CelticsStrong
Around the League => Around the NBA => Topic started by: wiley on April 10, 2017, 11:31:21 PM
-
Russell Westbrook should be MVP. Help make it happen by posting support here.
if enough fans support him around the league I thought it might help to keep voters from
flubbing an easy call.
-
yeah, Id give it to Harden, Leonard and Lebron all over him.
Hes right there with Isaiah for 4th in my book tho
-
Most Productive Player is not the same as Most Valuable Player.
Westbrook has had the most impressive season from a pure counting statistics perspective, but I don't think he's even close to the best or most impactful player from a winning standpoint.
I'd rank him behind LeBron, Curry, Kawhi, Durant, and Harden if we're just ranking who's best in a vacuum. In terms of who has had the best regular season, I think Harden and Kawhi are both ahead of him if you care about defense and whose team is best at, you know, winning games.
Look, it's one of the greatest regular seasons of all time. What's so remarkable about this season is that there are a handful of all-time great seasons by some of the top players in the league.
As I argued in another thread, I'd give it to Harden. A couple rebounds a game should not be the deciding factor here.
-
I think Lebron and Harden could do the same thing with more wins but they don't care about getting their own stats as much as WB.
It's cheap and classless the way he's done it.
Team sucks too.
How can you be the most valuable player if your team is barely in the playoffs and could be higher if you hadn't been stat padding all this time?
Garbage award and should be given by players or coaches instead of media.
-
Kawhi or Harden, then Westbrook.
I never had much MVP love for the 1st round bunnies.
I would give WB the most entertaining player award for this fantastic performance,
-
thunder's record when WB gets a TD is something like 35-8(sorry can't find the correct record.
Without him dominating like he does Thunder is nets of the west....
-
thunder's record when WB gets a TD is something like 35-8(sorry can't find the correct record.
Without him dominating like he does Thunder is nets of the west....
In my book MVP isn't about what team would be a bottom feeder without that player. It is about what team has a legit chance to be led to the championship by the MVP.
-
thunder's record when WB gets a TD is something like 35-8(sorry can't find the correct record.
Without him dominating like he does Thunder is nets of the west....
But without Harden the Rockets are fighting on a Sacramento Kings level of terrible too.
Harden more efficient, better record. They crush OKC in 7 game series right?
-
As a hardcore basketball fan, an MVP is a guy like Lebron, Kawhi, Durant. They represent match up problem on both end of the court and make their teammates better.
I'll consider Harden very close because he can play defense when he really wants to.
You can make a really strong case for MVP Harden as he makes his teammates WAY better.
As a casual fan, an MVP is a big number show guy like Harden, Westbrook, IT.
Different worlds.
-
thunder's record when WB gets a TD is something like 35-8(sorry can't find the correct record.
Without him dominating like he does Thunder is nets of the west....
But without Harden the Rockets are fighting on a Sacramento Kings level of terrible too.
Harden more efficient, better record. They crush OKC in 7 game series right?
I m pretty sure they won't even need 7 games.
But i am also pretty sure this is the case if the Houston plays without Harden and OKC without Westbrook.
And there is also this
http://www.sbnation.com/2017/3/31/15134562/james-harden-clutch-stats-history-mvp-rockets
I can see the argument that the team success should also be a factor. But WB's season is unique.
And i agree with LGC88.... I too prefer Kawhi type of players , efficient two way players who win games by themselves and you don't even notice it. But man.... OKC without him is not even a basketball team !
-
thunder's record when WB gets a TD is something like 35-8(sorry can't find the correct record.
Without him dominating like he does Thunder is nets of the west....
But without Harden the Rockets are fighting on a Sacramento Kings level of terrible too.
Harden more efficient, better record. They crush OKC in 7 game series right?
It is possible but that's not really what the on off court splits say, http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hardeja01/on-off/2017 the rockets are about 7 points better on offense with harden on the floor and about 5 points better on defense when he is off the floor, so they are only 2 points worse over the course of 100 possessions.
Thunder on the other hand are 11 points better on offense with Westbrook on the floor and 2 points better on defense when he is on the floor, they are 13 points better over 100 possessions with Westbrook in the game.
The rockets average +5.8 a game and without Harden in the game they are still +4.9 so looking at those numbers they would still be a top 5 team. The Thunder average +.8 a game but when Westbrook is not in they are -9.0 per 100 possessions which is almost 2 points worse than the worst team in the league.
Now I am not saying the rockets would still be top four on the west without Harden, but to say Harden has had the impact on winning that Russ has had is ridiculous.I think Lebron and Harden could do the same thing with more wins but they don't care about getting their own stats as much as WB.
It's cheap and classless the way he's done it.
Team sucks too.
How can you be the most valuable player if your team is barely in the playoffs and could be higher if you hadn't been stat padding all this time?
Garbage award and should be given by players or coaches instead of media.
And this the team would have a better record if Russ wasn't doing this? They are historically bad if he doesn't get a triple double and pretty good when he does, no one on that team can score in crunch time but Russ, he is a one man show dragging a team to potentially 48 wins.
-
I think Lebron and Harden could do the same thing with more wins but they don't care about getting their own stats as much as WB.
It's cheap and classless the way he's done it.
Team sucks too.
How can you be the most valuable player if your team is barely in the playoffs and could be higher if you hadn't been stat padding all this time?
Garbage award and should be given by players or coaches instead of media.
And this the team would have a better record if Russ wasn't doing this? They are historically bad if he doesn't get a triple double and pretty good when he does, no one on that team can score in crunch time but Russ, he is a one man show dragging a team to potentially a 48 wins.
I don't get that either.....
Not being the MVP is something that we can discuss .... But actually saying that OKC is better without him dominating like he does is ridiculous.
OKC is 32-9 when he gets a TD.
When he doesn't 14-25 .....
He is not just padding stats. He is actually winning games.
-
OKC is 32-9 when he gets a TD.
When he doesn't 14-25 .....
An alternate theory:
Maybe because once he's achieved his arbitrary counting stats he can focus on winning, rather than forcing assists and stealing rebounds from teammates?
Whereas, on nights when he hasn't reached arbitrary statistical milestones, he chases those stats, winning be [dang]ed.
-
I thought about this while writing the previous post... It could be...
But I think his fg% and TO would have taken a huge hit unless when he posts a TD he goes for something like 80%fg and 0TO....
I doubt he s that efficient
-
People talking about how bad his team is with him off the court....
Russ was hitting these TD's at the start of the season... Maybe, just maybe, he never gave his team a chance to gel together. It's hard to build cohesion when you're watching one player doing the hero ball thing. When he's not there, they probably don't know what to do.
-
Let's just remember Oscar finished in 3rd in 61-62 with 135 points behind Wilt who had 152 points and averaged 50/23. Of course Wilt only finished in 2nd to the defensive master on the league's best team who had a whopping 297 points in the MVP voting despite having lesser stats than either Wilt or Oscar. Defense matters in this award which is why Bill was the runaway choice for the award despite the eye popping stats from Oscar and Wilt.
-
thunder's record when WB gets a TD is something like 35-8(sorry can't find the correct record.
Without him dominating like he does Thunder is nets of the west....
That's what happens when you hog the ball. The entire team's success is correlated to you having a decent game.
Also, I'd love to see that juxtaposed against opponents record...
-
Let's just remember Oscar finished in 3rd in 61-62 with 135 points behind Wilt who had 152 points and averaged 50/23. Of course Wilt only finished in 2nd to the defensive master on the league's best team who had a whopping 297 points in the MVP voting despite having lesser stats than either Wilt or Oscar. Defense matters in this award which is why Bill was the runaway choice for the award despite the eye popping stats from Oscar and Wilt.
Is this a vote for Smaht if the Cs get best record in the East? LOL.
-
Let's just remember Oscar finished in 3rd in 61-62 with 135 points behind Wilt who had 152 points and averaged 50/23. Of course Wilt only finished in 2nd to the defensive master on the league's best team who had a whopping 297 points in the MVP voting despite having lesser stats than either Wilt or Oscar. Defense matters in this award which is why Bill was the runaway choice for the award despite the eye popping stats from Oscar and Wilt.
Give it to Kawhi. He checks all the boxes except self-promotion.
-
I wouldn't be mad if Harden got it.
But what Westbrook has done this season is pretty amazing.
-
Russ is deserving of MVP. So are Harden and Kawhi. None is more deserving than LeBron, though.
-
I really like what Lowe said on this on one of his podcasts about Westbrook:
"If you don't think Russell Westbrook is stat padding his rebounds, you're just blindfully ignorant or not watching. He is stat padding his rebounds. So if you really care enough about 2 defensive rebounds to make that the deciding factor in who you vote for, more power to you. If you vote for Westbrook, you should not do it because of the triple double. Period."
-
Who is the Thunder's best player in WB's absence? Oladipo? Taj Gibson? The Thunder are a poorly constructed team. 2/3rds of the roster are point guards or centers. For the rockets, Anderson shoots 40% 3pfg, Beverly shoots 38%, and Gordon shoots 37%. Double teaming Harden is a mistake. WB doesn't have anyone like that. He doesn't have Irving. He doesn't have Aldridge.
All of these other MVP guys have help. The Thunder are a playoff team. What more do you want? With. Terribly constructed roster, the team has made the playoffs. Taj Gibson gets you nowhere.
Without Westbrook the Thunder are the Nets, west. He's the clear MVP.
-
Give it to Russ. He's having a historic year.
Harden 2nd place. Lebron/Kawhi 3rd or 4th.
You could make the argument that Lebron should win it every year. I think that would be boring.
-
Give it to Russ. He's having a historic year.
Harden 2nd place. Lebron/Kawhi 3rd or 4th.
You could make the argument that Lebron should win it every year. I think that would be boring.
It's not Lebron's fault he's better than everyone else. We shouldn't just deny him MVPs because it would be boring to admit to ourselves that he's been dominating the league for the past 10 years.
Though I would give it to Harden this year. Carrying a team that really shouldn't be in the playoffs without him, and 29 pts, 11 assists at much better efficiency than Westbrook.
-
It's not Lebron's fault he's better than everyone else. We shouldn't just deny him MVPs because it would be boring to admit to ourselves that he's been dominating the league for the past 10 years.
Though I would give it to Harden this year. Carrying a team that really shouldn't be in the playoffs without him, and 29 pts, 11 assists at much better efficiency than Westbrook.
The first part is true imho. Without being 100% focused and commited LBJ posts amazing stats and gets easily 1st or 2nd seed. If he cared i`m sure he could have had a TD season.....
As far as the effiency argument goes.....
http://insider.espn.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/order/true
Harden has lower PER and higher TO ratio .... and per sbnation is MIA in crunch time
-
As far as the effiency argument goes.....
http://insider.espn.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/order/true
Harden has lower PER and higher TO ratio .... and per sbnation is MIA in crunch time
PER is really a per minute production statistic. Though Harden does have a higher turnover %. I think the difference in TS% makes up for this personally, but I guess I could see the other side of it.
-
Who is the Thunder's best player in WB's absence? Oladipo? Taj Gibson?
The Thunder are a poorly constructed team.
Answer: Steven Adams
Are they "poorly constructed"? Or are they actually quite well constructed?
I would argue they are built pretty much in an ideal fashion to play the way they've played this year, which is to let Westbrook do whatever he wants while the players around him defend their butts off and rebound all the misses.
-
Who is the Thunder's best player in WB's absence? Oladipo? Taj Gibson?
The Thunder are a poorly constructed team.
Answer: Steven Adams
Are they "poorly constructed"? Or are they actually quite well constructed?
I would argue they are built pretty much in an ideal fashion to play the way they've played this year, which is to let Westbrook do whatever he wants while the players around him defend their butts off and rebound all the misses.
Steven Adams - by point of reference, averages 11 points and 7 rebounds per game. He is about as good as Greg Monroe. And neither Adams nor Monroe are leading anyone to the playoffs.
I think you can make the argument that they were constructed for his benefit - but were they? Seems like they are lacking a small forward (KNOW WHAT I MEAN?). After Durant left, they signed Enes Kanter. Not exactly a comparable replacement. Did the Taj Gibson trade really put them over the top [?].
I think WB has done his best with the flotsam that was left after Durant's departure.
That said - accepting your premise as true. ...isn't it also true that no player is more valuable to his team than WB is to the Thunder? I don't give an F about the triple double season. I just think he is irreplaceable, as far as what he brings to their team. K. Leonard is awesome, no doubt. ...but he's playing with Danny Green, Aldridge, Gasol, Parker, Ginobli - a core of professionals who make his life easier.
While there is no doubt that Nazr Mohammed is a professional - I don't think he has the same skill set he had, oh, I don't know 2005/2006 when he was playing for the Spurs. Mohammed came into the league in 1998.
