There are 195 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

MVP award in sports, in general

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
Originally posted by 80sbaby24:
You guys can laugh or facepalm me all you want. Wont change my opinion.

If you want, I can list regular statistics, advanced statistics and other bits of information that can back my opinion. I am willing to do so, if you are willing to read them objectively. If not, I wont waste my time.

Ok, whatcha got?

Honestly, I feel its people who think Rose is a deserving MVP should be the ones explaining themselves rather than the other way around. Because there honestly isnt one piece of measurable/statistical evidence that shows that he is worthy.

Alright here we go.

Lets start with basic statistics:

-7th in the NBA in scoring
-10th in the NBA in assists
-42nd in the NBA in assist/turnover ratio (a truly disgusting statistic for a point guard and leader of an offense)
-25th among NBA guards in field goal percentage
-16th among NBA guards in free throw percentage
-52nd in the NBA in steals

Do any of those numbers scream MVP to you guys? They sure dont to me.

What about advanced stats?

-Rose was 9th in the NBA in PER. Only twice in the past decade has there been an MVP that finished worse than 5th in PER, both of which were highly questionable MVP winners.

-Rose was 6th in the NBA in Estimated Wins added. 6th on that isnt exactly high for someone who is supposed to be the most valuable player in the entire league.

-The Bulls only averaged 1.49 points less per 100 possessions with Derrick Rose sitting on the bench than they did with him on the court. Let that stat marinate for a minute. 1.49 points per 100 possessions is the effect that Derrick Rose has on the Bulls. Statistically, the Bulls outscore their opponents by 6.78 points per 100 possessions with Rose on the bench. If you were to expand that statistic, it translates to a 55 win team.

(Just for a point of comparison, you know how many less points per 100 possessions the Heat were with Lebron on the bench? How about 10.49 points worse. An what about the Mavericks with Dirk on the bench? Try 16.68 points per 100 possessions worse. Dwight and the Magic? 8.68 points per 100 possessions.)

-Aside from free throw percentage, Rose was worse in every measurable statistic in clutch time (4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, with neither team leading by more than 5 points), than he was in non clutch time.

Honestly, I could keep going. The Bulls #1 ranked defense (something Rose has very little to do with) is the reason for the Bulls success last year. Rose was unquestionably the driving force behind the Bulls offense though.....an offense that was good enough to be ranked 21st in the NBA. To me, there is so little evidence that Rose deserves the award, its almost comical. There is nothing that shows he was a more valuable player in 2011 than Lebron, Dwight, Dirk, Paul, etc. Rose won the award because of a compelling narrative, an nothing more.

Im done. Comment away.....
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 13,744
Rose led the Bulls to an NBA-best record of 62-20, and to the most wins by a Bulls team since Chicago won 62 games in 1997-98.

With his scoring, assist and rebounding averages, he became just the seventh player in NBA history to average 25.0 ppg, 7.5 apg and 4.0 rpg in a single season (Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Dwyane Wade and LeBron James).

He also became the fifth player in NBA history to post 2,000 points, 600 assists and 300 rebounds in a single season (Oscar Robertson, John Havlicek, Michael Jordan and LeBron James).

Derrick Rose made or assisted on at least half of Chicago's field goals in 26 games, the highest such total for any player in the NBA in 2010-11. He also was the only player in the NBA to rank in the top 10 in points per game and assists per game.

In doing so, once again, he joined Michael Jordan (1988-89) as the only players in franchise history to finish in the top 10 in scoring and assists in a single season.
[ Edited by Jcool on Dec 24, 2011 at 8:29 AM ]
The Bulls #1 ranked defense (something Rose has very little to do with) is the reason for the Bulls success last year.

guess he was playing Melo type D. with that logic it may seem as though Bulls were always playing 5-4 on D with D. Rose was in the penalty box. C'MON MAN, Don't Toews me bro!

P.s nice breakdown Jcool
LOL. I knew someone would take one sentence of my whole writeup and put a bunch of laughing smileys or some equally cute gif.....while completely ignoring everything else. I love how you are putting words in my mouth saying Rose doesnt playing any defense. Never once did I say that. But of the 5 players that start on the Bulls, Rose is unquestionably the weakest link.

