quote:

Where are all the Kobe haters?

Front and Center!!!! YUCK!!!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by joeneek:
Decks said:
Based on the pattern of voting, it appears the MVP award usually goes to a player on the top two teams (by record) in the Eastern or Western Conference.

Marshall said:
I checked the list of every MVP winner and all of them played on teams that had one of the best records in the NBA.


This is where the problem lies. Writers have said there is no such criteria as you both ascribe. Assuming arguendo that there is such criteria- being a top tier team- then why has Kobe not won MVP before since he has played and dominated on a top team?

They won the NBA title 3 times and I think in all but one of those yrs they were a high seed. Shaq got one, AI got one and Duncan got one. By your own logic, as a top 1 or 2 team, (and it's not like Kobe was just a side kick to Shaq on those title teams) Kobe should have won an MVP already.

It's like folks are seemingly saying the Lakers were never a high seed after Shaq left until this year so that's why it's only fitting for him to get it this year. So what, Kobe could have easily won the award in 99-00, 00-01, or 01-02 when the Lakers were doing damage.

With the logic you have that means that Scottie Pippen, John Stockton, James Worthy, Kevin Johnson, Kevin McHale, Josh Howard and Lamar Odom should have won MVPs as well.

The MVP is always going to go to the best player on the best team. Kobe was never considered the best player on the Lakers while playing with Shaq. Pippen was never considered the Bulls best player while playing with Jordan and McHale and Worthy were never considered the best player alongside Bird and Magic.

Heck, James Worthy won the NBA Finals MVP in 1987 but never the league MVP. I guess the voters were hating on him, too?

Look, Kobe Bryant is polarizing figure just like Notre Dame football, Duke basketball, the Yankees and Dallas Cowboys. Folks are going to have strong opinions good and bad about the aformentioned no matter what.

Lakers fans have to stop acting like Chicken Little and deal with it.

Kobe won the MVP because:

1. He is a great player.
2. The Lakers had one of the best records in the NBA.

LeBron James actually had better numbers than Kobe Bryant did, but yet, did not win the MVP. Why? The Cavs did not play well down the stretch.

Just like last year when Kobe had better numbers than Dirk and did not win the MVP. The Mavs happened to have the best record and the Lakers were the 7th seed in the West.

That is the pattern I've seen when it comes to voters. I might not like it and you might not like it. However, that's the way it is.

That's the way it is at this moment. Not necessarily the way it has always been. You know the media has to try to cover their azz.

quote:

Originally posted by joeneek:
It's like folks are seemingly saying the Lakers were never a high seed after Shaq left until this year so that's why it's only fitting for him to get it this year. So what, Kobe could have easily won the award in 99-00, 00-01, or 01-02 when the Lakers were doing damage.

Personally, I thought he deserved at least one of those. Shaq missed a lot of free throws and Kobe cleaned him up.

quote:

Originally posted by ksmith:
That's the way it is at this moment. Not necessarily the way it has always been. You know the media has to try to cover their azz.

Beleive it or not, it's always been that way. The one noteable exception was Kareeem Abdul Jabaar winnning it in 1976 for a Lakers team that finished 40-42. I think MJ won his first one when Chicago finished third in the Eastern Division.

No Marshall. Kobe dominated on 3 Championship teams. The others you list did not. Horrible analogy. It's not just being on the team but leading it. You basically list the 2nd best player on all of those teams. I guess you are saying KB was 2nd fiddle to Shaq for all 3.

You said,
1. He is a great player.
2. The Lakers had one of the best records in the NBA.
If that is true, why did he not win it from 99-02 when he was killing?

Besides, if you were paying attention, I'm neither a Laker or Kobe fan.

Yeah Camera, I agree.

Regardless of what "has always been" or "patterns of criteria" most people would agree that dude should not just be celebrating his 1st MVP. That is the point.

quote:

Kobe was never considered the best player on the Lakers while playing with Shaq.

That is where your argument fails.

quote:

Originally posted by MARSHALL:

quote:

Originally posted by ksmith:


He should have at least two by now.

I don't think that is accurate based on the way the voting has gone historically.

If you look at all the players who have won the MVP, you find that all of them won the award while playing on teams that had one of the best records in the NBA.

This year, the Lakers had the best record in the West so Kobe won the award just like last year when the Mavs had the best record and Dirk won the MVP. That is always how the voters have gone.

Voters usually don't give the MVP award to players whose team is in the middle of the pack in the standings or near the bottom like the Lakers were before this season.

Congrats to Kobe. This one was debatable but congrats anyway. And no, he should not have won one before now.

Things fell in place for him this year: best record in the West, the superiority of the West vs. the East helping put even more shine on their first-place record, teammates improved commensurate with the record, and his being forgiven for his crying like a baby about wanting out of Lakerland and publicly trouncing his teammates during the offseason- forgot about that, huh? As well as the league's willingness (AND NEED) to continue his image rehab despite his offseason antics. Need to sell those t-shirts, season tickets, etc, ya' dig?