I think the only other real contender for MVP is Harden - so answer me this: who would be worse without their respective MVP Candidate: the Rockets? or the Thunder? I think if your answer is the Thunder, WB is the MVP. (Anderson and Trevor Ariza are, 11th and 14th on the present 3Pfg% chart for all players). Eric Gordon, his other teammate - is 4th, tied with IT.
-
Steven Adams - by point of reference, averages 11 points and 7 rebounds per game. He is about as good as Greg Monroe. And neither Adams nor Monroe are leading anyone to the playoffs.
First of all, those guys are nothing alike as players except that they play the same position.
Second, you can't just look at counting stats when you evaluate players.
Steven Adams is much, much better than Greg Monroe.
In general, your post indicates a lack of familiarity with the Thunder's roster, since you seemingly missed the fact that Enes Kanter was in OKC long before Durant left in free agency last summer.
-
Who is the Thunder's best player in WB's absence? Oladipo? Taj Gibson?
The Thunder are a poorly constructed team.
Answer: Steven Adams
Are they "poorly constructed"? Or are they actually quite well constructed?
I would argue they are built pretty much in an ideal fashion to play the way they've played this year, which is to let Westbrook do whatever he wants while the players around him defend their butts off and rebound all the misses.
Steven Adams - by point of reference, averages 11 points and 7 rebounds per game. He is about as good as Greg Monroe. And neither Adams nor Monroe are leading anyone to the playoffs.
I think you can make the argument that they were constructed for his benefit - but were they? Seems like they are lacking a small forward (KNOW WHAT I MEAN?). After Durant left, they signed Enes Kanter. Not exactly a comparable replacement. Did the Taj Gibson trade really put them over the top [?].
I think WB has done his best with the flotsam that was left after Durant's departure.
That said - accepting your premise as true. ...isn't it also true that no player is more valuable to his team than WB is to the Thunder? I don't give an F about the triple double season. I just think he is irreplaceable, as far as what he brings to their team. K. Leonard is awesome, no doubt. ...but he's playing with Danny Green, Aldridge, Gasol, Parker, Ginobli - a core of professionals who make his life easier.
While there is no doubt that Nazr Mohammed is a professional - I don't think he has the same skill set he had, oh, I don't know 2005/2006 when he was playing for the Spurs. Mohammed came into the league in 1998.
I think the only other real contender for MVP is Harden - so answer me this: who would be worse without their respective MVP Candidate: the Rockets? or the Thunder? I think if your answer is the Thunder, WB is the MVP. (Anderson and Trevor Ariza are, 11th and 14th on the present 3Pfg% chart for all players). Eric Gordon, his other teammate - is 4th, tied with IT.
This logic isnt good.
Harden's rockets have won 8 more games than Westbrook's Thunder.
Also, Adams is way better than Monroe. Not even close really.
-
I think the only other real contender for MVP is Harden - so answer me this: who would be worse without their respective MVP Candidate: the Rockets? or the Thunder? I think if your answer is the Thunder, WB is the MVP. (Anderson and Trevor Ariza are, 11th and 14th on the present 3Pfg% chart for all players). Eric Gordon, his other teammate - is 4th, tied with IT.
I'm going to modify your question slightly -- which team would be better with an average starter in place of their superstar?
The reason I do that is because I think it makes more sense to think that way. Most teams are going to look desperately flawed if you just remove their central piece and don't replace him with anybody. Realistically, the question of how much a star improves his team is not how bad his team would be without him, but rather how bad his team would be if they had somebody entirely ordinary in his place.
With that in mind, here's how I think about it.
A league average starter at the "lead guard / offensive creator" spot is probably somebody like Jrue Holiday or Dennis Schroder.
So, which team would be worse off with Schroder or Holiday in place of their superstar?
Well, I think both teams would be bad, but not horrendous. Both teams have good coaches and the infrastructure to play a certain way.
Still, I think the Rockets would be worse because without Harden, they would probably be a middle of the road offensive team at best. Their defense would become a much bigger issue in that case.
My guess is they'd be something like a 30-35 win team.
The Thunder with a Schroder / Holiday type would be toward the bottom of the league offensively, but they might also move the ball more and involve talented players like Oladipo, Kanter, and Adams more heavily.
At the same time, they would likely be at least as good defensively as they are now, which is to say a top 10 defensive squad.
Given that, I think they'd be in the mix with teams just outside of the playoff picture. Certainly not a bottom feeder.
Overall, I think the rosters around Westbrook and Harden are comparable; the Thunder are more oriented toward defense and rebounding, while the Rockets are oriented toward shooting and offense.
Given that when you look at both teams with their stars, the Rockets are a considerably more dangerous team than the Thunder, I think the argument is weighted in Harden's favor.
-
https://www.theplayerstribune.com/matt-bonner-nba-mvp-2017-kawhi-leonard/
This article ends in a really odd way, but I think it brings some interesting flavour to the discussion.
-
https://www.theplayerstribune.com/matt-bonner-nba-mvp-2017-kawhi-leonard/
This article ends in a really odd way, but I think it brings some interesting flavour to the discussion.
He's completely right. Why do so many ignore 50% of the game? 60 wins + elite offense + DPOY level defense equals MVP to me.
-
Matt Moore made a pretty good case for each of the candidates, and ultimately chose Harden.
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/even-in-maybe-the-tightest-nba-mvp-race-ever-one-man-does-stand-out-from-the-rest/
-
Interesting debate this year. I'd probably go with either Harden or Kawai. It's interesting that, regardless of who wins the MVP, I do think '16-'17 will be the "Westbrook triple double" year, even though it's pretty arbitrary. I mean, it stands out because we have 10 fingers. If we used base 8, it would be different and more common; if we used base 12 it wouldn't have happened yet. And, as many point out, is 18-10-10 really better than 28-9-8? I try not to buy into uniqueness for the sake of uniqueness, similar to why I would be more impressed by a baseball player hitting 2 doubles and 2 homers than by the more neat sounding "hitting for the cycle."
It's always interesting to think about what people consider the definition of MVP. But one interesting exercise is what if you could re-draft everyone who was in the playoffs, with the goal of winning the title. Where would Westbrook go? I'd probably have him 6th, behind Kawai, Lebron, Harden, Curry, Durant. Now, I wouldn't give MVP to Durant due to missed time, but Curry has played 78 games, putting up a 25/4.5/6.6 with 47/41/90 splits in just 33 minutes for a 66 win team, and he isn't even in the MVP conversation!
-
I think it's very likely that Curry is going to spend the next month and a half making us feel a little bit silly for focusing so much on these other dudes without once really talking about how he's still the best player on the best team in the league.
-
Russell Westbrook should be MVP. Help make it happen by posting support here.
if enough fans support him around the league I thought it might help to keep voters from
flubbing an easy call.
This is the most obvious and clear cut decision in recent MVP history.
No player has averaged a triple double since Oscar Robinson several decades ago.
I don't believe any player in NBA history has ever averaged a triple double while also leading the league in scoring.
That is absolutely ridiculous, the man is not human.
He's also led a genuinely hot garbage Thunder team to a 6th seed in a very tough Western Conference, and lets be honest - without Westbrook that Thunder team would be fighting for a bottom 5 spot.
Lebron James plays with Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving, and has the most stacked supporting cast in the NBA. Curry and Durant combine to form the most loaded starting lineup possibly in NBA history. Kawhi Leonard has LaMarcus Aldridge, Pau Gasol, Tony Parker and one of the top 5 coaches in NBA history.
James Harden's next best player is Eric Gordon - he's not by any means a superstar, but he's been playing very well this year and has been a key reason for the Rocket's success. Harden's ability to lead the Rockets to such a good record is still very impressive though.
But Westbrook, his next best player is...Steven Adams? Or would it be Victor Oladipo? Those guys are nowhere near stars and would probably come off the bench for several NBA teams. That he has even led this team to the playoffs in mind boggling, and that he's put up the type of numbers he has - as a 6'3" guard - is mind boggling.
-
Russell Westbrook should be MVP. Help make it happen by posting support here.
if enough fans support him around the league I thought it might help to keep voters from
flubbing an easy call.
This is the most obvious and clear cut decision in recent MVP history.
No player has averaged a triple double since Oscar Robinson several decades ago.
I don't believe any player in NBA history has ever averaged a triple double while also leading the league in scoring.
That is absolutely ridiculous, the man is not human.
He's also led a genuinely hot garbage Thunder team to a 6th seed in a very tough Western Conference, and lets be honest - without Westbrook that Thunder team would be fighting for a bottom 5 spot.
There's no question that it's an impressive statistical feat.
I don't agree that the Thunder are nearly as bad as you say apart from Russ.
Honestly, what Russ has done this season is impressive but I've also found it kind of off-putting, in that I feel like Russ and the franchise as a whole has been focused primarily on helping Russ achieve this milestone, rather than focusing on playing the best basketball and winning as many games as they can.
That they accomplished the project of getting their star to achieve the milestone is really cool, and will rightfully be the thing that this regular season is remembered for, first and foremost.
It doesn't, in my view, make Russ the MVP of the league. MVP is about more than individual statistical achievement, I think,
-
Russell Westbrook should be MVP. Help make it happen by posting support here.
if enough fans support him around the league I thought it might help to keep voters from
flubbing an easy call.
This is the most obvious and clear cut decision in recent MVP history.
No player has averaged a triple double since Oscar Robinson several decades ago.
I don't believe any player in NBA history has ever averaged a triple double while also leading the league in scoring.
That is absolutely ridiculous, the man is not human.
He's also led a genuinely hot garbage Thunder team to a 6th seed in a very tough Western Conference, and lets be honest - without Westbrook that Thunder team would be fighting for a bottom 5 spot.
There's no question that it's an impressive statistical feat.
I don't agree that the Thunder are nearly as bad as you say apart from Russ.
Honestly, what Russ has done this season is impressive but I've also found it kind of off-putting, in that I feel like Russ and the franchise as a whole has been focused primarily on helping Russ achieve this milestone, rather than focusing on playing the best basketball and winning as many games as they can.
That they accomplished the project of getting their star to achieve the milestone is really cool, and will rightfully be the thing that this regular season is remembered for, first and foremost.
It doesn't, in my view, make Russ the MVP of the league. MVP is about more than individual statistical achievement, I think,
The Thunder have 47 wins for a 58% win record. Please tell me how many games you expect the Thunder to win if he was not on the team? Steven Adams and Victor Oladipo are both fringe starters. Enes Kanter might be the worst defensive player of this decade - scratch that, this generation. For that team to win 47 games in that western conference is quite an achievement - and how many of those wins have come on the back of Russell Westbrook's heroics?
I've been saying for the past few years that Westbrook, not Durant, was the best player in OKC. Now he's proving that to be true.
Yes, Harden has been amazing. His production on paper has been almost as impressive as Westbrook's, and his team has won more games. But everybody on this planet knows that James Harden is an absolutely pathetic defensive player who shows no interest or effort whatsoever on that end of the court.
Westbrook is not only the NBA scoring leader, and putting up double figures in three categories - he's also been one of the better defensive PG's in the league over the past 5+ seasons. He's a complete player who does everything, and that deserves to be recognized.
What he has achieved this season is a feat that we may never see again - and if we do, it may not be for another 40 years. There have been so many guys how have come CLOSE to averaging a triple double while also leading their teams to good records. Only two players in the history of the NBA have averaged a triple double for a whole season - that has got to say something about how incredible an achievement that is, no matter what the context.
This decision should be a no brainer.
-
As I explained above, I think the Thunder would be a slightly below average kind of team if you replace Westbrook with an average starting caliber point guard.
I think the Rockets would be in a similar range with an average starting caliber point guard in place of Harden.
Yet with their stars, the Rockets are significantly better than the Thunder.
Also, I really don't see what you see with Westbrook's defense. He seems mostly indifferent to me. Harden at least tries more frequently.
-
Harden deserves the award with Kawhi a close 2nd. He already got ripped off once two years ago and it looks like it's going to happen again...and I'm not even a big Harden fan, just think he deserves the award. Fans on ESPN voting have Westbrook at 63% (in a five man race) so not looking good.
-
As I explained above, I think the Thunder would be a slightly below average kind of team if you replace Westbrook with an average starting caliber point guard.
I think the Rockets would be in a similar range with an average starting caliber point guard in place of Harden.
Yet with their stars, the Rockets are significantly better than the Thunder.
Also, I really don't see what you see with Westbrook's defense. He seems mostly indifferent to me. Harden at least tries more frequently.
You are underrating the Rockets' supporting cast too much, they would be a borderline playoff team with an average PG (eg. Jeremy Lin)replacing Harden while the Thunder would be a kings type of team if that happened with Westbrook
-
OKC without RW a slightly below average kind of team ? seriously????