Jcool....thats a really nice narrative that you wrote up. Its that Sportscenter type knowledge which got him the MVP to begin with. If the NBA voters were as knowledgeable as baseball voters, there is NO way that Rose would have gotten the MVP. Like you said JCool, his MVP campaign was built on the idea that "oooh the Bulls won 20 more games in 2010-11 than they did in 2009-10."

It amazes me that Rose gets the credit for the turnaround rather than the Tom Thibodeau, and the defense installed. Their defense went from 15th ranked in 09-10 to first in 10-11. Their offense went from 24th to 21st....hardly a reason to celebrate. The defense is the reason the Bulls had a big turnaround.

And Jcool, all that "Rose was one of ___ players to do ____ in NBA history" is exactly what I am talking about regarding a narrative. Why are we comparing Rose with players of past seasons rather than players of the same season? And I find it absolutely comical that you chose to use Michael Jordan's 88-89 season stats as a way to prop up Rose, when in fact Michael Jordan finished 3rd in MVP voting that year.
[ Edited by 80sbaby24 on Dec 24, 2011 at 11:01 AM ]
Ya I think MVP should have been Dwight, LBJ, or Durant.
Originally posted by 80sbaby24:
LOL. I knew someone would take one sentence of my whole writeup and put a bunch of laughing smileys or some equally cute gif.....while completely ignoring everything else. I love how you are putting words in my mouth saying Rose doesnt playing any defense. Never once did I say that. But of the 5 players that start on the Bulls, Rose is unquestionably the weakest link.

Jcool....thats a really nice narrative that you wrote up. Its that Sportscenter type knowledge which got him the MVP to begin with. If the NBA voters were as knowledgeable as baseball voters, there is NO way that Rose would have gotten the MVP. Like you said JCool, his MVP campaign was built on the idea that "oooh the Bulls won 20 more games in 2010-11 than they did in 2009-10."

It amazes me that Rose gets the credit for the turnaround rather than the Tom Thibodeau, and the defense installed. Their defense went from 15th ranked in 09-10 to first in 10-11. Their offense went from 24th to 21st....hardly a reason to celebrate. The defense is the reason the Bulls had a big turnaround.

And Jcool, all that "Rose was one of ___ players to do ____ in NBA history" is exactly what I am talking about regarding a narrative. Why are we comparing Rose with players of past seasons rather than players of the same season? And I find it absolutely comical that you chose to use Michael Jordan's 88-89 season stats as a way to prop up Rose, when in fact Michael Jordan finished 3rd in MVP voting that year.

I thought it was ok for Rose to win from watching him play. His numbers are All Star numbers , but are MVP worthy when on a top playoff seed. But when you watch Rose beat double and triple teams, especially down the stretch, I was sold. The Bulls are a lottery team with out Rose. Dwight could have edged him out had his team had a better record than the Bulls.

22 year old MVP is cray
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
I thought it was ok for Rose to win from watching him play. His numbers are All Star numbers , but are MVP worthy when on a top playoff seed. But when you watch Rose beat double and triple teams, especially down the stretch, I was sold. The Bulls are a lottery team with out Rose. Dwight could have edged him out had his team had a better record than the Bulls.

22 year old MVP is cray

I hear what you are saying, that Rose was definitely playing at an elite level. There is NO question about that, and I will never argue that.

But to your bolded sentence......you could replace the name Rose with about 5-8 other names (and those players teams), and the sentence would still be true.
To be honest (and more to the original point of the thread), I am so tired of the trend of NBA MVPs going to the best player on the best team. Its ridiculous. Why does someones team need to be the best (or close to) for a player to be considered the MVP? Makes no sense.
Originally posted by 80sbaby24:
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
I thought it was ok for Rose to win from watching him play. His numbers are All Star numbers , but are MVP worthy when on a top playoff seed. But when you watch Rose beat double and triple teams, especially down the stretch, I was sold. The Bulls are a lottery team with out Rose. Dwight could have edged him out had his team had a better record than the Bulls.

22 year old MVP is cray

I hear what you are saying, that Rose was definitely playing at an elite level. There is NO question about that, and I will never argue that.

But to your bolded sentence......you could replace the name Rose with about 5-8 other names (and those players teams), and the sentence would still be true.

Sorry, when I said lottery I meant bottom 3 team. I think the Magic are the only other team that would go from playoffs to worst 3 team with the loss of one player IMO.
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
Sorry, when I said lottery I meant bottom 3 team. I think the Magic are the only other team that would go from playoffs to worst 3 team with the loss of one player IMO.

