nash, 15,000+ points, 9,000+ assists (#5 all time), 3x 1st team All NBA

Nash's career averages are just 14.6 PPG & 8.5 APG, Andre Miller for example is good for 14.4/7.2, so a multiple time MVP is essentially Andre Miller with an extra assist per game. He's got the fewest times as a first teamer with Russell, but he wasn't vying for a single spot with an in his prime Stockton/Magic/Kidd etc which is what Russell had to deal with with Wilt. He's a nice player who was overrated by the media and the stats bear that out. An all time legend of the sport gets his team there with less help than Nash had. Not winning the ring is fine, not getting there at least once in 11 trips to the postseason with all the talent he was surrounded by isn't.

[Trey]

Oh, I agree with you on the back-to-back MVP awards being a complete disgrace, I just don't agree that one of the big complaints is that he never made the Finals and a lot of that has to do with the fact he is strapped with such a horrible owner. If memory serves me correctly, they basically gave away Luol Deng and Joe Johnson so Marcus Banks and some other trash as just one of the many cheapskate moves made by that team that more then likely cost them a championship.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Trey

[naiwf]

Oh, I agree with you on the back-to-back MVP awards being a complete disgrace, I just don't agree that one of the big complaints is that he never made the Finals and a lot of that has to do with the fact he is strapped with such a horrible owner. If memory serves me correctly, they basically gave away Luol Deng and Joe Johnson so Marcus Banks and some other trash as just one of the many cheapskate moves made by that team that more then likely cost them a championship.

There's no denying that Phoenix wasted their opportunity to get a shot at the Finals because their owner was cheap. He sold off a bunch of draft picks for cash just so they wouldn't have to pay luxury tax, so there was no way he was going to pay everyone what their inflated stats said they were worth due to the 'Antoni system. It's the exact same problem the Knicks would have now if Dolan was a cheapskate.

My main issue with Nash is essentially that every other great player of the last 25 years or so at least played in the Finals at some point and we've had multiple dynasties/mini dynasties during that time (Bad Boy Pistons, Jordan's Bulls, the back to back Rockets, Shaq/Kobe, Spurs, Kobe/Gasol). If you look at guys who could someday win an MVP that haven't made the Finals yet they are all young enough that anything can happen, especially when you consider that some of the elite teams like LA, Boston, San Antonio and Dallas are all getting older and you've got potential game changers like Howard, CP3 and Deron Williams who are almost guaranteed to switch teams unless the new CBA prevents them from doing so.

[Trey]

I hold it against Nash that he never made a Finals appearance but I hold his career defense against him a lot more. As for those guys switching teams and making Finals, am I the only one who hates these super teams getting together?

[gunnar hendershow]

To be fair to Nash I think we all basically assumed a title in 07 was a foregone conclusion, and then Bob Horry went all Cerebral Assassin on the Suns and cost them 2 games in the series. MVP awards are meaningless in all sports though, I forget where it is but I once saw something where a guy said more than half the MVP winners weren't the Most Valuable in the league that particular year, as in another player's numbers more affected the win/loss total of his particular team.

[naiwf]

The new superteam strategy does suck, but only if you consider that they're much more obvious about it now than they were in the past.

Consider that The Spurs tanked a season while The Admiral was hurt and got luckier than Boston in the lottery for that one or Duncan would have been a Celtic and the Spurs would have 0 titles instead of 4.

Orlando hit the lottery TWO years in a row picking up Shaq and Webber, who they then traded for Penny Hardaway. They got to the Finals in '95 and were the "next big thing" until Shaq left Orlando because he was tired of dealing with Penny and Kobe forced a draft night trade from the Hornets to create that Lakers three peat, or it may have been Orlando that had a bunch of titles.

Boston traded a bag of balls for Allen and KG to make their big three.

Jerry West basically gifted Gasol to LA for this version of the Lakers.

LeBron, Wade and Bosh essentially orchestrated the Miami version years ago. Carmelo then got his way and got to the Knicks and it's pretty much a given that other stars will follow suit if they can. The days of OKC finding pieces in the draft and making a slick trade (Perkins for Green) are pretty much going to be nonexistent unless the CBA puts in a franchise player style clause.

[Trey]

I was only 11 I think when the Spurs got Duncan, did they tank Miami style when Wade got hurt or were they just not that talented outside of Robinson?

As for the teams with no stars tanking, I don't have a problem with it because more then likely they'll end up getting a star sooner rather then later. I just hate that before I would watch a Cavs game for LeBron, a Nuggets game for Carmelo, a Raptors game for Bosh, a Heat game for Wade, a Hornets game for Paul, etc and now I'm lucky if I end up watching more then 3 games a week that I'm not just fast forwarding through because it loses my interest. I'm selfish like that.

[naiwf]

I was only 11 I think when the Spurs got Duncan, did they tank Miami style when Wade got hurt or were they just not that talented outside of Robinson?

I'd say 6 of one, and a half dozen of the other. They were 20-62 that year and were a pretty bad team, however they clearly weren't going balls out to win either. Just for comparison's sake, the Spurs have won AT LEAST 47 games every other full year (strike shortened season they were 37-13 and won the title) since 1989-90. Was Robinson worth 25-30 wins that season? It's hard to say but when your next 2 worst seasons in two plus decades are 47 and 49 wins and everything else is 50+ it does seem a little bit shady.

[bill_da_bill]

Not saying I agree with this, but the argument I hear against Rose pretty much all hinges on the +/- category. Basically Lebron and Dwight have a more significant impact on their team because their teams do worse without them than the Bulls do without Rose.

I think it'd ridiculous. Rose is the MVP.