Anyway for me is more important that Harden has around him players that fit his game That is not the case with Westbrook
-
I see a lot of guys trying to adjust their MVP criteria to satisfy the media led RW case. Try to use the WB criteria (amazing season, mediocre supporting cast, probable 1st round bounce) and you will realise that MJ, Grant Hill, T-Mac etc. had those and walked away without the award.
Kawhi is the more complete, more succesful and just plain better player this year. He is in that Nowitzki, MJ, Barkley etc. MVP tier. I don't change my case from year to year, that is silly.
-
I see a lot of guys trying to adjust their MVP criteria to satisfy the media led RW case. Try to use the WB criteria (amazing season, mediocre supporting cast, probable 1st round bounce) and you will realise that MJ, Grant Hill, T-Mac etc. had those and walked away without the award.
Kawhi is the more complete, more succesful and just plain better player this year. He is in that Nowitzki, MJ, Barkley etc. MVP tier. I don't change my case from year to year, that is silly.
Yeah, MJ had a year where he averaged 32.5/8/8, with close to 3 steals and 3.6 turnovers. He did that while shooting 53.8% from the floor. He was 1st team All-Defense. He didn't win MVP, because he only won 47 games. Magic had less impressive stats but a better team.
-
As I explained above, I think the Thunder would be a slightly below average kind of team if you replace Westbrook with an average starting caliber point guard.
I think the Rockets would be in a similar range with an average starting caliber point guard in place of Harden.
Yet with their stars, the Rockets are significantly better than the Thunder.
Also, I really don't see what you see with Westbrook's defense. He seems mostly indifferent to me. Harden at least tries more frequently.
You are underrating the Rockets' supporting cast too much, they would be a borderline playoff team with an average PG (eg. Jeremy Lin)replacing Harden while the Thunder would be a kings type of team if that happened with Westbrook
Am I?
Or am I considering that the Rockets supporting cast would look worse if they didn't play with Harden?
Whereas I'm honestly not convinced the OKC guys wouldn't play better on a team that had to integrate their full skillsets.
-
Just a note about the quality of the Rockets vs that of the Thunder.
The Rockets have a SRS of 5.84, good for third in the league, with an Expected W-L of 55-27.
The Thunder have a SRS of 1.14, good for 10th in the league, with an Expected W-L of 43-39.
In other words, Harden has elevated the Rockets to genuine contender status.
Russ, on the other hand, hasn't raised OKC above the middle of the pack.
You could point to the fact that they finished a few wins higher than expected and say that Russ's performance in the clutch helped them over perform. One could also argue that was probably due to a good deal of luck.
-
OKC without RW a slightly below average kind of team ? seriously????
Read what I said and you'll see I was talking about what would happen if you replaced him with an average starting point guard.
Obviously if you took the star point guard off a team with literally zero nba caliber backups, they'd be terrible.
I don't think MVP ought to be based on how bad your backup is.
-
I'd still vote for James but I don't expect him to win the award.
-
OKC is 32-9 when he gets a TD.
When he doesn't 14-25 .....
An alternate theory:
Maybe because once he's achieved his arbitrary counting stats he can focus on winning, rather than forcing assists and stealing rebounds from teammates?
Whereas, on nights when he hasn't reached arbitrary statistical milestones, he chases those stats, winning be [dang]ed.
I can't buy the alternative theory.
Westbrook seems good at getting triple doubles (league record).
Therefore:
On nights where he tries to get triple doubles, you would think he would be rather successful at getting triple doubles. If he's good at it and tries to do it, it's more likely he would succeed at the triple double than on nights where he is being more focused on winning. If he's more focused on winning because he already has the triple double, we'd have to conclude that he is great at accidentally getting triple doubles, but terrible at actually trying for them.
It's more likely he's always trying for the stats, and the way his team is built, that actually helps his team win. If that's the case, it's a solid MVP argument.
I don't like Harden and actually hate watching him play, but I'd have to admit he's probably MVP this year (with Lebron being the real MVP every year). I'd like to see Westbrook get it though.
-
It's more likely he's always trying for the stats, and the way his team is built, that actually helps his team win. If that's the case, it's a solid MVP argument.
I agree with the first part, but I don't find it to be a persuasive argument for MVP.
It seems to me that the Thunder have built their roster and their gameplan around "letting Russ be Russ." I think it has been their goal almost every night to actually help Russ to achieve the statistical milestones he's been gunning for basically all season.
It's a donkey-backward way to go about playing basketball, but it has made their team a lot more interesting than they ought to have been after Durant left them in the lurch.
When the plan works, the Thunder are more likely to win, just as any team is more likely to succeed when it's managing to execute its first choice gameplan.
Two years ago, Kevin Durant got hurt and missed all but 27 games in the 2014-2015 season. The Thunder won 45 games while Russ went HAM on the league every night. Russ didn't come close to winning MVP that year.
Why should it be different this year because he added a couple points, a couple assists, and a couple rebounds to his averages? His usage rate went up and he had sole possession of the team's driver's seat for the full season. I'm not sure he's a much better player this season than he was back then.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnAL17fUogE
Coach Nick with a case for Kawhi.
-
I'd still vote for James but I don't expect him to win the award.
Would you be mailing your vote In from your house in Cleveland?
-
I've been saying for the past few years that Westbrook, not Durant, was the best player in OKC. Now he's proving that to be true.
Of all the things in your post I disagree with, of which there are a lot, this is by far the one I disagree with the most.
I do not in any way think this proves Westbrook is better than Durant.
What I do think it does, is completely validate Durant for leaving OKC. It has become glaringly obvious this is what Russ wanted to be the whole time, the unquestioned alpha dog. Russ has proven to everyone that he is the selfish, me-first ball hog everyone always knew him to be.
-
I guess I'm just missing the boat here on where its egregious if Westbrook wins the MVP? I certainly don't think it'd go down as one of more controversial MVPs in league history. Some people are really getting their panties in a bunch about this possibility.
(And its probably not a question of "if, it's "when")
-
I think it's neck and neck between Harden and Westbrook.
I don't see Kawhi in the race. He would be most years but those two have both just been so incredible this season. They have blown everyone else out of the water.
LeBron's team has underachieved too badly for me to consider him as MVP. The 3 Golden State guys (Durant, Steph, Draymond) have all gotten each other's way a bit. All 3 have a solid case for being a top 5 MVP candidate.
I don't like the argument that the MVP should only come from a contender. I will give extra notice to players on strong teams but every one in awhile someone comes along and does something truly astonishing from a mid-level team and when that happens I am happy to consider them for MVP. I think Kobe Bryant was the last one to do so.
-
I guess I'm just missing the boat here on where its egregious if Westbrook wins the MVP? I certainly don't think it'd go down as one of more controversial MVPs in league history. Some people are really getting their panties in a bunch about this possibility.
(And its probably not a question of "if, it's "when")
Personally I think about what Bill Simmons wrote about "the secret" of basketball.
"The secret of basketball is that it’s not about basketball."
Here’s what Isiah Thomas meant: the guys who have the best numbers don’t always make the best team. Now here’s an excerpt from the book where Simmons talks about a trade the Detroit Pistons made:
"Maybe Dantley was a better player than Aguirre, but Aguirre was a better fit for the 1989 Pistons. If they didn’t make that deal, they wouldn’t have won the championship. It was a people trade, not a basketball trade.And that’s what Isiah learned while following those Lakers and Celtics teams around: it wasn’t about basketball.Those teams were loaded with talented players, yes, but that’s not the only reason they won. They won because they liked each other, knew their roles, ignored statistics, and valued winning over everything else."
Simmons went on to say the following:
"Fans overlook The Secret completely. Nobody writes about The Secret because of a general lack of sophistication about basketball; even the latest ‘revolution’ of basketball statistics centers more around evaluating players against one another over capturing their effect on a team.Numbers help, but only to a certain degree. You still have to watch the games.The fans don’t get it. Actually, it goes deeper than that—I’m not sure who gets it. We measure players by numbers, only the playoffs roll around and teams that play together, kill themselves defensively, sacrifice personal success and ignore statistics invariably win the title. We have trouble processing the ‘teamwork over talent’ thing. But how do you keep stats for ‘best chemistry’ and ‘most unselfish’ or even ‘most tangible and consistent effect on a group of teammates’? It’s impossible. That’s why we struggle to comprehend professional basketball."
And here’s a quote from NBA legend Bill Russell:
"I always thought that the most important measure of how good a game I played was how much better I made my teammates play."
This, to me, is why Tim Duncan had a better career and was a better player at his peak than Kobe Bryant, hands down. It's not even close, to be honest.
And that is also why I think you've got to take team success and chemistry into account when you are looking at who should be considered "most valuable" in any given season. The award should not just be about who racks up the most counting stats. It should be about who actually elevates their team.
Russ has had an amazing season, but if I'm being perfectly honest I think his team did more to help him achieve those stats than he did to help his team play the best basketball they could play. Does that make sense? I want to really emphasize that, because it's really the heart of my argument on Russ. I've tried to articulate that notion in a few different ways in this thread.
Harden and Kawhi both played on teams with better roster balance and cohesion, with offensive systems that maximized the strengths of the players in them.
However, I think Russ is also a product of a system -- that is, a system in which he does everything and his teammates clean up whatever mess is left over. I think that as KG's Knee pointed out, Russ is in large part the cause of that state of affairs. The Thunder were left with no stars but Russ, and they know exactly how Russ would want to play: with the ball in his hands always, doing everything for the team while he was on the floor.
I think they were probably as good this year as they possibly could be playing that style. I don't agree that that style was the best way they could achieve success as a team. But it certainly maximized Russ's ability to put up counting stats.
If you want to argue for Kawhi, I won't argue much. He's the best two way player on the second best team in the league in terms of record.
Harden I think did more than any other individual player this season to lift his team offensively. He made his teammates better. Just look at the seasons that Nene and Capela had, not to mention Anderson, Gordon, and Ariza.
Steph Curry should still be in this conversation, in my opinion, because he's every bit as good this year as he was in 2015, and his team was the clear cut best team in the league from start to finish. The fact that Durant joined his team this year knocked him out of the running, though I'm not sure that's fair. He's still the best player on the best team. He still breaks the game when he's on the floor because of his unreal shooting and ball handling.
In any case, to me Russ is maybe the 5th or 6th best player in the world, and he didn't really make his teammates better, nor does his presence on the floor make his team a threat to win a playoff series. Therefore, he's not my first or second choice for MVP.
-
I guess I'm just missing the boat here on where its egregious if Westbrook wins the MVP? I certainly don't think it'd go down as one of more controversial MVPs in league history. Some people are really getting their panties in a bunch about this possibility.
(And its probably not a question of "if, it's "when")
The sort-of paradox is that among the 3 guys likely to get it, there are no bad choices, but they're all bad omissions. Meaning whoever wins will deserve it for his incredible season, but the two guys who don't will be terrible snubs for THEIR incredible seasons, if that makes any sense. Especially Harden/Westbrook.
The NBA picked the right year to switch the awards to a end-of-year ceremony, I'll say that.
-
I guess I'm just missing the boat here on where its egregious if Westbrook wins the MVP? I certainly don't think it'd go down as one of more controversial MVPs in league history. Some people are really getting their panties in a bunch about this possibility.
(And its probably not a question of "if, it's "when")
The sort-of paradox is that among the 3 guys likely to get it, there are no bad choices, but they're all bad omissions. Meaning whoever wins will deserve it for his incredible season, but the two guys who don't will be terrible snubs for THEIR incredible seasons, if that makes any sense. Especially Harden/Westbrook.
The NBA picked the right year to switch the awards to a end-of-year ceremony, I'll say that.
If the Thunder get bounced in 4-5 games in the 1st round, Westbrook winning MVP sometime in June will have a slightly different tone than if they handed out the award before the playoffs started.
-
I guess I'm just missing the boat here on where its egregious if Westbrook wins the MVP? I certainly don't think it'd go down as one of more controversial MVPs in league history. Some people are really getting their panties in a bunch about this possibility.
(And its probably not a question of "if, it's "when")
The sort-of paradox is that among the 3 guys likely to get it, there are no bad choices, but they're all bad omissions. Meaning whoever wins will deserve it for his incredible season, but the two guys who don't will be terrible snubs for THEIR incredible seasons, if that makes any sense. Especially Harden/Westbrook.
The NBA picked the right year to switch the awards to a end-of-year ceremony, I'll say that.
If the Thunder get bounced in 4-5 games in the 1st round, Westbrook winning MVP sometime in June will have a slightly different tone than if they handed out the award before the playoffs started.