So congrats, Kobe. Can't wait to see what happens if you don't win the ring this year and get off to a less-than- stellar start next year. It would be just like old times.

quote:

Originally posted by joeneek:
No Marshall. Kobe dominated on 3 Championship teams. The others you list did not. Horrible analogy. It's not just being on the team but leading it. You basically list the 2nd best player on all of those teams. I guess you are saying KB was 2nd fiddle to Shaq for all 3.


You said,
1. He is a great player.
2. The Lakers had one of the best records in the NBA.
If that is true, why did he not win it from 99-02 when he was killing?

Besides, if you were paying attention, I'm neither a Laker or Kobe fan.

Yeah Camera, I agree.

Regardless of what "has always been" or "patterns of criteria" most people would agree that dude should not just be celebrating his 1st MVP. That is the point.

1. Yes, Kobe was second fiddle to Shaq because other teams game-planned to stop Shaq and not Kobe. Kobe was not even the Lakers No.1 option on offense Shaq was.

Kobe was a fantastic player during the title runs, but he was complemented Shaq more than anything.

2. Kobe had great numbers the last three years, but does that equate to being MVP?

LeBron James had better numbers than Kobe and played on a far less talented team than the Lakers, but yet, did not win the MVP. So again, I ask you, do numbers equate to an MVP season?

quote:

Originally posted by MARSHALL:

quote:

Originally posted by joeneek:
No Marshall. Kobe dominated on 3 Championship teams. The others you list did not. Horrible analogy. It's not just being on the team but leading it. You basically list the 2nd best player on all of those teams. I guess you are saying KB was 2nd fiddle to Shaq for all 3.


You said,
1. He is a great player.
2. The Lakers had one of the best records in the NBA.
If that is true, why did he not win it from 99-02 when he was killing?

Besides, if you were paying attention, I'm neither a Laker or Kobe fan.

Yeah Camera, I agree.

Regardless of what "has always been" or "patterns of criteria" most people would agree that dude should not just be celebrating his 1st MVP. That is the point.

1. Yes, Kobe was second fiddle to Shaq because other teams game-planned to stop Shaq and not Kobe. Kobe was not even the Lakers No.1 option on offense Shaq was.

Kobe was a fantastic player during the title runs, but he was complemented Shaq more than anything.

2. Kobe had great numbers the last three years, but does that equate to being MVP?

LeBron James had better numbers than Kobe and played on a far less talented team than the Lakers, but yet, did not win the MVP. So again, I ask you, do numbers equate to an MVP season?

I disagree with you about Kobe playing second fiddle to Shaq. They played an inside out game using the Triangle. Neither one was first option, it depends on how the D plays you. When they started fouling Shaq, he had to be pulled a few times cause he could not convert at the charity strike. Kobe was the cog in the wheel, without him, it does not happen for those teams.

As for your point #2, you are way off the mark. Kobe should have been the MVP at least 2 of the last 3 years, you pick the two, and maybe all three.

quote:

Originally posted by The Camera:

quote:

Originally posted by MARSHALL:

quote:

Originally posted by joeneek:
No Marshall. Kobe dominated on 3 Championship teams. The others you list did not. Horrible analogy. It's not just being on the team but leading it. You basically list the 2nd best player on all of those teams. I guess you are saying KB was 2nd fiddle to Shaq for all 3.


You said,
1. He is a great player.
2. The Lakers had one of the best records in the NBA.
If that is true, why did he not win it from 99-02 when he was killing?

Besides, if you were paying attention, I'm neither a Laker or Kobe fan.

Yeah Camera, I agree.

Regardless of what "has always been" or "patterns of criteria" most people would agree that dude should not just be celebrating his 1st MVP. That is the point.

1. Yes, Kobe was second fiddle to Shaq because other teams game-planned to stop Shaq and not Kobe. Kobe was not even the Lakers No.1 option on offense Shaq was.

Kobe was a fantastic player during the title runs, but he was complemented Shaq more than anything.

2. Kobe had great numbers the last three years, but does that equate to being MVP?

LeBron James had better numbers than Kobe and played on a far less talented team than the Lakers, but yet, did not win the MVP. So again, I ask you, do numbers equate to an MVP season?

As for your point #2, you are way off the mark. Kobe should have been the MVP at least 2 of the last 3 years, you pick the two, and maybe all three.

Why should he have been MVP? I still have not gotten an answer.

Because he was the BEST dang on player in the NBA.

quote:

Originally posted by The Camera:
Because he was the BEST dang on player in the NBA.

Maybe Pau Gasol is.

Before the Lakers made the "steal" with the Grizzles, L.A. was 29-16. After the trade the Lakers were 28-9.

Like I've been saying, Kobe won this award because the Lakers got really good.

Even Tim Legler on ESPN said in order to be a serious MVP candidate, your team has to be championship-caliber. The Lakers were not the last two years.

That's why Kobe did not win the award even though he had better numbers than the winners.

LeBron had better numbers in points, rebounds and assists than Kobe, but the Cavs were the just an average team.