Oh you meant bottom 3 team? Well then there is absolutely no way I can agree with you in regards to the Bulls and Rose.

Like I wrote earlier, with Rose on the bench, the Bulls still outscore their opponents by an average of 6.78 points per 100 possessions.....which roughly translates to a 55 win team. Even if that statistic is off by 20 games (which is unrealistically generous), they would still be a 35 win team....which would still make them better than 10 NBA teams.
[ Edited by 80sbaby24 on Dec 24, 2011 at 12:01 PM ]
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 13,744
Jcool....thats a really nice narrative that you wrote up. Its that Sportscenter type knowledge which got him the MVP to begin with. If the NBA voters were as knowledgeable as baseball voters, there is NO way that Rose would have gotten the MVP. Like you said JCool, his MVP campaign was built on the idea that "oooh the Bulls won 20 more games in 2010-11 than they did in 2009-10."

Baseball writers knowledgeable??? HAHA good one! His MVP was based on the fact he had a great season and was the primary scorer and ball handler on 60 win team. Having a deep bench does not take away from the season he had. Try watching a game for once it might help you out. Looking just at stats is the easy way out. Its how the GREAT baseball writers make A-Rod MVP on a last place team.
[ Edited by Jcool on Dec 24, 2011 at 12:14 PM ]
80sbaby24 it's all good!!! i asked a ?estion and you gave you perspective. just curious to whom you thought should have been the mvp? i have a good guess.
Originally posted by Jcool:
Jcool....thats a really nice narrative that you wrote up. Its that Sportscenter type knowledge which got him the MVP to begin with. If the NBA voters were as knowledgeable as baseball voters, there is NO way that Rose would have gotten the MVP. Like you said JCool, his MVP campaign was built on the idea that "oooh the Bulls won 20 more games in 2010-11 than they did in 2009-10."

Baseball writers knowledgeable??? HAHA good one! His MVP was based on the fact he had a great season and was the primary scorer and ball handler on 60 win team. Having a deep bench does not take away from the season he had. Try watching a game for once it might help you out. Looking just at stats is the easy way out. Its how the GREAT baseball writers make A-Rod MVP on a last place team.

Ah yes. The good old "you must not watch the games" assumption, coupled with the "only looking at stats" assumption. Nicely done.

He had a great season. I agree.

He was the primary scorer and ball handler on a 60 win team. I agree.

But how do either of those two sentences make him more deserving than a player who had a great season, was the primary scorer and ball handler on a team that won a couple of less games?

Are you a Giants fan Jcool? Only reason I ask is because I assume you think that Lincecum deserved his two Cy Youngs right? Well if baseball voters use the same logic as basketball voters do, Timmy would have zero CYs. Felix wouldnt have his either. An I really dont understand your Alex Rodriguez issue. He was clearly the best player in all of baseball when he won his MVP. It makes ZERO sense that someones lack of a good team could prevent a player from winning an MVP. Much like it makes no sense that an MVP award is given out based on team success (like the NBA does).
Originally posted by 80sbaby24:
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
Sorry, when I said lottery I meant bottom 3 team. I think the Magic are the only other team that would go from playoffs to worst 3 team with the loss of one player IMO.

Oh you meant bottom 3 team? Well then there is absolutely no way I can agree with you in regards to the Bulls and Rose.

Like I wrote earlier, with Rose on the bench, the Bulls still outscore their opponents by an average of 6.78 points per 100 possessions.....which roughly translates to a 55 win team. Even if that statistic is off by 20 games (which is unrealistically generous), they would still be a 35 win team....which would still make them better than 10 NBA teams.

There are too many variables that go into calculating what a team would be with or with out a certain player. Especially when you have a stat that says the bulls would win 55 games without Rose, when Rose is on the bench you can't assume that all the best players for both teams are on the court except Rose
Originally posted by Negrodamus:
80sbaby24 it's all good!!! i asked a ?estion and you gave you perspective. just curious to whom you thought should have been the mvp? i have a good guess.

Its all in good fun bro. I hope my message didnt come off as me talking down or something. Just trying to have a fun sports debate with you.

Honestly, I think there are a number of players more deserving than Rose (Howard, Lebron, Durant, Dirk). If I had to pick the MVP I would go with Howard, followed very closely by LeBron.