I agree but I think MVP generally went out midway through the 2nd round - I remember a very somber Dirk collecting his after his 1 seed Mavs had been bounced by Golden State.
-
My personal nod is to Russell Westbrook.
He took that team on his back after Durant left and did his absolute best to keep it competitive - even giving Sam Presti 2-3 years to get players around him to make the team better.
He had every opportunity to leave - right along with Durant - but chose to stay. In doing so he's had one of the best seasons of ANY NBA player in recent memory.
47-35 is nothing to sneeze at. Their record could've been 50+ wins if not for Kanter getting injured. His productive play off the bench could've netted them 5 or so more wins if he was not injured.
I love the season that Harden has had but Westbrook gets my intangibles vote. He's my choice for NBA MVP.
-
I guess I'm just missing the boat here on where its egregious if Westbrook wins the MVP? I certainly don't think it'd go down as one of more controversial MVPs in league history. Some people are really getting their panties in a bunch about this possibility.
(And its probably not a question of "if, it's "when")
The sort-of paradox is that among the 3 guys likely to get it, there are no bad choices, but they're all bad omissions. Meaning whoever wins will deserve it for his incredible season, but the two guys who don't will be terrible snubs for THEIR incredible seasons, if that makes any sense. Especially Harden/Westbrook.
The NBA picked the right year to switch the awards to a end-of-year ceremony, I'll say that.
If the Thunder get bounced in 4-5 games in the 1st round, Westbrook winning MVP sometime in June will have a slightly different tone than if they handed out the award before the playoffs started.
I agree but I think MVP generally went out midway through the 2nd round - I remember a very somber Dirk collecting his after his 1 seed Mavs had been bounced by Golden State.
Different tone? Probably. Uproar in the long run? Doubtful.
Personally, if there was a year to split it, I'd have no qualms with it going Westbrook/Harden.
-
Based on ESPN, I think we can assume awards will look like this:
Embiid ROY
Dantoni COY
Draymond DPOY
Giannis MIP
Westbrook MVP
Iggy / Gordon 6MOY
Will be interesting to see that MVP presentation in June after the Thunder are killed in round one and the Warriors dominate the league for a couple months.
-
Based on ESPN, I think we can assume awards will look like this:
Embiid ROY
Dantoni COY
Draymond DPOY
Giannis MIP
Westbrook MVP
Iggy / Gordon 6MOY
Will be interesting to see that MVP presentation in June after the Thunder are killed in round one and the Warriors dominate the league for a couple months.
It's entirely possible that Russell Westbrook will consider that a moral victory.
-
Serious question for people -- how much should we care about guards getting rebounds?
Because honestly, does it help your team that much if your guard grabs the rebound? How much value is it bringing to the team for Harden or Westbrook to grab the rebound as opposed to Steven Adams or Clint Capela?
If we take rebounds out of the equation and just look at offensive creation -- which, I think it's fair to say, is the role guys like Harden and Westbrook are performing first and foremost -- I feel like it's harder to make a case for Westbrook, other than resorting to the "he has less help" thing.
-
OKC without RW a slightly below average kind of team ? seriously????
Anyway for me is more important that Harden has around him players that fit his game That is not the case with Westbrook
Nonsense, his team covers him on the reg when he gives selfish, embarrassing effort on defense.
-
While harden"s teammates don"t do the same ...
And in addition they space the floor so can play one on one and either score on the rim or pick an assist if double teamed.
BTW it is funny to talk about insufficient def effort of a PG in a celtics forum this season
-
While harden"s teammates don"t do the same ...
And in addition they space the floor so can play one on one and either score on the rim or pick an assist if double teamed.
BTW it is funny to talk about insufficient def effort of a PG in a celtics forum this season
You think Harden's teammates cover him on defense? Come on.
Now they are better offensive players, though it's funny how all of a sudden Eric Gordon and Ryan Anderson are world beaters when they flopped in NO with AD.
It's almost like they have a PG who, gasp, actually makes his teammates better.
-
While harden"s teammates don"t do the same ...
And in addition they space the floor so can play one on one and either score on the rim or pick an assist if double teamed.
BTW it is funny to talk about insufficient def effort of a PG in a celtics forum this season
You think Harden's teammates cover him on defense? Come on.
Now they are better offensive players, though it's funny how all of a sudden Eric Gordon and Ryan Anderson are world beaters when they flopped in NO with AD.
It's almost like they have a PG who, gasp, actually makes his teammates better.
Pat Beverley? ;)
-
Bill Simmons:
I’m not voting for Westbrook, either. Was Russ the FUN pick? Absolutely. Did he own the season? Absolutely — he won Question No. 4. But he wasn’t playing for the 2001 Sixers; he didn’t have to do absolutely everything at the expense of never developing/nurturing/testing anyone else.
Remember when we came out of the 2016 playoffs raving about how much we liked Steven Adams, Enes Kanter, and Andre Roberson? Why didn’t they get any better? Why wasn’t Adams as devastating in OKC as the Capela-Nene-Harrell trio was for Houston? Why wasn’t Oladipo BETTER on a much better team? Why did they dump Ersan Ilyasova after only three games, and why wasn’t it a bigger deal when he thrived in Philly and Atlanta? Why such a wasted rookie year for Domantas Sabonis?
Everyone acts like Russ is playing with the Washington Generals — he has two top-three lottery picks and three other lottery picks in their playing rotation. Kanter and Oladipo have near-max deals. Adams has a nine-figure deal coming. Ilyasova scored 15 a night on Philadelphia. Those guys sucked? If a superstar guarantees you 45 wins, then Westbrook dragged them to … 47 wins? What?
I loved watching Westbrook this season. Repeat: I loved it. I never imagined we’d see a Big O/triple-double sequel, just like I never imagined that Kobe could average 35 a game, or that Ron Artest could fight an entire section of Pistons fans without getting shanked.
But if it’s down to Harden and Westbrook, and both sides are relatively equal, and we’re voting on offensive impact and team success over everything else and that breakdown comes down to this …
47 wins, 17th-ranked offense, zero chance of winning the title
55 wins, second-ranked offense (10th all time), puncher’s chance of winning the title
… I mean, what are we arguing about? And why the hell did it take me so long? I’m picking James Harden.
-
While harden"s teammates don"t do the same ...
And in addition they space the floor so can play one on one and either score on the rim or pick an assist if double teamed.
BTW it is funny to talk about insufficient def effort of a PG in a celtics forum this season
You think Harden's teammates cover him on defense? Come on.
Now they are better offensive players, though it's funny how all of a sudden Eric Gordon and Ryan Anderson are world beaters when they flopped in NO with AD.
It's almost like they have a PG who, gasp, actually makes his teammates better.
Pat Beverley? ;)
Compared to Oladipo, Grant, Adams, and Roberson?
That's a top 10 defender at the 2-5 positions...
-
Boy "MVP" Russ sure brought it in the first game of the playoffs...
It's almost like shameless stat padding at the expense of what's good for the team will hurt you in a playoff series against a good opponent. Who knew?!?!
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
-
There is a reason why no one ever had Westbooks sky-high usage rate.
It is not productive.
Simple as that.
-
There is a reason why no one ever had Westbooks sky-high usage rate.
It is not productive.
Simple as that.
This is how how feel. Loved your Zizic post too, by the way.
-
There is a reason why no one ever had Westbooks sky-high usage rate.
It is not productive.
Simple as that.
Westbrook does not have the highest usage even since they started keeping the stat. Kobe had the highest. Westbrook is 2nd. Both were above 38 and were joined in the 38 club by Michael Jordan.
-
There is a reason why no one ever had Westbooks sky-high usage rate.
It is not productive.
Simple as that.
Westbrook does not have the highest usage even since they started keeping the stat. Kobe had the highest. Westbrook is 2nd. Both were above 38 and were joined in the 38 club by Michael Jordan.
I disagree:
USG%
Jordan 1986/87 - 38,3%
Iverson 2001/02 - 37,8%
Bryant 2005/06 - 38,7%
Westbrook 2016/17 - 41,7%
I am begging to fully understand his "My only friend is Spalding" quote.
So far in 2 playoff games he has (sit down and swallow if you are eating/drinking) - 52%!
-
There is a reason why no one ever had Westbooks sky-high usage rate.
It is not productive.
Simple as that.
Westbrook does not have the highest usage even since they started keeping the stat. Kobe had the highest. Westbrook is 2nd. Both were above 38 and were joined in the 38 club by Michael Jordan.
I disagree:
USG%
Jordan 1986/87 - 38,3%
Iverson 2001/02 - 37,8%
Bryant 2005/06 - 38,7%
Westbrook 2016/17 - 41,7%
you are right, the list I was looking at didn't have this year in it. It had Westbrook's 14/15 season which is now 3rd.
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
The guy who didn't miss 26 field goals en route to a loss.
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
The guy who didn't miss 26 field goals en route to a loss.
and yet he was the guy whose team was better than the other team by 11 when he was on the floor. Put it this way, Westbrook played 41 minutes and the Thunder were +11, in the 7 minutes he was on the bench the Thunder were -15. In other words, the Thunder were losing more than 2 points per minute when Westbrook was resting and were gaining a point ever 3.7 minutes or so. The Rockets on the other hand were +3 in Harden's 37 minutes and +1 in the other 11 minutes, which means they were actually increasing their lead at a better pace when Harden wasn't in the game (1 point per 11 minutes when he was on the bench, and only 1 point per every 12.3 minutes when he was in the game).
-
I wonder if you can get a triple double in golf.
If you can I'm sure Westbrook will in the coming weeks.
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
The guy who didn't miss 26 field goals en route to a loss.
and yet he was the guy whose team was better than the other team by 11 when he was on the floor. Put it this way, Westbrook played 41 minutes and the Thunder were +11, in the 7 minutes he was on the bench the Thunder were -15. In other words, the Thunder were losing more than 2 points per minute when Westbrook was resting and were gaining a point ever 3.7 minutes or so. The Rockets on the other hand were +3 in Harden's 37 minutes and +1 in the other 11 minutes, which means they were actually increasing their lead at a better pace when Harden wasn't in the game (1 point per 11 minutes when he was on the bench, and only 1 point per every 12.3 minutes when he was in the game).
I really like the +/- stat, but I think you're being too general with it right now, and that's one of the limitations of +/-.
In this game, the +/- for Harden/Westbrook is being driven by the good 1st quarter for Westbrook and a bad one for Harden as Westbrook was +12 in the 1st, while Harden was -9. From the 2nd through 4th quarter though, Harden was +11 while Westbrook was -1. Going into the 4th, OKC was up 3 and Westbrook played the entire 4th but was -7, while Harden was +3 (in about 7 mins).
Sure on average, it looks like OKC was gaining a point every 3.7 minutes Westbrook was on the floor, but then you got to explain how OKC was up going into the 4th and how Westbrook played the entire 4th but the team still lost, because it sounds like they should have added to their lead. That per minute production doesn't actually translate that well here.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/plus-minus/201704190HOU.html
-
The Rockets are a team led by an MVP caliber player.
The Thunder have an MVP caliber player with a collection of dudes playing beside him.
The distinction there is important, and we're seeing that in this series.
The Rockets have more offensive talent than the Thunder, but I do not believe that the Thunder are getting the most that they can from the offensive talent on their roster.
Of course, it's too late to change that now. You spend the regular season practicing the kinds of sets you want to run in the playoffs. The Thunder spent the regular season helping Westbrook get his instead of figuring out how to maximize guys like Oladipo, Kanter, Adams, Sabonis, etc.
-
There is a reason why no one ever had Westbooks sky-high usage rate.
It is not productive.
Simple as that.
This is exactly what I've been saying. It leads to choppy team offense. The Thunder do not move the ball well at all and have one of the worst ast% in the league.
And these aren't minor differences we're talking about here. That Warriors team assists on 70.5% of its baskets. OKC is only at 53.2%
Thunder assist% ranking the last few years:
OKC 29th/24th/27th
compare that to the contenders:
Warriors 2nd/1st/1st
Spurs 6th/7th/9th
Cavs 17th/17th/20th
-
A lot of the all-time usage rate leaders by season were relatively inefficient stars like Kobe, T-mac, Stackhouse, Cousins, Iverson, Melo, and Jermaine-freaking-O'neal.
All good players, but that style is a throwback to David Stern's late 1990's 1-on-1 basketball.
It won't work now, as thankfully the league (and the rules and officiating) have shifted away from that.
-
The Rockets are a team led by an MVP caliber player.
The Thunder have an MVP caliber player with a collection of dudes playing beside him.
The distinction there is important, and we're seeing that in this series.
The Rockets have more offensive talent than the Thunder, but I do not believe that the Thunder are getting the most that they can from the offensive talent on their roster.
Of course, it's too late to change that now. You spend the regular season practicing the kinds of sets you want to run in the playoffs. The Thunder spent the regular season helping Westbrook get his instead of figuring out how to maximize guys like Oladipo, Kanter, Adams, Sabonis, etc.
Kanter is so bad defensively he has barely played in the series and Oladipo is 1 of 13 from three and 4 of 13 from two. Those are the only two remotely credible offensive players for OKC.
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
The guy who didn't miss 26 field goals en route to a loss.
and yet he was the guy whose team was better than the other team by 11 when he was on the floor. Put it this way, Westbrook played 41 minutes and the Thunder were +11, in the 7 minutes he was on the bench the Thunder were -15. In other words, the Thunder were losing more than 2 points per minute when Westbrook was resting and were gaining a point ever 3.7 minutes or so. The Rockets on the other hand were +3 in Harden's 37 minutes and +1 in the other 11 minutes, which means they were actually increasing their lead at a better pace when Harden wasn't in the game (1 point per 11 minutes when he was on the bench, and only 1 point per every 12.3 minutes when he was in the game).
I really like the +/- stat, but I think you're being too general with it right now, and that's one of the limitations of +/-.
In this game, the +/- for Harden/Westbrook is being driven by the good 1st quarter for Westbrook and a bad one for Harden as Westbrook was +12 in the 1st, while Harden was -9. From the 2nd through 4th quarter though, Harden was +11 while Westbrook was -1. Going into the 4th, OKC was up 3 and Westbrook played the entire 4th but was -7, while Harden was +3 (in about 7 mins).
Sure on average, it looks like OKC was gaining a point every 3.7 minutes Westbrook was on the floor, but then you got to explain how OKC was up going into the 4th and how Westbrook played the entire 4th but the team still lost, because it sounds like they should have added to their lead. That per minute production doesn't actually translate that well here.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/plus-minus/201704190HOU.html
this is a fair point and there is no question Westbrook had a bad 4th quarter but you can't just disregard the first 3 quarters either.
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
Harden...bc Rockets won
And he didnt miss 20 plus shots
-
The Rockets are a team led by an MVP caliber player.
The Thunder have an MVP caliber player with a collection of dudes playing beside him.
The distinction there is important, and we're seeing that in this series.
The Rockets have more offensive talent than the Thunder, but I do not believe that the Thunder are getting the most that they can from the offensive talent on their roster.
Of course, it's too late to change that now. You spend the regular season practicing the kinds of sets you want to run in the playoffs. The Thunder spent the regular season helping Westbrook get his instead of figuring out how to maximize guys like Oladipo, Kanter, Adams, Sabonis, etc.
Kanter is so bad defensively he has barely played in the series and Oladipo is 1 of 13 from three and 4 of 13 from two. Those are the only two remotely credible offensive players for OKC.
Kanter got time against GSW last year, so I don't believe he's necessarily unplayable as long as his production while he's out there is enough to justify his presence on the floor.
As for Oladipo, it's not a surprise he's struggling. He's never allowed an opportunity to get in rhythm. He hasn't been given an opportunity pretty much all year.
I don't think you can point to the lack of production of Westbrook's teammates right now as proof that he doesn't have offensive help. Building a balanced offense is something you have to do from the beginning of the year. You can't just turn to your teammates who haven't gotten touches all season long and say, "Things are tough now, better start scoring buckets."
-
The Rockets are a team led by an MVP caliber player.
The Thunder have an MVP caliber player with a collection of dudes playing beside him.
The distinction there is important, and we're seeing that in this series.
The Rockets have more offensive talent than the Thunder, but I do not believe that the Thunder are getting the most that they can from the offensive talent on their roster.
Of course, it's too late to change that now. You spend the regular season practicing the kinds of sets you want to run in the playoffs. The Thunder spent the regular season helping Westbrook get his instead of figuring out how to maximize guys like Oladipo, Kanter, Adams, Sabonis, etc.
Kanter is so bad defensively he has barely played in the series and Oladipo is 1 of 13 from three and 4 of 13 from two. Those are the only two remotely credible offensive players for OKC.
Kanter got time against GSW last year, so I don't believe he's necessarily unplayable as long as his production while he's out there is enough to justify his presence on the floor.
As for Oladipo, it's not a surprise he's struggling. He's never allowed an opportunity to get in rhythm. He hasn't been given an opportunity pretty much all year.
I don't think you can point to the lack of production of Westbrook's teammates right now as proof that he doesn't have offensive help. Building a balanced offense is something you have to do from the beginning of the year. You can't just turn to your teammates who haven't gotten touches all season long and say, "Things are tough now, better start scoring buckets."
Great, great post.
I talk to so many people who say that Russ's teammates suck, and they never listen when I try and explain to them that Westbrooks style is a big part of the reason everyone else sucks....they get no opportunities to do anything but at and around and wait to see what russ does.
-
It is hard to have good ball movement when you have no passers on your team.
OKC's big man passing is lousy. Kanter is a black hole. Adams is below average / barely adequate. Sabonis is the only plus passer on their team. Taj Gibson is a below average passer who only joined midseason. Jerami Grant is another non-passer. None of them are good ball-handlers.
Then their wing play. Andre Roberson is one of the worst offensive wings starting in the league who is lacking as a scorer, shooter, passer and ball-handler. Morrow is strictly a spot up shooter with limited handles / passing. Ditto for McDermott who only joined midseason. Of their wings, only Oladipo is the only one with plus skills as ball-handler and passer. And Oladipo while talented is a bad decision maker who frequently makes mistakes off the dribble in terms of shot-selection, over-dribbling and passing decisions.
How can you expect to have a team based on ball movement when so few of your players are below average passers and ball-handlers?
You can't.
It is not a Westbrook problem. It is a personnel problem. It is a badly built team that the GM is responsible for. Not Westbrook.
-
The Rockets are a team led by an MVP caliber player.
The Thunder have an MVP caliber player with a collection of dudes playing beside him.
The distinction there is important, and we're seeing that in this series.
The Rockets have more offensive talent than the Thunder, but I do not believe that the Thunder are getting the most that they can from the offensive talent on their roster.
Of course, it's too late to change that now. You spend the regular season practicing the kinds of sets you want to run in the playoffs. The Thunder spent the regular season helping Westbrook get his instead of figuring out how to maximize guys like Oladipo, Kanter, Adams, Sabonis, etc.
Kanter is so bad defensively he has barely played in the series and Oladipo is 1 of 13 from three and 4 of 13 from two. Those are the only two remotely credible offensive players for OKC.
Kanter got time against GSW last year, so I don't believe he's necessarily unplayable as long as his production while he's out there is enough to justify his presence on the floor.
As for Oladipo, it's not a surprise he's struggling. He's never allowed an opportunity to get in rhythm. He hasn't been given an opportunity pretty much all year.
I don't think you can point to the lack of production of Westbrook's teammates right now as proof that he doesn't have offensive help. Building a balanced offense is something you have to do from the beginning of the year. You can't just turn to your teammates who haven't gotten touches all season long and say, "Things are tough now, better start scoring buckets."
You can say whatever you want about Kanter, but Donovan was shown telling his assistants he can't play Kanter and Kanter has barely played in the Houston series (played less than 8 minutes last night despite the team needing his offense). Kanter is the 2nd best offensive player on OKC and he can't even get in the game.
Oladipo had by far the most efficient season of his career during the regular season. Set career highs in both two point and three point shooting by wide margins. He averaged 13.9 shots during the regular season, he is averaging 13 in the playoffs and is shooting 19.2%.
No other player on the Thunder is an above average offensive player. Adams is ok on the block as is Gibson, but they aren't guys that can create their own shot or score high volumes. Without Kanter on the bench, the bench is worthless offensively and as we saw in the 7 minutes Westbrook didn't play last night, the entire team is lost without him.
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
The guy who didn't miss 26 field goals en route to a loss.
and yet he was the guy whose team was better than the other team by 11 when he was on the floor. Put it this way, Westbrook played 41 minutes and the Thunder were +11, in the 7 minutes he was on the bench the Thunder were -15. In other words, the Thunder were losing more than 2 points per minute when Westbrook was resting and were gaining a point ever 3.7 minutes or so. The Rockets on the other hand were +3 in Harden's 37 minutes and +1 in the other 11 minutes, which means they were actually increasing their lead at a better pace when Harden wasn't in the game (1 point per 11 minutes when he was on the bench, and only 1 point per every 12.3 minutes when he was in the game).
That's because in those 7 minutes the Rockets went ballistic from the field including the 3 point line.
And considering that Russ is an awful defensive player assigning credit to him for statistical noise in the shooting samples seem absurd. What I do know though, is that he took 18 of the Thunders 30 FGA in the 4th, and shot them out of the game laying bricks like a mason.
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
The guy who didn't miss 26 field goals en route to a loss.
and yet he was the guy whose team was better than the other team by 11 when he was on the floor. Put it this way, Westbrook played 41 minutes and the Thunder were +11, in the 7 minutes he was on the bench the Thunder were -15. In other words, the Thunder were losing more than 2 points per minute when Westbrook was resting and were gaining a point ever 3.7 minutes or so. The Rockets on the other hand were +3 in Harden's 37 minutes and +1 in the other 11 minutes, which means they were actually increasing their lead at a better pace when Harden wasn't in the game (1 point per 11 minutes when he was on the bench, and only 1 point per every 12.3 minutes when he was in the game).
That's because in those 7 minutes the Rockets went ballistic from the field including the 3 point line.
And considering that Russ is an awful defensive player assigning credit to him for statistical noise in the shooting samples seem absurd. What I do know though, is that he took 18 of the Thunders 30 FGA in the 4th, and shot them out of the game laying bricks like a mason.
and what did the rest of the Thunder shoot in that quarter?
-
According to the guys over at The Dream Shake (Rockets SB Nation site), Westbrook will win MVP.
(http://www.thedreamshake.com/2017/4/21/15378112/russell-westbrook-nba-mvp-james-harden-vote-tracking)
Our crowd-sourcing and canvassing has found 62 of the NBA’s 100 first place votes for 2017 MVP. There was no announced list, so we identified the votes and that a voter had a ballot using Twitter, interviews, podcasts, articles and TV broadcasts.
And Westbrook will edge Harden.
And right now we estimate the MVP race, after 62 first place votes, to be at:
Russell Westbrook: 522
James Harden: 456
-
I'd still have Lebron James as my MVP bUT really have no issue with Westbrook winning
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
The guy who didn't miss 26 field goals en route to a loss.
and yet he was the guy whose team was better than the other team by 11 when he was on the floor. Put it this way, Westbrook played 41 minutes and the Thunder were +11, in the 7 minutes he was on the bench the Thunder were -15. In other words, the Thunder were losing more than 2 points per minute when Westbrook was resting and were gaining a point ever 3.7 minutes or so. The Rockets on the other hand were +3 in Harden's 37 minutes and +1 in the other 11 minutes, which means they were actually increasing their lead at a better pace when Harden wasn't in the game (1 point per 11 minutes when he was on the bench, and only 1 point per every 12.3 minutes when he was in the game).
That's because in those 7 minutes the Rockets went ballistic from the field including the 3 point line.
And considering that Russ is an awful defensive player assigning credit to him for statistical noise in the shooting samples seem absurd. What I do know though, is that he took 18 of the Thunders 30 FGA in the 4th, and shot them out of the game laying bricks like a mason.
and what did the rest of the Thunder shoot in that quarter?
::)
They built that lead because of bad Rockets shooting and lost it for the same reason. Once Russ came back in he bricked them out of the game.
It's like, Russ fans literally won't look at the stats or the tape. The dude hogs the ball, and chucks awful shots. Statistically he scores inefficiently. And guess what? His team not knowing what to do without him has a lot to do with him using 5000% of their possessions when they are in the game.
I'm not even sure why Billy Donovan bothered to put in offensive or defensive systems. The entire team exists to pad his stats because he got his feelings hurt when the 2nd best player in the NBA left because of his hero ball BS.
-
Well i don"t see stats here too ....
He is not efficient .. Known fact.
Are the rest efficient ? And if they are what part of theit made shots came from Westbrook's assists?
-
Harden is the MVP
RW is such a hog... stat padder
Just watch what is going on with rockets vs okc
Harden elevates the Rockets...RW elevates himself
Westbrook was +11 last night. Harden was +3. Who was more valuable?
The guy who didn't miss 26 field goals en route to a loss.
and yet he was the guy whose team was better than the other team by 11 when he was on the floor. Put it this way, Westbrook played 41 minutes and the Thunder were +11, in the 7 minutes he was on the bench the Thunder were -15. In other words, the Thunder were losing more than 2 points per minute when Westbrook was resting and were gaining a point ever 3.7 minutes or so. The Rockets on the other hand were +3 in Harden's 37 minutes and +1 in the other 11 minutes, which means they were actually increasing their lead at a better pace when Harden wasn't in the game (1 point per 11 minutes when he was on the bench, and only 1 point per every 12.3 minutes when he was in the game).
That's because in those 7 minutes the Rockets went ballistic from the field including the 3 point line.
And considering that Russ is an awful defensive player assigning credit to him for statistical noise in the shooting samples seem absurd. What I do know though, is that he took 18 of the Thunders 30 FGA in the 4th, and shot them out of the game laying bricks like a mason.
and what did the rest of the Thunder shoot in that quarter?
::)
They built that lead because of bad Rockets shooting and lost it for the same reason. Once Russ came back in he bricked them out of the game.
It's like, Russ fans literally won't look at the stats or the tape. The dude hogs the ball, and chucks awful shots. Statistically he scores inefficiently. And guess what? His team not knowing what to do without him has a lot to do with him using 5000% of their possessions when they are in the game.
I'm not even sure why Billy Donovan bothered to put in offensive or defensive systems. The entire team exists to pad his stats because he got his feelings hurt when the 2nd best player in the NBA left because of his hero ball BS.
he played the entire quarter we were discussing. Sure he should take some crap for going 4 of 18 but the rest of the team was 3 for 12 I believe. That is the point I was making.
-
At this point, I've accepted that Westbrook will win MVP. He worked very hard this season and did many amazing things on the floor, so I can't say he doesn't deserve it. I just think there were guys who did more to help their teams win games this season.
I'm going to paraphrase what Zach Lowe said on his podcast with Kevin Arnovitz this week.
Basically, Russ was not playing basketball so much as he was playing Russ-ball each night. It's a different sport. Very very impressive, but not the same thing as being a great basketball player, because basketball is a team sport.
What this comes down to is belief in a fundamental element of the sport that we love.
Either you believe that there is a cost to Westbrook dominating the ball and taking a million shots every game, or you don't. Either you think this sport is about individual brilliance and Westbrook is doing everything he can to help his team, or you believe that part of being a great player is lifting the players around you by involving them in the action.
I believe that Westbrook's play style has had a negative effect of the development of his teammates, individually and as a unit. But I can't "prove" it exactly, so I don't expect anybody who doesn't share that basic belief about the game to change to my way of thinking.
Something Kevin Arnovitz said was a pretty valuable point as well:
One way to evaluate the value of players would be to look at the value of their median or most average possession, as opposed to just thinking of their most spectacular plays.
That tends to favor a guy like Kawhi Leonard or Harden, as opposed to Westbrook. Westbrook has many great plays, but I think what sticks out for people is the absolutely unbelievable force-of-nature plays he makes, as opposed to the ho-hum offensive and defensive possessions that make up the bulk of his time on the floor. For Westbrook, that's a lot of lackadaisical play on the defense end, and a lot of pull-up mid-range jumpers on the offensive end.
-
When Westbrook was on the floor (for 39 minutes per game), the Thunder outscored Houston by 4.9
The Thunder were outscored by 51.3 points per 100 possessions while Westbrook watched from the bench
http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2017/4/26/15431112/russell-westbrook-rockets-thunder-lineups-2017
You may argue that this is not basketball , that he is not the most efficient player , that he is a ballhog , that there are better and more complete players. And you'd be possibly right
But this season he was the player who added the greatest value to his team.
-
While I'll agree Westbrook has more value to his team than LeBron or Leonard (despite them being better players) I don't agree he has more value than Harden.
I can't seem to figure out why a couple rebounds makes Westbrook some beast nobody has ever seen before.
I mean, half of this guy's rebounds are just defensive rebounds anybody on his team can get, but instead they clear out and let him have it.
Harden on the other hand is better at making his teammates better, a more efficient high volume score, and led his team to more success than Westbrook.
The only argument I've ever heard for Westbrook has been those arbitrary double digit rebounds.
-
While I'll agree Westbrook has more value to his team than LeBron or Leonard (despite them being better players) I don't agree he has more value than Harden.
I can't seem to figure out why a couple rebounds makes Westbrook some beast nobody has ever seen before.
I mean, half of this guy's rebounds are just defensive rebounds anybody on his team can get, but instead they clear out and let him have it.
Harden on the other hand is better at making his teammates better, a more efficient high volume score, and led his team to more success than Westbrook.
The only argument I've ever heard for Westbrook has been those arbitrary double digit rebounds.
then you haven't been paying attention. The Thunder are awful when Westbrook isnt on the floor. Lebron is the only guy in the league with better on Court vs off Court splits than Westbrook this season. The Rockets are basically the same team when Harden isn't in the game (they are slightly worse). In other words Harden adds almost no value to his team.
-
IMO If you would vote for RW it basicaly means you agree that Kobe should have 3/4 MVP years due to his hero ball/teamate alienization. I don't share that assesment.
Simiarities: playstyle, heroball, 1st round bounce as a lone star. BTW the best teamate Kobe got in the free agency, after he banished Shaq (insert Durant if needed), was a past prime Ron Artest. That is in L.A. the free agent Mecca. Sure some trades worked, Gasol trade gave them 2 chips. On the other hand Howard ran away as fast as could. My explanation is that heroball playstyle works like that cream you put on your skin when you don't want mosquitos to bite you.
My prognosis - not a single meaningfull free agent will go to OKC to play with the "MVP" - and the is pretty weak superstar trait. Remains to be seen, but thats my take.
-
While I'll agree Westbrook has more value to his team than LeBron or Leonard (despite them being better players) I don't agree he has more value than Harden.
I can't seem to figure out why a couple rebounds makes Westbrook some beast nobody has ever seen before.
I mean, half of this guy's rebounds are just defensive rebounds anybody on his team can get, but instead they clear out and let him have it.
Harden on the other hand is better at making his teammates better, a more efficient high volume score, and led his team to more success than Westbrook.
The only argument I've ever heard for Westbrook has been those arbitrary double digit rebounds.
then you haven't been paying attention. The Thunder are awful when Westbrook isnt on the floor. Lebron is the only guy in the league with better on Court vs off Court splits than Westbrook this season. The Rockets are basically the same team when Harden isn't in the game (they are slightly worse). In other words Harden adds almost no value to his team.
You don't really belive that, do you?
-
Westbrook should be the MVP after averaging a triple double. Nuff said.
-
Westbrook should be the MVP after averaging a triple double. Nuff said.
Then you would agree Oscar should have won it when he averaged that, but came in 3rd?
-
Westbrook should be the MVP after averaging a triple double. Nuff said.
Then you would agree Oscar should have won it when he averaged that, but came in 3rd?
What happened 50+ years ago should be relevant & apply to this season because....?
-
While I'll agree Westbrook has more value to his team than LeBron or Leonard (despite them being better players) I don't agree he has more value than Harden.
I can't seem to figure out why a couple rebounds makes Westbrook some beast nobody has ever seen before.
I mean, half of this guy's rebounds are just defensive rebounds anybody on his team can get, but instead they clear out and let him have it.
Harden on the other hand is better at making his teammates better, a more efficient high volume score, and led his team to more success than Westbrook.
The only argument I've ever heard for Westbrook has been those arbitrary double digit rebounds.
then you haven't been paying attention. The Thunder are awful when Westbrook isnt on the floor. Lebron is the only guy in the league with better on Court vs off Court splits than Westbrook this season. The Rockets are basically the same team when Harden isn't in the game (they are slightly worse). In other words Harden adds almost no value to his team.
You don't really belive that, do you?
the on off Court numbers show that. Now sure he is on the court a lot more than he is off and if he wasn't there at all I don't think the Rockets could maintain that high level of play all season long but I do think they show just how bad Harden is defensively and that his assists are inflated being surrounded by such great shooters. The Rockets are a well constructed team for Dantonio's system.
-
Westbrook should be the MVP after averaging a triple double. Nuff said.
Then you would agree Oscar should have won it when he averaged that, but came in 3rd?
What happened 50+ years ago should be relevant & apply to this season because....?
Because it's the only other time it has ever happened. Also, you could argue that MVP vote was more important because it was the players voting for MVP. The players that year thought stats on a 43 win team weren't as important as the contributions and stats of Bill Russell on a 60 win team.
Which you make the comparison to Harden's 'lesser stat's on a team with more wins.
-
Thing is, people still remember Oscar's triple-double season 50+ years later, and Wilt's 50+ ppg,48+ mpg season the same year. Far fewer people remember Bill Russell's season that year, or that he won the MVP.
To an extent, it doesn't really matter much if Westbrook gets the MVP or not (I think he will, but would vote for Harden personally). There's an MVP every year, but a triple-double average has only happened twice. It's more historic and more memorable, and unless it somehow becomes commonplace fans will be talking about it a lot longer than the 2017 MVP.
-
While I'll agree Westbrook has more value to his team than LeBron or Leonard (despite them being better players) I don't agree he has more value than Harden.
I can't seem to figure out why a couple rebounds makes Westbrook some beast nobody has ever seen before.
I mean, half of this guy's rebounds are just defensive rebounds anybody on his team can get, but instead they clear out and let him have it.
Harden on the other hand is better at making his teammates better, a more efficient high volume score, and led his team to more success than Westbrook.
The only argument I've ever heard for Westbrook has been those arbitrary double digit rebounds.
then you haven't been paying attention. The Thunder are awful when Westbrook isnt on the floor. Lebron is the only guy in the league with better on Court vs off Court splits than Westbrook this season. The Rockets are basically the same team when Harden isn't in the game (they are slightly worse). In other words Harden adds almost no value to his team.
Good Lord, Moranis.
I know you're smarter than that.
-
Swap Westbrook out for LeBron and OKC wins that series comfortably.
He should not be the MVP.
-
I'm very surprised that Isaiah Thomas hasn't received much MVP love in this discussion. Has there been anybody better in the fourth quarter in closing out games this season? And he also helped lead the Celtics to the #1 seed in the East. For the regular season, I think he is deserving of being in the top 3 discussion, alongside Westbrook and Harden. Believe me, I'm not trying to be a homer when bringing up IT. The last time I thought a Celtics player deserved to win the MVP was Garnett in 2008, but the voters decided to give Kobe the lifetime achievement MVP award.
As for the debate between Westbrook and Harden, I have to go with Westbrook. The debate for Harden seems to rest on team success versus Westbrook and his team. If that's the case, then shouldn't we also look at the teams offseason changes? I think too many people are overlooking the addition of head coach Mike D'Antoni and the offensive philosophy he brought to that team. I know D'Antoni gets a lot of credit for making Harden the point guard, but Harden was a ball hogging player long before the position change. The only difference seems to be D'Antoni convincing Harden to pass the [dang] ball. On the other hand, OKC simply couldn't recover from the offseason shock of losing a top 3 player in the world, and properly rebuilding the team on the fly. OKC replaced a reliable 28-30 ppg scorer in Durant with Andre Roberson's 6.6 ppg (who may also be the worst free throw shooter I have ever seen). The fact that OKC only won 8 games fewer than last season, seems pretty amazing to me given the circumstances.
-
While I'll agree Westbrook has more value to his team than LeBron or Leonard (despite them being better players) I don't agree he has more value than Harden.
I can't seem to figure out why a couple rebounds makes Westbrook some beast nobody has ever seen before.
I mean, half of this guy's rebounds are just defensive rebounds anybody on his team can get, but instead they clear out and let him have it.
Harden on the other hand is better at making his teammates better, a more efficient high volume score, and led his team to more success than Westbrook.
The only argument I've ever heard for Westbrook has been those arbitrary double digit rebounds.
then you haven't been paying attention. The Thunder are awful when Westbrook isnt on the floor. Lebron is the only guy in the league with better on Court vs off Court splits than Westbrook this season. The Rockets are basically the same team when Harden isn't in the game (they are slightly worse). In other words Harden adds almost no value to his team.
Good Lord, Moranis.
I know you're smarter than that.
Meh he has said a bunch of times he would vote for a guy that couldn't get his team the number 1 seed in a very week conference despite leading the league in minutes and playing aside two all stars and a bevy of respect role players. It is obviously not an unbiased take from a guy in Cleveland.
-
Swap Westbrook out for LeBron and OKC wins that series comfortably.
He should not be the MVP.
I wouldn't be so sure. Lebron playing alongside two all stars and a large group of accomplished role players won by 1, 6, 5 and 4 points over a team much worse than the Rockets. He would have needed to play MUCH better to beat the Rockets with Oladipo, Adams and Taj Gibson as his teammates. The second best player is probably Oladipo who may very well be the 5th best player on the Cavs team. Will be interesting to see if they can take it up a notch next series if they play the Raptors. The kind of defensive effort against George and scrubs would not get it done against Lowry, Ibaka and Derozen.
-
While I'll agree Westbrook has more value to his team than LeBron or Leonard (despite them being better players) I don't agree he has more value than Harden.
I can't seem to figure out why a couple rebounds makes Westbrook some beast nobody has ever seen before.
I mean, half of this guy's rebounds are just defensive rebounds anybody on his team can get, but instead they clear out and let him have it.
Harden on the other hand is better at making his teammates better, a more efficient high volume score, and led his team to more success than Westbrook.
The only argument I've ever heard for Westbrook has been those arbitrary double digit rebounds.
then you haven't been paying attention. The Thunder are awful when Westbrook isnt on the floor. Lebron is the only guy in the league with better on Court vs off Court splits than Westbrook this season. The Rockets are basically the same team when Harden isn't in the game (they are slightly worse). In other words Harden adds almost no value to his team.
Good Lord, Moranis.
I know you're smarter than that.
are you suggesting that on Court vs off Court numbers shouldn't be used when discussing ones value to the team. The reality is Harden is an absolutely atrocious defender. By far the worst defender of the 4 main mvp candidates and it isn't close. That is why when he sits the Rockets are only nominally worse but when James,
Leonard, and even Westbrook sit their teams are much worse. I mean take the Rockets/Thunder series. Over the final 4 games Harden was -3 despite Houston going 3 and 1 and overall outscoring the Thunder by 12. So Houston was 15 points better with Harden on the bench in the final 4 games of the series and that is with Harden averaging 38 mpg (so only 10 mpg without him in the game). Game 1 Harden was +22 in 34 minutes of course the rest of the team was +9 in 14 minutes which is still a better performance.
Funny I thought value was measured by how much you mean to your team winning.
-
Lou Williams, Eric Gordon and Nene were the difference in that series.
Not Harden vs Westbrook.
-
I think the On / Off numbers are best for measuring how good or bad a team's bench is, to be honest with you.
Harden has capable backups.
Russ has none.
Whether this figures into the question of how "valuable" they are is a matter of debate.
To say that Harden adds virtually no value to his team because his team doesn't drown in the minutes that he's sitting is a befuddling statement, to say the least. One might characterize it as mildly insane.
From what I understand, ESPN's RPM statistic attempts to take into account quality of teammates and opponents when looking at such on/off numbers. The reason for that is obvious -- if you have a good bench, your bench guys might be solidly in the plus against opposing bench players. That doesn't mean you could run out your bench for a full game and still win.
Harden is solidly in the + in ESPN's RPM. Russ ranks a bit higher.
I think the statistical case for either Russ or Harden is fairly obvious. To me, the best argument is what Zach Lowe stated on his podcast: You either believe that Russ's style of play comes with a team-wide cost, or you don't.
I do.
But, Russ is almost certainly going to win MVP, and good for him I suppose. He had an amazing individual season. His team was garbage in the post-season because when it came down to it, nobody on that team knew how to execute at the end of a close game unless the plan was to give Russ the ball and hope he made the shot or drew a foul.
Harden won't win MVP but he'll be playing in Round 2, and possibly Round 3.
-
I think the On / Off numbers are best for measuring how good or bad a team's bench is, to be honest with you.
Harden has capable backups.
Russ has none.
Whether this figures into the question of how "valuable" they are is a matter of debate.
To say that Harden adds virtually no value to his team because his team doesn't drown in the minutes that he's sitting is a befuddling statement, to say the least. One might characterize it as mildly insane.
From what I understand, ESPN's RPM statistic attempts to take into account quality of teammates and opponents when looking at such on/off numbers. The reason for that is obvious -- if you have a good bench, your bench guys might be solidly in the plus against opposing bench players. That doesn't mean you could run out your bench for a full game and still win.
Harden is solidly in the + in ESPN's RPM. Russ ranks a bit higher.
I think the statistical case for either Russ or Harden is fairly obvious. To me, the best argument is what Zach Lowe stated on his podcast: You either believe that Russ's style of play comes with a team-wide cost, or you don't.
I do.
But, Russ is almost certainly going to win MVP, and good for him I suppose. He had an amazing individual season. His team was garbage in the post-season because when it came down to it, nobody on that team knew how to execute at the end of a close game unless the plan was to give Russ the ball and hope he made the shot or drew a foul.
Harden won't win MVP but he'll be playing in Round 2, and possibly Round 3.
I agree 100% Phosita. I also agree that these plus minus off and on have a ton of noise related to value of backup. If IT has Smart backing him up and Smart is playing well that is going to majorly impact IT's off and on stats. If IT has phil pressey backing him up and coming in with other bad bench players the numbers will change dramatically for factors that have nothing to do with IT.
So look at Westbrook's backups and the OKC bench players. They had Semaj Christon, who was benched partly through the playoffs. They had Norris Cole who was out of the league most of the season. Jerian Grant? An athletic marvel that has added next to nothing to his game. Alex Abrines, a decent shooter that is very raw.
Then you look at Houston. Hilario, Gordon and Louis Williams are coming in. I mean, is that not an insane difference?
-
It blends in with bench qualtiy but on/off splits also are largely reliant on team construction.
OKC is built, both in terms of personnel and gameplan, to be the Russell Westbrook show. They have a bunch of very good defenders, so Russ doesnt have to try there and the only other player on the team comfortable with the ball in his hands is probably oladipo. No one else demands touches, so its all Westbrook all the time. Westbrook also is a bit of a rythym killer.
He comes out of the game and the roster (and gameplan) is lost. No one else does Edited. Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline. when Russ is in, so its hard to ask them to leap into rythym and play well.
Houston on the other hand has Lou Williams and Eric Gordon. Harden comes out and you have a couple players very comfortable creating in a pinch. Also, I think Harden helps his teammates more. Now this continues to reflect when Harden sits down. If Harden can help get a couple guys going the team isnt as doomed when he hits the bench.
its similar with James. The team is built speicifcally for him (and by him), so when he (the engine) leaves, the team is lost. This reflects most poorly on Kyrie, who should be able to maintain most of the playmaking Lebron brings, but has not been able to.
-
I think the On / Off numbers are best for measuring how good or bad a team's bench is, to be honest with you.
Harden has capable backups.
Russ has none.
Whether this figures into the question of how "valuable" they are is a matter of debate.
To say that Harden adds virtually no value to his team because his team doesn't drown in the minutes that he's sitting is a befuddling statement, to say the least. One might characterize it as mildly insane.
From what I understand, ESPN's RPM statistic attempts to take into account quality of teammates and opponents when looking at such on/off numbers. The reason for that is obvious -- if you have a good bench, your bench guys might be solidly in the plus against opposing bench players. That doesn't mean you could run out your bench for a full game and still win.
Harden is solidly in the + in ESPN's RPM. Russ ranks a bit higher.
I think the statistical case for either Russ or Harden is fairly obvious. To me, the best argument is what Zach Lowe stated on his podcast: You either believe that Russ's style of play comes with a team-wide cost, or you don't.
I do.
But, Russ is almost certainly going to win MVP, and good for him I suppose. He had an amazing individual season. His team was garbage in the post-season because when it came down to it, nobody on that team knew how to execute at the end of a close game unless the plan was to give Russ the ball and hope he made the shot or drew a foul.
Harden won't win MVP but he'll be playing in Round 2, and possibly Round 3.
I agree 100% Phosita. I also agree that these plus minus off and on have a ton of noise related to value of backup. If IT has Smart backing him up and Smart is playing well that is going to majorly impact IT's off and on stats. If IT has phil pressey backing him up and coming in with other bad bench players the numbers will change dramatically for factors that have nothing to do with IT.
So look at Westbrook's backups and the OKC bench players. They had Semaj Christon, who was benched partly through the playoffs. They had Norris Cole who was out of the league most of the season. Jerian Grant? An athletic marvel that has added next to nothing to his game. Alex Abrines, a decent shooter that is very raw.
Then you look at Houston. Hilario, Gordon and Louis Williams are coming in. I mean, is that not an insane difference?
Jerian Grant started last game for the Chicago Bulls.
-
I think the On / Off numbers are best for measuring how good or bad a team's bench is, to be honest with you.
Harden has capable backups.
Russ has none.
Whether this figures into the question of how "valuable" they are is a matter of debate.
To say that Harden adds virtually no value to his team because his team doesn't drown in the minutes that he's sitting is a befuddling statement, to say the least. One might characterize it as mildly insane.
From what I understand, ESPN's RPM statistic attempts to take into account quality of teammates and opponents when looking at such on/off numbers. The reason for that is obvious -- if you have a good bench, your bench guys might be solidly in the plus against opposing bench players. That doesn't mean you could run out your bench for a full game and still win.
Harden is solidly in the + in ESPN's RPM. Russ ranks a bit higher.
I think the statistical case for either Russ or Harden is fairly obvious. To me, the best argument is what Zach Lowe stated on his podcast: You either believe that Russ's style of play comes with a team-wide cost, or you don't.
I do.
But, Russ is almost certainly going to win MVP, and good for him I suppose. He had an amazing individual season. His team was garbage in the post-season because when it came down to it, nobody on that team knew how to execute at the end of a close game unless the plan was to give Russ the ball and hope he made the shot or drew a foul.
Harden won't win MVP but he'll be playing in Round 2, and possibly Round 3.
The Cavs and Spurs have very good benches yet when James and Leonard go to the bench their teams are much worse. Why is it only Houston where this happens? Might it just be that Harden is a terrible defender such that when he is on the bench the team is just better defensively (obviously not as good offensively)? I think you are giving Harden a pass that he just doesn't deserve. His defense is terrible. Worse than Thomas who at least makes the effort.
-
I think the On / Off numbers are best for measuring how good or bad a team's bench is, to be honest with you.
Harden has capable backups.
Russ has none.
Whether this figures into the question of how "valuable" they are is a matter of debate.
To say that Harden adds virtually no value to his team because his team doesn't drown in the minutes that he's sitting is a befuddling statement, to say the least. One might characterize it as mildly insane.
From what I understand, ESPN's RPM statistic attempts to take into account quality of teammates and opponents when looking at such on/off numbers. The reason for that is obvious -- if you have a good bench, your bench guys might be solidly in the plus against opposing bench players. That doesn't mean you could run out your bench for a full game and still win.
Harden is solidly in the + in ESPN's RPM. Russ ranks a bit higher.
I think the statistical case for either Russ or Harden is fairly obvious. To me, the best argument is what Zach Lowe stated on his podcast: You either believe that Russ's style of play comes with a team-wide cost, or you don't.
I do.
But, Russ is almost certainly going to win MVP, and good for him I suppose. He had an amazing individual season. His team was garbage in the post-season because when it came down to it, nobody on that team knew how to execute at the end of a close game unless the plan was to give Russ the ball and hope he made the shot or drew a foul.
Harden won't win MVP but he'll be playing in Round 2, and possibly Round 3.
The Cavs and Spurs have very good benches yet when James and Leonard go to the bench their teams are much worse. Why is it only Houston where this happens? Might it just be that Harden is a terrible defender such that when he is on the bench the team is just better defensively (obviously not as good offensively)? I think you are giving Harden a pass that he just doesn't deserve. His defense is terrible. Worse than Thomas who at least makes the effort.
Curious how you can say the Cavs have a very good bench (or at least have for the whole year) when Lebron was consistently complaining they needed more playmakers and depth for the first 2/3 of the season. Their bench prior to their deadline acquisitions and while missing Smith was Shumpert, Frye, Liggins, Jefferson, Felder?
-
I think the On / Off numbers are best for measuring how good or bad a team's bench is, to be honest with you.
Harden has capable backups.
Russ has none.
Whether this figures into the question of how "valuable" they are is a matter of debate.
To say that Harden adds virtually no value to his team because his team doesn't drown in the minutes that he's sitting is a befuddling statement, to say the least. One might characterize it as mildly insane.
From what I understand, ESPN's RPM statistic attempts to take into account quality of teammates and opponents when looking at such on/off numbers. The reason for that is obvious -- if you have a good bench, your bench guys might be solidly in the plus against opposing bench players. That doesn't mean you could run out your bench for a full game and still win.
Harden is solidly in the + in ESPN's RPM. Russ ranks a bit higher.
I think the statistical case for either Russ or Harden is fairly obvious. To me, the best argument is what Zach Lowe stated on his podcast: You either believe that Russ's style of play comes with a team-wide cost, or you don't.
I do.
But, Russ is almost certainly going to win MVP, and good for him I suppose. He had an amazing individual season. His team was garbage in the post-season because when it came down to it, nobody on that team knew how to execute at the end of a close game unless the plan was to give Russ the ball and hope he made the shot or drew a foul.
Harden won't win MVP but he'll be playing in Round 2, and possibly Round 3.
The Cavs and Spurs have very good benches yet when James and Leonard go to the bench their teams are much worse. Why is it only Houston where this happens? Might it just be that Harden is a terrible defender such that when he is on the bench the team is just better defensively (obviously not as good offensively)? I think you are giving Harden a pass that he just doesn't deserve. His defense is terrible. Worse than Thomas who at least makes the effort.
Curious how you can say the Cavs have a very good bench (or at least have for the whole year) when Lebron was consistently complaining they needed more playmakers and depth for the first 2/3 of the season. Their bench prior to their deadline acquisitions and while missing Smith was Shumpert, Frye, Liggins, Jefferson, Felder?
If you count Lou Williams then you have to count guys like Korver. And while Eric Gordon only started 15 of his 75 games he was third on the team in mpg so it isn't like he didn't play the majority of the time with Harden. And Jefferson and Shumpert are very solid bench wings. Dunleavy was as well before he was traded for Korver.
-
I think the On / Off numbers are best for measuring how good or bad a team's bench is, to be honest with you.
Harden has capable backups.
Russ has none.
Whether this figures into the question of how "valuable" they are is a matter of debate.
To say that Harden adds virtually no value to his team because his team doesn't drown in the minutes that he's sitting is a befuddling statement, to say the least. One might characterize it as mildly insane.
From what I understand, ESPN's RPM statistic attempts to take into account quality of teammates and opponents when looking at such on/off numbers. The reason for that is obvious -- if you have a good bench, your bench guys might be solidly in the plus against opposing bench players. That doesn't mean you could run out your bench for a full game and still win.
Harden is solidly in the + in ESPN's RPM. Russ ranks a bit higher.
I think the statistical case for either Russ or Harden is fairly obvious. To me, the best argument is what Zach Lowe stated on his podcast: You either believe that Russ's style of play comes with a team-wide cost, or you don't.
I do.
But, Russ is almost certainly going to win MVP, and good for him I suppose. He had an amazing individual season. His team was garbage in the post-season because when it came down to it, nobody on that team knew how to execute at the end of a close game unless the plan was to give Russ the ball and hope he made the shot or drew a foul.
Harden won't win MVP but he'll be playing in Round 2, and possibly Round 3.
The Cavs and Spurs have very good benches yet when James and Leonard go to the bench their teams are much worse. Why is it only Houston where this happens? Might it just be that Harden is a terrible defender such that when he is on the bench the team is just better defensively (obviously not as good offensively)? I think you are giving Harden a pass that he just doesn't deserve. His defense is terrible. Worse than Thomas who at least makes the effort.
Curious how you can say the Cavs have a very good bench (or at least have for the whole year) when Lebron was consistently complaining they needed more playmakers and depth for the first 2/3 of the season. Their bench prior to their deadline acquisitions and while missing Smith was Shumpert, Frye, Liggins, Jefferson, Felder?
If you count Lou Williams then you have to count guys like Korver. And while Eric Gordon only started 15 of his 75 games he was third on the team in mpg so it isn't like he didn't play the majority of the time with Harden. And Jefferson and Shumpert are very solid bench wings. Dunleavy was as well before he was traded for Korver.
I would argue that Louis Williams is twice the player that Korver is at this stage of their career and is far and away the best bench player on either team (will probably be 6th man of the year). Though you are right they only had him for 23 regular season games.
Dunleavy is pretty irrelevant (he saw 7 minutes off the bench in the Hawks last game).
Shumpert and Jefferson are pretty average wings(And Jefferson started about the same number of games as Gordon). I mean are they any better than Sam Decker?
It probably isn't getting into the noise of trying to dissect how many times Lebron James was replaced by someone like McCrae/Korver/Jefferson when Harden was replaced by Gordon/Williams.
I feel like you want to have it both ways here. You are suggesting Lebron should get consideration for MVP. However, if they have a decent bench as you seem to be arguing, and two all-stars in Love and Irving (and I do remember you arguing Love should be on the all-star team). How does James bear no responsibility for them massively underachieving and finishing with the 6th best record in the league? Keep in mind the award is just for the regular season....
Either the bench sucked (which skews Lebron's plus/minus numbers in his favor) or the bench was solid, but collectively the talent did not perform enough (including) to win more than 52 games. Can't be both.
-
Swap Westbrook out for LeBron and OKC wins that series comfortably.
He should not be the MVP.
I wouldn't be so sure. Lebron playing alongside two all stars and a large group of accomplished role players won by 1, 6, 5 and 4 points over a team much worse than the Rockets. He would have needed to play MUCH better to beat the Rockets with Oladipo, Adams and Taj Gibson as his teammates. The second best player is probably Oladipo who may very well be the 5th best player on the Cavs team. Will be interesting to see if they can take it up a notch next series if they play the Raptors. The kind of defensive effort against George and scrubs would not get it done against Lowry, Ibaka and Derozen.
I like how all of a sudden Oladipo, Gibson, Adams, Kanter etc are bums when half this blog is on record wanting to trade for them. They were good players until they became scapegoats for OKC's rotten, ball-stopping offense.
Regarding LeBron,
Two seasons ago LeBron gave the Warriors a scare in the Finals playing alongside Tristan Thompson and a bunch of nobodies.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2015-nba-finals-cavaliers-vs-warriors.html
He took the 2008 Celtics (one of the best teams of the last decade IMO) to 7 games with a dubious supporting cast.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2008-nba-eastern-conference-semifinals-cavaliers-vs-celtics.html
He beat a very good Pistons squad in the conference finals in 2007 with a garbage team . (Sasha effing Pavlovic played 32mpg in that series)
http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2007-nba-finals-cavaliers-vs-spurs.html
Now imagine LeBron playing alongside Durant, Harden, and Ibaka. Good lord.
-
Swap Westbrook out for LeBron and OKC wins that series comfortably.
He should not be the MVP.
I wouldn't be so sure. Lebron playing alongside two all stars and a large group of accomplished role players won by 1, 6, 5 and 4 points over a team much worse than the Rockets. He would have needed to play MUCH better to beat the Rockets with Oladipo, Adams and Taj Gibson as his teammates. The second best player is probably Oladipo who may very well be the 5th best player on the Cavs team. Will be interesting to see if they can take it up a notch next series if they play the Raptors. The kind of defensive effort against George and scrubs would not get it done against Lowry, Ibaka and Derozen.
I like how all of a sudden Oladipo, Gibson, Adams, Kanter etc are bums when half this blog is on record wanting to trade for them. They were good players until they became scapegoats for OKC's rotten, ball-stopping offense.
Regarding LeBron,
Two seasons ago LeBron gave the Warriors a scare in the Finals playing alongside Tristan Thompson and a bunch of nobodies.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2015-nba-finals-cavaliers-vs-warriors.html
He took the 2008 Celtics (one of the best teams of the last decade IMO) to 7 games with a dubious supporting cast.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2008-nba-eastern-conference-semifinals-cavaliers-vs-celtics.html
He beat a very good Pistons squad in the conference finals in 2007 with a garbage team . (Sasha effing Pavlovic played 32mpg in that series)
http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2007-nba-finals-cavaliers-vs-spurs.html
Now imagine LeBron playing alongside Durant, Harden, and Ibaka. Good lord.
You are kind of creating a bit of a made up situation here. Let us start with the fact that I really don't recall anyone on this board ever clamoring for Kanter. Perhaps when he was very young with Utah. However, on a big contract and locked into a bench scoring big role that is very bad at defense, did people really want him? I honestly didn't expect there.
I do think Celtics would like Adam but that is a combination of us not having a true defensive center and being weak on the boards rather than him being an all-star level player. Similarly Gibson is certainly a solid player and he fits the same needs the Celtics have had the last few years. These are the main reasons people have proposed trades or mentioned them.
The point I was making was that OKC does have a really awful bench. They hardly played it for a little and were changing their backup point guard position throughout the playoffs between christon/Cole. No other way to slice that. That is an awful backup guard rotation.
With respect to your second point. James is obviously an amazing player, and I don't really think many people are calling Westbrook better than him overall (if anyone is). I do think it is a regular season award and for this particular regular season Westbrook had a better regular season. I mean I don't think anyone can argue that Irving and Love are better than Oladip and Adams and Thompson is a capable starting 5. Yet the Cavs won 4 more games. That is crazy.
There is also a pretty big difference between someone being a bum and saying someone is not that great as a second best player.
-
Then you would agree Oscar should have won it when he averaged that, but came in 3rd?
Given how long the record stood ought to show you how difficult it truly was, his team is crap without him. It was last done in 62 so the record stood over what 55 years?
James is obviously an amazing player, and I don't really think many people are calling Westbrook better than him overall (if anyone is). I do think it is a regular season award and for this particular regular season Westbrook had a better regular season.
Kyrie helped carry the Cavs last year. Wade pretty took over for one of the titles in MIA. LeBron is a great player but he is not always the best player on his team at times. I recall clearly when he used to avoid the big moment and pass up such a shot. He has definitely improved in that regard but my point is he too has his flaws. He also gets more help from the NBA with all the travels and bail out calls. Still a great player, even though he is on PEDs.
-
I think the On / Off numbers are best for measuring how good or bad a team's bench is, to be honest with you.
Harden has capable backups.
Russ has none.
Whether this figures into the question of how "valuable" they are is a matter of debate.
To say that Harden adds virtually no value to his team because his team doesn't drown in the minutes that he's sitting is a befuddling statement, to say the least. One might characterize it as mildly insane.
From what I understand, ESPN's RPM statistic attempts to take into account quality of teammates and opponents when looking at such on/off numbers. The reason for that is obvious -- if you have a good bench, your bench guys might be solidly in the plus against opposing bench players. That doesn't mean you could run out your bench for a full game and still win.
Harden is solidly in the + in ESPN's RPM. Russ ranks a bit higher.
I think the statistical case for either Russ or Harden is fairly obvious. To me, the best argument is what Zach Lowe stated on his podcast: You either believe that Russ's style of play comes with a team-wide cost, or you don't.
I do.
But, Russ is almost certainly going to win MVP, and good for him I suppose. He had an amazing individual season. His team was garbage in the post-season because when it came down to it, nobody on that team knew how to execute at the end of a close game unless the plan was to give Russ the ball and hope he made the shot or drew a foul.
Harden won't win MVP but he'll be playing in Round 2, and possibly Round 3.
The Cavs and Spurs have very good benches yet when James and Leonard go to the bench their teams are much worse. Why is it only Houston where this happens? Might it just be that Harden is a terrible defender such that when he is on the bench the team is just better defensively (obviously not as good offensively)? I think you are giving Harden a pass that he just doesn't deserve. His defense is terrible. Worse than Thomas who at least makes the effort.
Curious how you can say the Cavs have a very good bench (or at least have for the whole year) when Lebron was consistently complaining they needed more playmakers and depth for the first 2/3 of the season. Their bench prior to their deadline acquisitions and while missing Smith was Shumpert, Frye, Liggins, Jefferson, Felder?
If you count Lou Williams then you have to count guys like Korver. And while Eric Gordon only started 15 of his 75 games he was third on the team in mpg so it isn't like he didn't play the majority of the time with Harden. And Jefferson and Shumpert are very solid bench wings. Dunleavy was as well before he was traded for Korver.
I would argue that Louis Williams is twice the player that Korver is at this stage of their career and is far and away the best bench player on either team (will probably be 6th man of the year). Though you are right they only had him for 23 regular season games.
Dunleavy is pretty irrelevant (he saw 7 minutes off the bench in the Hawks last game).
Shumpert and Jefferson are pretty average wings(And Jefferson started about the same number of games as Gordon). I mean are they any better than Sam Decker?
It probably isn't getting into the noise of trying to dissect how many times Lebron James was replaced by someone like McCrae/Korver/Jefferson when Harden was replaced by Gordon/Williams.
I feel like you want to have it both ways here. You are suggesting Lebron should get consideration for MVP. However, if they have a decent bench as you seem to be arguing, and two all-stars in Love and Irving (and I do remember you arguing Love should be on the all-star team). How does James bear no responsibility for them massively underachieving and finishing with the 6th best record in the league? Keep in mind the award is just for the regular season....
Either the bench sucked (which skews Lebron's plus/minus numbers in his favor) or the bench was solid, but collectively the talent did not perform enough (including) to win more than 52 games. Can't be both.
the Cavs are terrible when James isn't the game. There were multiple games this year where the Cavs were +10 or better with James yet lost the game because of the 10 minutes James was on the bench. The reason for that is because James is just that good and is that valuable. He has by far the largest on Court vs off Court numbers in the league. That is a real measure of value. Couple that with James having one of the three best statistical seasons of his career and he is the clear MVP in my mind.